UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep

                          UFO UpDates Mailing List
                                  Sep 2000

  Sep 2:

   More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Scott Corrales [37]
   Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua - - John Hayes [21]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young - Bob Young [35]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [23]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [17]
   Re: UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition - Hammond - Elizabeth Hammond
   [13]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Jeffrey - Martin Jeffrey [41]
   Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles - Jenny Randles [20]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman - Rory Lushman [19]
   John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com> - John Hayes [626]
   Nicaraguan Experts Study 'Chupacabras' - Scott Corrales [30]
   Hybrid Dog, Coyote Sub-Species or Chupacabras? - Scott Corrales [103]
   Re: 13 Year Russian UFO Study - Gildas Bourdais [128]
   Chupacabras: If It Barks Like A Dog... - Scott Corrales [24]
   Chupacabras: A Source of Controversy and Pilgrimage - Scott Corrales
   [143]
   Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua? - Images - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo
   [14]
   In Memory Of Cynthia Hind - Philip Mantle [30]
   Mallove On Free Energy - Terry Blanton [91]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Greg Sandow [51]
   Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & - Greg Sandow [79]
   Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch - Larry Hatch [27]
   Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua - - Larry Hatch [23]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [41]
   Latest Of The Hemo Predator - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [12]
   Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean - Victor J. Kean [25]
   CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Moosomin, - Paul Anderson [129]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris - Neil Morris [43]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [98]
   Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & - Dennis Stacy [17]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [93]

  Sep 3:

   Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Lemire - Todd Lemire [52]
   New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda - Tom Benson [85]
   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-2-00 - Rense E-News [218]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [93]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [184]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [12]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [51]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [30]
   Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua - - Dr. Virgilio
   Sanchez-Ocejo [51]
   Soviets Smart On UFOs Over US? - Stig Agermose [54]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hayes - John Hayes [60]
   Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua - - John Hayes [38]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch - Larry Hatch [26]
   Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - - Scott Corrales [21]
   UFO Meeting, Clacton-on-Sea, UK - 6th September - John Hayes [16]
   Schweinfurt UFOs - Andy Roberts [179]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young - Bob Young [19]
   FOIA Research - URL - Todd Lemire [8]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Dennis Stacy [13]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman - Stan Friedman [57]
   'The People's Front' - Dave Bowden [41]
   Re: COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997 - Gildas Bourdais
   [29]

  Sep 4:

   Test - UFO UpDates - Toronto [0]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [174]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [86]
   In Search Of Other Worlds - Michael Wysmierski [166]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark - Jerome Clark [32]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [36]
   Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua - - Larry Hatch [46]
   Iguana Salad: A Quickie Recipe - Larry Hatch [112]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Blanton - Terry Blanton [20]
   Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch - Larry Hatch [54]

  Sep 5:

   E-Mail Server Problems - UFO UpDates - Toronto [9]
   Chupacabras Study Leaves Questions Unanswered - Scott Corrales [43]
   "This Isn't My Goatsucker!" - Scott Corrales [30]
   Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Scott Corrales [18]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung - Bob Young [78]
   Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [23]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [15]
   Re: Alternative 3 - Redux - Georgina Bruni [11]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [23]
   S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's Theories - Stig Agermose [48]
   TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.4.00 - Paul Anderson [73]
   Re: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [30]

  Sep 6:

   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith
   The Duke of Mendoza [140]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith The
   Duke of Mendoza [30]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Cashman - Mark Cashman [40]
   International Space Station Visible With Naked Eye - Stig Agermose [88]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez - John Velez [74]

  Sep 7:

   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [52]
   Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's - Robert Gates [25]
   CPR-Canada News: Hazlet, Saskatchewan Crop Circle - Paul Anderson [72]
   Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - McCoy - GT McCoy [38]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes - Terry Rhodes [37]
   Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & - Serge Salvaille
   [219]
   Filer's Files #35 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [490]
   Another Chupacabra Prowls Malpaisillo - Scott Corrales [49]
   Webcams At UFO-Hotspots? - Werner Walter [6]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Jenny Randles [149]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman - Stan Friedman [127]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman - Stan Friedman [44]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung - Bob Young [36]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung - Bob Young [28]
   Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's - Bruce Maccabee [40]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [25]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [30]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Greg Sandow [20]
   Chupacabra Reappears in Northern Mexico - Scott Corrales [44]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski - Chris Rutkowski [54]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [27]
   Roswell TV Show - Stan Friedman [16]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale - Roy J Hale [16]
   Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Crop - Paul Anderson [63]
   Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Corrales - Scott Corrales [61]
   Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [60]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 36 - John Hayes [460]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung - Bob Young [23]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung - Bob Young [33]
   Re: UFO UpDate: Roswell TV Show - Johnson - James Bond Johnson [17]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark - Jerome Clark [37]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [34]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski - Chris Rutkowski [67]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark - Jerome Clark [81]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young - Bob Young [13]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez - John Velez [92]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [52]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [58]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith - Peter Brookesmith
   The Duke of Mendoza [23]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [28]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young - Bob Young [72]

  Sep 8:

   Australian UFO Conference March 2001 - Diane Harrison Director AUFORN
   [27]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [44]
   Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden - Dave Bowden [53]
   CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Grenfell, - Paul Anderson [86]
   CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Hazlet, Saskatchewan - Paul Anderson [52]
   Clark's Law [was: 'Linda' Case Footnote] - Brian Cuthbertson [38]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [63]
   Bulletin of Anomalous Experience CD Rom - Jenny Randles [26]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman - Stan Friedman [108]
   'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch - UFO UpDates - Toronto [11]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [23]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso - Greg Sandow [45]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung - Bob Young [27]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung - Bob Young ? [75]
   Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman - Stan Friedman [65]

  Sep 9:

   Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [15]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso - Luis R. Gonzlez Manso [34]
   Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch - Larry [24]

  Sep 11:

   CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Saskatoon Crop Circle - Paul Anderson [45]
   Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, #2 'Random' Crop - Paul Anderson [27]
   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-9-00 - "Rense E-News" [225]
   Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & - Greg Sandow [185]
   A New Mailing List in French... - Richard D. Nolane raynaud@total.net
   [7]
   Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [23]
   'UFOs And Abductions' - David Jacobs, Editor - Dennis Stacy [36]
   Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch - UFO UpDates - Toronto
   [35]
   CPR-Canada News: New Directors - Saskatchewan and - Paul Anderson [32]
   'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - Steven L. Wilson Sr [65]
   Cydonian Imperative: Update 9-10-00 - Mac Tonnies [10]
   New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda - Tom Benson [99]
   TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.11.00 - Paul Anderson [87]
   Southern Illinois A UFO Hot Spot? - Stig Agermose [14]
   UN Builds Giant Radio Telescope To Look For ETs - Stig Agermose [53]
   Paranoia Mag Interviews Dan Smith - Terry Blanton [14]
   Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - Ignatius Graffeo [110]

  Sep 12:

   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - Stan Friedman [94]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - Terry Blanton [33]
   Roswell - Beyond Schiff? - Gildas Bourdais [8]
   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - David Furlotte [78]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - David Furlotte
   [22]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [74]
   Filer's Files #36 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [482]
   Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [306]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brad Sparks [350]
   60's Space Speech JFK - Roy J Hale [27]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [49]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - Bruce Maccabee
   [39]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - David Rudiak
   <DRudiak@aol.com [393]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - Stan Friedman [30]
   Re: Roswell - Beyond Schiff? - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [38]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [39]
   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - - Bob Young [15]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - Bruce Maccabee
   [39]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow - Greg Sandow [29]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [43]
   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - - Jerome Clark [25]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [15]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [23]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [18]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez - John Velez [134]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [75]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [88]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch - Larry Hatch [31]
   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - GT - GT McCoy [55]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [56]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [10]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [16]

  Sep 13:

   Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - - Robert Gates [83]
   Nick Pope'S Weird World - September 2000 - Georgina Bruni [114]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [70]
   Re: 'Scientific UFO Research' WebRing - James Easton [7]
   An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness - Jerome Clark [45]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [20]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [127]

  Sep 14:

   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [36]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - KRandle - Kevin Randle [36]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [33]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak - David Rudiak [200]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks - Brad Sparks [81]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks - Brad Sparks [12]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [92]
   Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' - Giuliano 'Jimmy'
   Marinkovicc - AGETI [301]
   Cashman: Easton & Aldrich - Mark Cashman [36]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [74]
   Ghostwolf Info? - Royce J. Myers III [15]
   Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Chris Rutkowski [16]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 37 - John Hayes [537]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris - Neil Morris [73]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [43]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [35]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [30]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [34]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Mike Beaver [82]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark - Jerome Clark [17]
   Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - An Audience Of - John Rimmer [18]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer - John Rimmer [18]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Alevy - Gary Alevy [77]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Conrad - Cheyne Conrad [45]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks - Brad Sparks
   RB47Expert@aol.com [116]
   Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked - - Tom Carey [36]

  Sep 15:

   Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Clark - Jerome Clark [18]
   Budd Hopkins' Intruders Foundation: UFO Seminar - Intruders Foundation
   Conference [43]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Young - Bob Young [20]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Hale - Scott Hale [25]
   Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates - Robert Gates [17]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Chippendale - Anthony Chippendale
   [72]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles - Jenny Randles [103]
   CPR-Canada News: Viscount, Saskatchewan Crop - Paul Anderson [56]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [31]
   Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [24]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [18]
   Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Wright - Bruce Wright [25]
   Re: Orford Ness lighthouse - Randles - Jenny Randles [26]
   A Carpenter Note - Gary Hart [198]
   Re: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' - - Franois Parmantier
   [44]
   Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' - - Giuliano 'Jimmy'
   Marinkovicc - AGETI [495]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - McCoy - GT McCoy [41]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Beaver - Mike Beaver [45]
   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [24]
   Olympic Opening Ceremony - Steven G. Bassett [10]

  Sep 16:

   Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Moroff - Daniel D. Moroff [27]
   Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates - Robert Gates [37]
   Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Lovett - Diane Lovett [21]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates - Robert Gates [27]
   3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Roy J Hale [32]
   Reports From The Bridge Of The Brooklyn - Jim Mortellaro [26]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [35]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [114]
   Re: Olympic Opening - Anthony - Gar Anthony [35]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans - Roger Evans [48]
   Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - 'Wandjina' - - John W. Auchettl [65]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach - Kurt Jonach [44]

  Sep 17:

   Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [39]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [57]
   Re: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News - 9-16-00 - Rense E-News [303]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans - Roy J Hale [25]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni - Georgina Bruni [80]
   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Jones - Sean Jones [44]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow - Greg Sandow [49]
   CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Saskatoon, - Paul Anderson [25]
   'Great Dreams' UFO Site - Roy J Hale [4]
   The Wandjina - Bill Chalker [105]
   Further On The Wandjina - Bill Chalker [143]

  Sep 18:

   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Kurt Jonach [39]
   'Rendlesham' Images [was: Orford Ness Lighthouse - Neil Morris [65]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [260]
   Date Of Grey's Wandjina Discovery - Bill Chalker [16]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Velez - John Velez [115]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [90]
   Re: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.18.00 - Paul Anderson [97]
   ETI Signal From The Pleiades? - Nick Balaskas [152]
   Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Bruce Maccabee [10]
   Filer's Files #37 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [522]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans - Roger Evans [15]
   Brazilian International Bulletin, Edition 3 2000 - Thiago Luiz
   Ticchetti [392]

  Sep 19:

   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Hatch - Donald Ledger [19]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates - Robert Gates [54]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [38]
   Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference - Anthony Chippendale
   [159]
   Re: OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror - Auchettl & Barnett [70]
   OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror - Auchettl & Barnett [70]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach - Kurt Jonach [60]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young - Bob Young [19]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [84]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [25]
   Re: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Lehmberg - Alfred Lehmberg [70]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [79]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [16]

  Sep 20:

   UFOs & Schools - Daniel Muoz [39]
   Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Royce J. Myers III [33]
   Cydonian Imperative Update - 9-19-00 - Mac Tonnies [10]
   Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories - Kelly
   Peterborough [103]
   Can You Moo Too? - Gary Alevy [111]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [42]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brad Sparks [116]
   Dr. Bruce Maccabee On IRC Chat - 09-22-00 - Bobbie Felder [30]
   Re: ETI Signal From The Pleiades? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [21]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart - Gary Hart [24]
   NASA's Most Fantastic Proposal - Kelly Peterborough [173]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [85]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [57]
   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Hatch - Larry Hatch [42]
   Project 1947 Roswell Page - Jan Aldrich [29]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [420]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans - Roger Evans [44]
   Iridium'S Fall A Mixed Blessing For Astronomers - Kelly Peterborough
   [31]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Murray - Marty Murray [85]
   Time Travel Articles? - Mark Hall [11]
   Arthur Tomlinson Passes On - Stephen Mera [22]
   Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference - Josh Goldstein
   [58]
   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Connelly - Dwight Connelly [40]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [43]
   Re: Time Travel Articles? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [10]
   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [34]
   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Gates - Robert Gates [51]

  Sep 21:

   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [74]
   Re: Time Travel Articles? - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [14]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates - Robert Gates [49]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Kurt Jonach [36]
   Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO - Larry Hatch [82]
   The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?] - Nathan G. Daniel -
   Underground Video [122]
   Faxed Questions To The Croatian Air Force - Giuliano 'Jimmy'
   Marinkovicc - AGETI [197]
   Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False - Melanie Mecca [21]
   'Angel Hair'? - Kelly Peterborough [44]
   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 38 - John Hayes [400]
   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - McCoy - GT McCoy [107]
   P-47: Philistines in Space - Jan Aldrich [73]
   Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away - Dennis Stacy [12]
   Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [150]
   Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [18]

  Sep 22:

   Re: Time Travel Articles? - Isenberg - Holger Isenberg [23]
   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [29]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans - Roger Prokic [37]
   Another FOIA Request From Larry Bryant - Jim Mortellaro [165]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [157]
   Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Gehrman - Ed Gehrman [42]
   Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Sanchez-Ocejo - Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo [79]
   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Maly - Kevin Maly [35]
   Cydonian Imperative Update: 'Catbox' Revisited - Mac Tonnies [87]
   Dust Bunny Hunt - In Case Anybody Was Wondering - John Velez [55]
   MAGONIA Monthly Supplement #30 - Mark Pilkington [305]
   Dr. Bruce Maccabee On Irc Chat Tonight - 9/22/00 - Bobbie Felder [30]
   Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False - Sue Strickland [87]
   Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Balaskas - Nick Balaskas [51]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [41]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Evans - Roger Evans [36]
   Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Royce J. Myers III [29]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [23]
   UFO Images From The UK - Dan Geib [13]
   Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away - Daniel Muoz [6]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [65]
   UFO Scotland Changes URL - Dave Ledger [12]
   Limited X-PPAC Media Update - Background Only - - Steven G. Bassett
   [55]

  Sep 23:

   Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Royce J. Myers III [14]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [44]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [66]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hale - Roy J Hale [20]
   Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Rutherford - Retha Rutherford [39]
   Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Gates - Robert Gates [38]
   Gere To Star In Movie On Mothman Prophecies - Stig Agermose [20]
   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [74]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire - Todd Lemire [37]
   Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Larry Hatch [49]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch - Larry Hatch [92]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [66]
   Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch - Larry Hatch [22]
   Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart - Gary Hart [16]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch - Larry Hatch [60]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [88]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [112]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [107]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [107]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Zeigermann - Ralf Zeigermann [24]
   Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-23-00 - Rense E-News [266]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [102]

  Sep 24:

   John Carpenter Does it Again - 2 - Gary Hart [22]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [72]
   Remote Viewing/Guessing Target EL-6 - Royce J. Myers III [36]
   Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Killeen - Patrick Killeen [15]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young - Bob Young [15]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [139]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [99]
   Re: UFO Images From The UK - Geib - Dan Geib [38]
   Fox News Article On Mars Face - Lan Fleming [62]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger - Donald Ledger [29]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Young - Bob Young [19]
   Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Young - Bob Young [19]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [147]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles - Jenny Randles [51]
   CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Viscount, Saskatchewan - Paul Anderson
   [14]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [83]
   Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch - Larry Hatch [44]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [38]
   Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III
   [32]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [80]
   Re: Time Travel Articles? - Hall - Mark Hall [7]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [43]

  Sep 25:

   Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Fleming - Lan Fleming [32]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [63]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hale - Roy J Hale [17]
   Re: John Carpenter Does it Again - 2 - Gates - Robert Gates [41]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young - Bob Young [35]
   Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Bruce Maccabee [12]
   UFO 2000 Symposium, Lima, Ohio - Jan Sypherd [38]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [14]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [98]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer - John Rimmer [17]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Krause - Scott Krause [38]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [100]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [117]
   UFO Sighted By 3 Children In Castellon, Spain - Scott Corrales [24]
   TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.25.00 - Paul Anderson [90]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Clark - Jerome Clark [17]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [33]

  Sep 26:

   Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [28]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [18]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [64]
   Trent Photos Blowout! - Roger Evans [15]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [26]
   Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [39]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [93]
   Ted Phillips on IRC Chat Friday 9/29/00 at 9 PM EDT - Bobbie Felder
   [43]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer - John Rimmer [29]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer - John Rimmer [50]
   A Few TV Listings - 08-25-00 - Ron Cecchini [33]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein - Josh Goldstein [93]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [102]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [251]
   Re: eier-Hoax Claims - Sandow - Greg Sandow [29]
   Model Buiiding, Adamski, Meier, & Others - GT McCoy [60]
   Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton - James Easton [530]
   Filer's Files #38 -- 2000 - George A. Filer [394]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger - Donald Ledger [39]
   37th Annual National UFO Conference Report - Stig Agermose [66]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire - Todd Lemire [65]
   Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Hatch - Larry Hatch [34]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [28]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [29]
   Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax - Jerome Clark [64]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax - Jerome Clark [82]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [26]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [108]
   Re: New Jersey UFO Conference - October 7 & 8, 2000 - tom benson [11]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [36]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles - Jenny Randles [73]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [43]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [186]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [11]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan Daniel [11]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [67]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich - Jan Aldrich [40]
   Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [17]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Friedman - Stan Friedman [53]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [173]
   Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [21]
   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [114]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Deschamps - Michel M. Deschamps [26]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas - Nick Balaskas [54]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Cecchini - Ron Cecchini [37]

  Sep 27:

   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark - Jerome Clark [34]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Myers - Royce J. Myers III [35]
   Eros' Square Craters - Ron Cecchini [10]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [42]
   [lunascan] Square Craters on Eros - Larry Klaes [115]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans - Roger Evans [104]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire - Donald Ledger [74]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger - Donald Ledger [73]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [27]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [25]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [50]
   Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [43]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer - John Rimmer [52]
   Did UFOs Land Near Woodbridge Base? - Georgina Bruni [41]
   Re: A Little Boy Draws A Flying Saucer - Larry Hatch [24]
   Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Fernandes - Joaquim Fernandes [22]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Sparks - Brad Sparks [143]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton - Terry Blanton [19]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak - David Rudiak [146]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [71]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [39]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [109]
   Re: Eros' Square Craters - Young - Bob Young [20]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark - Jerome Clark [31]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [47]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel - Nathan G. Daniel [103]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [150]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [16]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Mortellaro - Jim Mortellaro [22]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [47]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [25]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Thompson - Paul Thompson [32]

  Sep 28:

   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [101]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Rimmer - John Rimmer [22]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson - Brian Cuthbertson [107]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [107]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [45]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff - Jim Deardorff [35]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [21]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas - Nick Balaskas [113]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak - David Rudiak [278]
   Re: Eros' Square Craters - Gates - Robert Gates [19]
   Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Gates - Robert Gates [35]
   Politics of UFOs/Disclosure Town Hall Meeting - Steven G. Bassett [52]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Felder - Bobbie Felder [25]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Kaeser - Steve W. Kaeser [23]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [210]
   Another UFO Fighter Plane - Dennis Stacy [8]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [192]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [36]
   Simone Mendez - Karl Pflock [15]
   Re: Eros' Square Craters - Tonnies - Mac Tonnies [26]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [54]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [21]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young - Bob Young [67]

  Sep 29:

   '2001 Mars Odyssey' For NASA's Next Trip To Mars - NASA News [75]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [93]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman - Mark Cashman [101]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman - Mark Cashman [57]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Gates - Robert Gates [46]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille - Serge Salvaille [67]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [47]
   Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under - Bill Chalker [9]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak - David Rudiak [54]

  Sep 28:

   UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 39 - John Hayes [459]

  Sep 29:

   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [112]
   Recent Action: Illinois, Wisconsin and Arizona - Kenny Young [55]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton - Terry Blanton [12]
   UFO Report: Girard, Ohio - 9/19/2000 - Kenny Young [7]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [191]
   French Book By Astronomer Pierre Gurin - Gildas Bourdais [33]
   Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson - Gar Anthony [6]
   Strange Lights Frighten Driver In Pennsylvania - Stan Gordon [39]
   MUFON E-mail Directory - Bob Long [16]
   Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [170]
   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee - Bruce Maccabee [43]
   Re: Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson - Stacy - Dennis Stacy [13]
   Real X-Files Hot Gossip UK - Oct 2000 - Georgina Bruni [137]
   Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct 2000 - Georgina Bruni [181]
   McMinnville Photos - Joel Carpenter - Mark Cashman [24]
   9/2000 UFO Photos? - Charles Chapman [23]

  Sep 30:

   Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans - Roger Evans [96]
   Re: Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under - - Roy J Hale [17]
   Re: Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct - James Easton [158]
   Contactees, Cults, and Culture Paper Published - Todd Lemire [12]
   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Chapman - Charles Chapman [54]
   Friedman On Siegel, Oct. 2 - Stan Friedman [17]
   Check Out This Crop Circle! - Kelly Peterborough [4]
   UpDates Off-Line Until Wednesday, October 4th, 2000 - UFO UpDates -
   Toronto [13]

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





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                   More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:47:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:38:15 -0400
Subject: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains


Dear Friends,

The protean entity known as the Chupacabras has resurfaced yet
again--not in Chile but much closer to home, Read on.

============
Source: La Prensa de Nicaragua (newspaper)
Date: August 30, 2000

CHUPACABRAS REMAINS FOUND
by Maricely Linarte and Clarissa Altamirano, Special
Correspondents

** Specialists described the animal as an uncommon species after
a careful examination of its skeleton. It presents yellow hair
on its short tail, large eye-sockets, soft skin like that of a
bat, large claws and fangs, and a crest on its main vertebrae.
Could this be the Chupacabras? A team of biologists and
veterinarians from Leon must now answer the question **

  LEON.- the skeleton of the animal that slaked its thirst with
the blood of sheep on the San Lorenzo farm, owned by Jorge Luis
Talavera and located at Km. 154 of Malpaisillo, was found in the
early morning hours of monday some 80 meters away from the
paddock where it procured its victims.

"The creature could be a hybrid of several species, created in a
laboratory by means of genetic engineering," noted Giocconda
Chevez, Malpaisillo's veterinarian.

Jorge Talavera explained that three days ago he opened fire
against the alleged Chupacabras using a shotgun, causing its
death and resuting in its flesh being devoured by vultures. The
creature was in an advanced state of decomposition by the time
it was discovered. "We had to kill it. In 15 days it sucked 25
sheep, and my neighbor lost 35 sheep in 10 days. It was an
average of 5 sheep and goats a night," he explained.

Captain Leonardo Carmona, head of the Malpaisillo Crime Lab,
indicated that the animal's remains are to be studied at the
Hospital Escuela de Leon (Leon Teaching Hospital), where
veterinarians and biologists shall be on hand to examine it,
according to a report by Edgard Orozco, who is in charge of the
Department of Forensic Medicine.

####

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special Thanks to Gloria Coluchi








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

              Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:02:45 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:41:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:24:59 -0400
 >Subject: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Source: El Nuevo Diario (Nicaragua)
 >Date: August 30, 2000

 >Strange Entity Causes Astonishment * Chupacabras Killed in
 >Tolapa * Farmers and Zootechnician at a loss to find a suitable
 >classification * It was wounded and its corpse appeared several
 >days later as a bare skeleton * Fangs, lobes and maw are source
 >of confusion and fear

Original article with images is available at:

http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/nacional/nacional4.html

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:49:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:40:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>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

<snip>

 >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.

Hi, David, Peter:

Has anybody plotted all of this on a map and is this available
on an URL, somewhere?

<snip>

 >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.

Yes, and he waited weeks before putting a statement down on
paper. Maybe he hoped it would all go away.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:26:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:47:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden


 >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?

 >>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?

At the last count it was... wait for it... three. Yes! we have a
result, someone is actually interested in present day UFO
sightings!!

Sorry for the interruption, we now return you to the flying
lighthouse and silver pelican show.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                  Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:39:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:49:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow


 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:19:12 -0400
 >From: Pter Brookesmith, The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >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.

Ah.

But aren't they correct, my criticisms? Fascinating how you
didn't address the substance of what I wrote.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

             Re: UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition - Hammond

From: Elizabeth Hammond <lizzz@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:57:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:51:49 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition - Hammond


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: <Updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFOIN Announce Abduction Competition
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:37:46 +0100

 >UFOIN announce abduction research >competition

Dear Jenny:

I think this is wonderful news. And a long time coming. As an
"abductee" I look forward to seeing some serious, truely
scientific study of this. Regardless of outcome! Again, my
thanks and my best wishes to whoever wins, you will have you're
work cut out for you!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

               Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Jeffrey

From: Martin Jeffrey <martin-j@lineone.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:32:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:26:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Jeffrey


 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:44:35 -0700
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?

 >>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..

Hi Roy and Rory

I think that if you bear in mind that London UFO Studies doesn't
have the best reputation in productive ufology, (if there is
such as term) that Chris Martin is just one of a long line of
storytellers aiming to make money.

Roy Lake, their "leader" is best friends with Tony Dodd and
share the same ET thesis and this is carried through their
publications.

LUFOS also brought us Robert La Mont, the Hypnotherapist who
tricked LUFOS and a few hundred believers with a dodgy UFO video
he had faked in Mexico. (Confession available)

I think I might go to the Leeds conference, especially with the
Karl Woods and Chris Martin arguments brewing.

Regards

Martin Jeffrey







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                      Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:47:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:28:42 -0400
Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Randles


 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 02:50:11 -0400
 >From: Victor J.Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >Jenny,

 >I do apologise if you really consider that my attempt to get you
 >to substantiate your claim that the Bacup (Lancs) - Todmorden
 >area is the area of greatest UFO activity in the UK (Possibly in
 >Europe) is "bizarre hounding".

 >Let us consider this 'thread' dead and buried... Other List
 >members please note.


Hi,

Thats fine by me, Victor.

I'm certainly not wishing to fall out over this, I just truly
dont see what more I can say about this that I havent already in
my previous postings.

But if you have specific questions, by all means ask.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

               Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman

From: Rory Lushman <oubliette@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:47:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:31:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Lushman


 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:44:35 -0700
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?

 >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.

Whilst I am going to Leeds, you seem to assume that everyone
else is. Its all right saying ask Chris, or go to his house to
see the footage or even go to Leeds. Its just seems that those
who cannot make it to any of these places are being told we
won't answer any questions here but at the same time we will
plug it just the same.

Well we'll just have to wait and see what the footage shows
there then. I do have a few questions in mind but who knows
Chris may even answer them during his talk.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                     John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:00:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:32:28 -0400
Subject: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

       UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 5, Number 35
August 31, 2000
Editor: Joseph Trainor

PAKISTANI ARMY FINDS
MYSTERIOUS WRECKAGE

       The Pakistani Army recovered mysterious metal
wreckage near the village of Khumbi Thalang in
Baluchistan province on Monday, August 21, 2000.
      According to Rahil Khan, UFO Roundup
correspondent in Pakistan, "On August 21, there was
a brief news item that a UFO was found in Baluchistan
province, but no official information was given about it."
       The wreckage appears to be related to the lone
saucer seen over the city of Dera Ghazi Khan at
about 8:30 p.m. on Tuesday, August 15, 2000.
(For more information, see UFO Roundup, volume 5,
number 34, "UFO fleet seen by thousands in
Afghanistan and Pakistan," page 1.)
       Dera Ghazi Khan is a large city west of the Sutlej
River about 400 kilometers (240 miles) north of Karachi.
       On Thursday, August 18, 2000, Pakistani authorities
rushed an armored brigade into the Rajanpur district.
Tanks and other military vehicles quickly sealed off the
Tuman Gorchant tribal area in Rajanpur, where Khumbi
Thalang is located.
       Several high-ranking Pakistani officers visited the
crash site that day, including a lieutenant general, the
corps commander from Bahalwapur, located about
160 kilometers (100 miles) east of Dera Ghazi Khan.
       "He along with other army officers inspected the
10-foot-long (3-meter-long) piece of metal.  The
wreckage ws taken away to an unknown place in a
closed container."
       On August 15, the UFO "was seen flying over
Rajanpur, Loralal, Barkhan and Fort Munro.  It crashed
some 20 kilometers (12 miles) away from PAF Farid
(Pakistani Air Force base--J.T.) used by the PAF for
exercises."
       "According to local tribesmen, when it crashed at
Khumbi Thalang, the sky remained illuminated for
about one minute."
       Rahil Khan reported that the retrieval "has become a
top-secret thing and some Pakistani and U.S. agencies
are involved."
       "Some people saw a formation of choppers from the
U.S. Navy fly over the city (of Karachi) from the direction
(south) of the Arabian Sea," apparently taking off from
an aircraft carrier over the horizon offshore.
       During the multiple UFO overflight of August 15, he added,
"Some of them also caused sonic booms."
       The story quickly went around the Quetta bazaar that
these were U.S. Stealth helicopters out hunting for
Osama bin-Laden.
(Editor's Comment: Stealth helicopters flying at 1,700
miles per hour?  That doesn't seem likely.)
       The USA "secret team" that was in Chile in June or
July also reportedly turned up in Pakistan.
       According to Rahil Khan, a Pakistani army captain
"was in Karachi for a three-day furlough" on Saturday,
August 19, 2000, "to attend his sister's wedding."
The captain "said that they used the expression vo log
(Urdu for those people--R.K.)  He didn't tell me who he
was referring to, but he was very sensitive about it.  A
large (army) contingent had cordoned off the area."
(See the UK newspaper The News for August 27,
2000, "Wreckage of UFO moved to unknown place."
Many thanks to Gerry Lovell and Rahil Khan for
these reports.)
(Editor's Comment:  Both Gerry and I agree that the
10-foot metal wreckage retrieved was probably a
cruise missile.  Note, however, that only some of the
objects seen that night emitted sonic booms.  The rest
were high-flying and silent.  My guess is, somebody
fired cruise missiles at the UFOs.  The saucer in Dera Ghazi
Khan deflected its attacker, and the missile crashed in
nearby Khumbi Thalang.)

SILVER-SPHERE UFO CAUSES
FLAP IN BUCKS AND SURREY
.
       "Frightened nanny Michelle Williams said she almost
careered off the road when she spotted a UFO hovering
above her car.  It was her second sighting in a day."
      "Michelle, 25, of Billings Close, Stokenchurch (Bucks.)
first saw the sphere at her window when getting out of bed."
       "She said, 'It was around 6:45 on Friday morning
(August 18, 2000) and I saw something hovering above
the trees in the back of my house.  At first I thought it was
a police helicopter and it was probably about a mile away.
One minute it was there, and in the next minute it shot off
in a straight line above the trees.  It suddenly stopped but
it disappeared.'"
       "Michelle, who lives in Marlow, said she was slightly
bemused but thought little more of it."
       "But that was until she spotted the silver craft as she
drove to work along Marlow Road, Stokenchurch."
       "'Driving toward Marlow, directly in front of me,
I could see the object.  Again it was hovering, and there
were flashing bright white lights.  It was something
very dodgy-looking, and I was quite frightened.'"
       'Then it just shot up into the air, and that's when I
careered off the road.'"
       "Michelle guessed the flying saucer must have been
about the size of a large family car and that it was at least
200 feet (60 meters) above the ground."
       "She added, 'People will probably think I am a
weirdo, but this was the first time I have ever seen
anything like this.  It was quite scary actually and I
wondered if I was going to be beamed up or something.
I even checked my watch to see if I was missing a few
minutes.'"
       "Police confirmed their helicopter had not been in
the area at the time, and a spokesman for RAF Naphill
(air base) said there had been no reports of unidentified
flying objects in the area and that the base did not
equipment to track such objects anyway."
       ""Melanie Redgrave (distant relative of actresses
Vanessa and Lynn--J.T.) spotted a UFO the same day
frightened nanny Michelle Williams nearly careered off
the road after seeing a silver-coloured craft hovering
above her car."
       "Melanie, 30, of Hanging Croft, High Wycombe, said
she saw the flying saucer just hours after Michelle's
sighting in Stokenchurch."
       "Former retail assistant Melanie said, 'I was
drawing the window curtain when I saw this really bright
light.  I pulled back the nets because I thought it was a
helicopter or a large jet, which we get round here.  But
there was no sound.  It was silent.'"
       "She added, 'I thought Oh, Crikey, this is really,
really bright!  And I looked over to the left over some
high trees.  It was far too low to be a plane, so I kept
staring at it but it didn't move much, just slightly up and
down.  Then it moved to the right and vanished..  I
thought, This is strange.'"
       "Melanie, who lives with her parents and is new to
High Wycombe, " said it had "glowing orange lights and
two long bars across the middle.  The top had small lights all
the way around with spaces in between."
       "Michelle (Williams) said she was pleased someone else
had seen the mystery object in the sky.  She said, 'I've been
getting a lot of stick for what I saw, but I am 100 percent
certain I saw something.  The last thing I would want to do
is make a fool of myself.'"
       On Wednesday, August 23, 2000, at 9:10 p.m., Timothy
Silver was in Addleston, Surrey when he saw "three
'pinpoints of light' like average 'stars' in size and brightness
but with a dim halo" travel "through approximately 12 to 16
degrees of sky in about six to eight seconds.  The lights did
not keep a regular formation.  The outer lights moved in and
out relative to the middle light.," as if RAF jets were in
pursuit.
       Tim added that there "were no navigation lights
flashing" on the UFOs even though they were close to
London's Heathrow International Airport.  (See the
Bucks Free Press for August 23, 2000, "Nanny spots
UFO," and August 24, 2000, "Second sighting of UFO."
Many thanks to Louise Lowry and Tim Silver for these
news reports.)

ANOTHER CROP CIRCLE
FOUND IN SASKATCHEWAN

       Yet another crop circle has been found in Canada's
Saskatchewan province, which has also been the site
of an ongoing UFO flap this summer.
       On Sunday, August 20, 2000, a crop-dusting pilot
spotted a large formation on a farm near Moosomin,
Sask. (population 2,500), located on Provincial
Highway 1 about 145 kilometers (90 miles) east of
Regina.
       "The formation is a large classic 'dumbbell' formation,
one large circle and a smaller circle connected by a
straight pathway.  Larger circle is 120 feet (36
meters) in diameter, and the smaller is 60 feet
(18 meters) in diameter.  Pathway is about 40 feet
(12 meters) long and five feet (1.4 meters) wide.
Total length is approximately 220 feet (66 meters).
The crop inside the pathway is flattened in the
opposite direction."
       On Saturday, August 26, 2000, the site was
investigated by cerealogist Dennis Eklund of Saskatoon.
       Last week the crop circle was visited by over 2,000
people, "and the farmer doesn't want any more publicity,"
although he is allowing researchers to visit the site.
(Many thanks to Paul Anderson of Circles Phenomenon
Research-Canada for this report.)

A STRANGE ENCOUNTER AT
LAKE MEAD IN NEVADA

       During the week of August 15, 2000, Lynda Ashley
and her friend Ronda left work in Las Vegas, Nevada and
drove out to Lake Mead, just east of the city.
       "My friend Ronda and I arrived at the lake around
2 a.m.  There were four trailers parked on the shore
so we parked" further away "and walked over with our
blankets," finding a spot on the beach "kinda far from
them."
       "We laid on our blankets and were looking at the
stars like we always do.  All of a sudden, the light appeared
out of nowhere.  We knew it wasn't a star 'cause we we
were looking in that direction for a long time.  Then the light
got brighter, so bright that we felt we were on a stage and
that we were (the show's) stars."
       "We were a little scared, but we calmed ourselves.
And when I did this, it began to move to the right really slow
and disappeared behind the hill.  I followed it until it
disappeared.  Then I came back to the blanket and laid
back down.  The distance from the water to the hill was
about 500 feet (165 meters).  That's where the craft was--
6000 feet away.  There was no sound, as well."
       "Then the craft's light went dim, then off, then back
on and brighter than before.  So we both sat up, and
as we did, my friend Ronda said, 'It's coming this way!'
and we were really terrified.  But then I said, 'Lay down
flat.'  and we did."
       The UFO "was coming across the water at a rapid speed
and then I saw the craft behind the image," or dazzling glow.
       Lynda described the UFO as "the bottom of the craft
was red circular lights over a white background.  There was
a spinning circle around the craft (equator) with blue/
green flashes.  There were what appeared to be two legs
protruding from the craft, and they were blue/white,
and there was a white dome on top."
       ""And that's when I realized that what we were (first)
looking at was an image of the craft and not the craft itself.
The image was coming from the craft.  It appeared to be
a 3=D where you could almost touch it.   By this
time, we were too scared to move so we stayed there
(on the beach) until 6 a.m. and kept our eyes on it.
It stayed there and was still there when we left."
       "On our way back to town, we saw a helicopter"
flying low over the lake.  "I figured the military was
looking for whatever it was that we saw."
       Arriving at a friend's house, Lynda and Ronda
invited those present to come outside and see the
formation of helicopters converging on Lake Mead.
       Afterward, they attempted to contact the media,
but "they were acting as though we were all crazy."
(Email Form Report)

HIGH-FLYING UFO SEEN NEAR
ABERDEEN, SOUTH DAKOTA

       On Monday, August 21, 2000, at 9:10 p.m.,
Jason J. and his wife were on their farm in Spink
County near Aberdeen, South Dakota (population
25,000) when they sighted an unusually bright light
high in the sky.
       ""Me and my wife saw a light way up but at first
I thought it was a satellite," Jason reported, "And then I
realized it was moving quite fast and thought maybe it
could be a plane.  But usually the light blinks on a plane
and also a plane doesn't move that fast.  At the distance
we were seeing it, it was quite a ways up.  As we
watched it, it just slightly dimmed, and then it wasn't
even there anymore."
       The UFO "was moving west" and "was like a white
dot because it was a ways up," he added, "We live
out of town and there's no city lights and you can see
everything."
       Aberdeen, is on South Dakota Highway 12
approximately 160 miles (256 kilometers) northeast
of Pierre, the state capital.  (Email Form Report)

RESEARCHER DECLARES 2000
"SUMMER OF SASQUATCH"

       "Summer of Sasquatch"--that's what Bigfoot
researchers are calling the season based  on the
number of sightings recorded during the last few
months in the USA's Pacific Northwest.
       "Cryptozoologist Loren Coleman says the season's
sightings have been unusually well-documented, even
though the number hasn't increased much from last
year."
       "Coleman says this year local and national media
appear to be more willing to take Bigfoot sightings
seriously instead of sensationalizing them 'a la the
Weekly World News.'"
       "As a result, he claims cryptozoology is finally
starting to be taken seriously, and he predicts universities
and other scientific groups will earmark funds for
Bigfoot research."
       In related news, the annual Bigfoot Daze celebration
was held last weekend in Carson, Washington state
(population 1,000).
       The highlight of this year's celebration, which ran
from Friday, August 25, to Sunday, August 27, 2000,
was an attempt by researchers to communicate with
Bigfoot by pounding on tree trunks.
       "Bigfoot expert Ray Crowe says evidence suggests
Bigfeet keep in contact with each other by whacking
wooden sticks against trees in two-, three- and
four-whack patterns."
       "Although the creatures are reportedly shy and
avoid humans, Crowe says that 'when they hear the
whack, they can't help but respond back.'"
       Carson, Wash. is on Highway 14 about 40 miles
(64 kilometers) east-northeast of Portland, Oregon.
(Many thanks to Loren Coleman for these news
releases.)

JESUS PAINTING SHEDS TEARS
IN BETHLEHEM CHURCH

       A Fifth Century icon of Jesus Christ is drawing
pilgrims to the Church of the Nativity on Manger Square
in Bethlehem with reports of miraculous phenomena.
      The church is the oldest in the West Bank and was
built by St. Helena in 326 A.D.  It was rebuilt in the
Fifth Century following an earthquake, and the icons
were added to the interior pillars at that time.
(Editor's Note:  Helena was born in Colchester, UK
in 247 A.D., the daughter of a British chieftain.  She
married a Roman officer named Constantius, who
later became the emperor.  Their son was Constantine,
who also became emperor.)
       Inside the church "are four rows of Corinthian pillars.
Every pillar bears the picture of an apostle.  Several
dozen gilded lamp fixtures hang from the oak ceiling."
       One pillar's painting of Jesus "blinks, sheds tears
and has begun to perform miraculous healings of the
sick, old an infirm."
       "According to witnesses, the eyes of the icon have
come alive and have saved the hopelessly sick  from
certain death."
       "Respected religious leaders in Bethlehem have
acknowledged that the Christ painting does weep."
       'It's a message to people to come back to God,'
says Father Anastasios, a senior Greek Orthodox
clergyman in Bethlehem.  'I saw it myself.  Many
people have seen Jesus with the tears coming down.
It is officially declared a miracle.'"
       "Bible expert Daniel Czutno expects more than
tears and healing miracles from Christ."
       "'This is a sure sign Jesus is getting prepared
to make his promised return.' he says."
       "Meanwhile, hundreds of pilgrims are flocking to
the Church of the Nativity--the West Bank location
where Jesus was born--for a glimpse of the column
that bears Christ's picture."
       Anne Henderson of Detroit, Michigan, USA
"travelled all the way from Detroit seeking a cure for
Lou Gehrig's disease, which was robbing her of her
muscle control--and her life."
       "'I had no faith in doctors, but I still kept my faith
in the Lord,' says the fully-recovered 47-year-old.
'The so-called experts had given up--and they
basically wanted me to do the same.  Thank God I was
stubborn enough to make this trip.'" (See the Sun for
September 5, 2000, "Jesus painting heals thousands!")
(Editor's Comment:  I sure hope this is just your
run-of-the-mill, garden-variety phenomenon and not a
portent of next week's massacre in Jerusalem.)


from the UFO Files...

1714: UNFORGETTABLE
            CATHERINE THEOT

       This remarkable woman psychic holds the record
for being the only woman to break ranks with the Illuminati
and live.  September 1 marks the anniversary of her
death 206 years ago.
       Catherine was born in 1714 in Barenton, a small
town in Normandy (bow the department of Manche
in France--J.T.)  From early childhood, she showed an
amazing "wild talent" for precognition.  Nor was her
clairvoyance confined to dreams,  She often had visions
in the middle of the day.
       Starting in about 1730, Catherine began having a
recurring dream that stayed with her all her life.  In this
dream she saw herself as a young girl in a bombed or
fire-blackened Paris.  Only it wasn't her Paris.  She saw
herself standing in a plaza "of the Great Iron Tower,"
but the ruins were deserted.
(Editor's Note:  The Eiffel Tower didn't exist in the
Eighteenth Century.  It went up in 1889.)
       Then, in her dream, Catherine sees a man walking
towards her.  His facial features, though, are indistinct.
She has a strong impression that he is the Messiah.
And that she herself is destined to become "the
Mother of God."
       Telling of dreams like this...well, it's no surprise
that Catherine soon has a reputation as a madwoman.
In 1744, she causes a real commotion when she
wanders into Ste.-Mere-Eglise, a neighboring town.
      "The invasion is coming," she tells the townspeople,
and then starts raving about "giant moaning birds with
three white stripes on their wings" and "thousands of
soldiers descending from the sky with great white
wings like angels."
(Editor's Note: Prophecy fulfilled on June 6, 1944,
courtesy of the 101st Airborne Division, U.S. Army.
Catherine wasn't wrong.  She was just 200 years
too early.)
       Enough is enough, the magistrates rule.
Mlle. Theot is remanded to Ste. Pelagie, a convent
also known les Miramions.
(Editor's Note: The convent was founded by Marie
Bonneau de Miramion, an associate of King
Louis XIII in the Seventeenth Century.  It served
as an ecclesiastical prison for the confinement of
"repentant girls," married and single women who had
run off with somebody else's husband.)
       Catherine spends long years in Ste. Pelagie,
working as a serving-maid.  "A long course of religious
asceticism unhinged her mind, and she was placed
under restraint."
       "The priests she was forever harrying had stuffed
her into the convent of the Miramions, along with the
'repentant girls.'  But what did she have to repent of?
Listening to the word of God for thirty years?  To hear her
tell it, it was the world that needed to repent, and quickly
too...Otherwise Paris, just like Sodom and Gomorrah."
       In April of 1779, at age 55, Catherine busts out..
Fashioning a rope from stolen clothing, she goes over
the wall of Ste. Pelagie and goes into hiding in
Montmartre.  She tries to keep a low profile, but the
visions will not leave her in peace.
       In no time at all, this "tall, 'dry and almost
diaphanous' woman, 'like the ancient Sibyl of Cumae'"
is up to her old tricks again, "rousing little crowds on
steps of St. Eustache and Notre Dame...The police
arrest her on the Rue Geoffroy l'Asnier."
       Catherine is interrogated by M. Chenon, the
police commissioner. He's a newcomer to Paris,
born and raised in Geneva.  And a member of a new
secret society--the Order of the Illuminati.
       After two hours with Catherine, Chenon is certain
he is dealing with a lunatic.  Passchendaele?  The
sleepiest village in Flanders.  Who would fight a
battle there?  Oswiecim?  Where the hell is that?--
Somewhere in eastern Europe, maybe.
       Finally Catherine says something that remotely
makes sense.  "Cornwallis will surrender in
Virginia in the autumn of 1781."
       Chenon laughs out loud.  Like everyone else
in Europe, he is following the war on the other side
of the Atlantic.  He knows that George Washington's
army has just been defeated--again--in New Jersey.
The British are winning the war.  They still hold
New York City and Newport, Rhode Island, and they
are poised to take Savannah and Charleston.  The
best the Americans can hope for is a negotiated
settlement.  Cornwallis surrender?  Impossible!
       Still, Cehnon thinks, "a madwoman of her kind
can always become dangerous...They shut her up for good
in the Salpetriere."  Catherine is now a "terrorist."
       But the joke is on Chenon.  Imagine his surprise
when he picks up Le Moniteur in December of 1781
and reads about Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown.
He wastes no time.  Grabbing his quill, he pens a
letter to Adam Weishaupt, the sinister grandmaster
of the Illuminati, in far-off Bavaria.  "We have a
visionary here, and I believe she is genuine."
       In early 1782, Catherine is released from her
chains and leg-irons and taken from her cell at
the Salpetriere.  Chenon awaits her in the warden's
office.  He comes right to the point.  "How would
you like to get out of here?"
       "I know what you want, and I know who you
represent," Catherine replies, "I have no desire to
serve the Illuminati."
       "You misjudge us.  Our order will change the world.
Mankind will at last find tranquility.  Our Illuminatus
Rex is the most brilliant man alive.  He--"
       "Adam Weishaupt is a murderer," she interrupts.
       Chenon grimaces.  "I forgot.  You see things.
No pretenses, then.  Our order has many friends.
Agree to work for us, and you'll be out of here
by tomorrow."
       It is, quite literally, a deal with the Devil, and
Catherine knows it.  But she was locked up for
thirty-five years in the Miramions and has just spent
two years in the Salpetriere.  She cannot bear the
thought of dying in prison, so she agrees.
       The Illuminati install her in an upstairs flat on
the Rue de Contrescarpe.  They tutor her in the
finer points of necromancy.  And soon a medium of
Catherine's considerable talent is in demand in all
of the Illuminati meeting-places.  In particular, the
new lodge founded by Gabriel Riqueti, Comte (Count)
de Mirabeau and Philippe, Duc (Duke) d'Orleans in 1786.
       So there is Catherine, by day reading the Book of
Revelation and seeking some clue to the source of the
strange visions that continue to afflict her.  By night,
she's a star of the occult underground, conjuring up
every ghost of antiquity from Anaxagoras to Zeno.
       In 1789, she meets a radical priest named
Christophe-Antoine Gerle, newly elected to the
Estates-General.  Like her, Gerle is leading a double
life.  By day, Dom Gerle is a glad-handing politician,
hobnobbing with the painter David, the Abbe Sieyes,
Condorcet and Lafayette.  But at night he consorts with
the most fearsome Illuminati diabolists in Paris--the
Marquis de Sade, Retif de la Bretonne, Cagliostro and
Anarcharsis Clootz.
       Dom Gerle is obsessed with the future.  Having
"borrowed" certain papers from the visionary Suzanne
Labrousee  he has used his knowledge of the future
to enrich himself.  When he first moved to Paris, he
lived with a Spiritualist doctor and through this fellow
made contact with the Illuminati.  And now he is the
confidant of Catherine Theot, the most formidable
psychic in Europe.
       The year 1792 finds France slipping into chaos,
and Catherine holding court at her house on the Rue
de Contrescarpe.  Desperate people flock to her--former
nobles, frightened housewives, unemployed tradesmen--
eager to hear her prophecies.  But still she is plagued
by that recurring dream--the plaza, the iron tower, the city
in ruins and the approaching man.  What can it mean?
       And she is tired of being the Iluminati's pet
psychic.  She hates Chenon, and she owes him for
that three years in the Salpetriere.  If it's the last thing
she ever does, she's going to stick it to that Geneva
pimp.  She's half-tempted to pick up a knife herself,
but she fears the Illuminati.  If only there was a man here
in Paris, a strong man who could protect her from the
vengeance of Adam Weishaupt...
       Dom Gerle is an unhappy camper, too.  Anarcharsis
Clootz has promised to make him the Pope when the
New World Order takes over Europe.  But now the
French armies are in retreat, and Clootz;s boy Brissot
couldn't get elected dogcatcher.  Gerle is 56 years old,
and he's afraid he won't live long enough to ascend to the
papacy.  Dammit, he even has his inaugural speech
already written.
       Then Gerle introduces Catherine to the rising
politician Maximilien Robespierre.  Something clicks.
The handsome and meticulously dressed Robespierre
has a devastating effect on women,  Catherine, now
78 years old, is no exception.
       Here is the strongman who will protect them from
Weishaupt.  Catherine and Gerle betray the order,
giving away all of Clootz's secrets to Robespierre
and his ruthless chief of intelligence, Louis Saint-Just.
(Editor's Note:  Saint-Just makes Hitler's secret police
chief, Heinrich Himmler, look like Pee-Wee Herman.)
       Robespierre strikes first.  In March 1794, the
Illuminati faction led by Clootz goes to the guillotine.
The following month, they're followed by the Dantonists,
Robespierre's recent allies.  "The Incorruptible" is
strengthening his grip on power.
       For the next few months, France is ruled by a
weird triumvirate--Robespierre as dictator, surrounded by
his elite guard, les Tappedurs (French for Strike Hards--
J.T.)...Dom Gerle as pontiff of the new religion of L'Etre
Supreme (the Supremne being)...and Catherine as kind of
a shadowy sorceress-queen, occupying the throne
recently vacated by Marie Antoinette.
       Catherine still has her recurring dream, but
now the man in it has a face--the face of Robespierre.
Of course! she thinks, He's the new Adam--I'm the
New Eve.  Our children will be the New Humans,
repopulating the devastated Paris of the future.  Then
I will be rejuvenated so I can become the Mother
of God!
       While Catherine jots down these visions in her
diary, the Illuminati are running for cover.  But they're
not beaten yet.  Chenon approaches Robespierre
with an olive branch in May 1794.  The Illuminati will
support Robespierre's Republic of Virtue if the
Incorruptible will sign "a supernatural constitution,"
a pact with Lucifer
(Editor's Comment:  Was Chenon sincere in making
this offer?  Or was he just trying to put Ronespierre
off his guard while the Illuminati readied their counter-
attack?  An answer to that will have to awaut the
opening of the Illuminati archives.)
       A defector from the Robespierre camp, Joseph
Fouche, has gone over to the Illuminati.  He fingers
the traitors, Gerle and Mlle. Theot.  The order
chooses a wealthy landowner, Marc Guillaume Vadier,
as point man for the counter-attack
       In June Vadier rises in the Convention and
denounces the Theot faction, "asserting that
Catherine was a tool of (British prime minister
William) Pitt the mummeries of the Theotists were
but a cloak for clerical and reactionary intrigue."
Catherine, he adds, is linked to "the occultists
of Bavaria."
(Editor's Comment:  A classic case of the pot
calling the kettle black.  Vadier attended many an
Illuminati hoodoo hootenanny himself.)
       A police raid on Catherine's apartment produces
papers "found in the old lady's mattress," her
writings about the future Messiah and letters from
Robespierre himself.
       "The situation became more dangerous for the
Incorruptible when he rescued the old seer and her
friends from the guillotine."  And when public prosecutor
Antoine Fouquier-Tinville tried to investigate Dom Gerle,
Robespierre attempted to force him out of office, an
action which led to Robespierre's downfall and
execution in July 1794.
       Catherine remained in prison and died a few
weeks later on September 1, 1794.  Ironically, by
joining the Illuminati, she encountered the same fate
she had struggled so hard to avoid--dying in a prison
cell.
       As for Catherine's most vivid and persistent vision,
the young man and woman at the Eiffel Tower in the
midst of a fire-blackened Paris...well, it hasn't come
true...yet.
       Will it?  Good question!
(See The Wind from America by Claude Manceron,
Alfred A. Knopf, New York, N.Y. 1978, page 199;
Robespierre--The Force of Circumstance by
John Laurence Carr, St. Martin's Press, New York,
N.Y., 1972, pages 48, 49, 60, 81, 154 and 155;
The French Revolution: A History by Thomas
Carlyle, Firts Modern Library, New York, N.Y., 1934,
pages 684 and 685; The French Revolution by
J.M. Thompson, Oxford University Press, New York, N.Y.
1945, pages 550 to 555

       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..

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                   Nicaraguan Experts Study 'Chupacabras'

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:27:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:37:21 -0400
Subject: Nicaraguan Experts Study 'Chupacabras'


SOURCE: Diario La Prensa de Nicaragua (Nicaragua)
DATE: August 31, 2000


NICARAGUAN EXPERTS STUDY "CHUPACABRAS"
by Maricely Linarte and Clarisa Altamirano--Correspondents

"We cannot say by when the results will be ready given that some
parts are missing. Therefore we will be forced to take some time
if it becomes necessary to send DNA samples abroad," detailed
Dr.  Pedrarias Davila. He added that a second stage would
involve the preservation of the remains to retard the
decomposition process and a third one, involving a team of
specialists which would determine what species it belongs to.


LEON.- The skeleton of the alleged "Chupacabras" was taken
yesterday to the medical campus of the UNAN at Leon in order to
determine what species it belongs to, according to biologist
Pedrarias Davila.

"On the record sheet we noted the characteristics of the
skeletal system, the number of ribs and vertebrae, nails, state
of decomposition, among others, for inclusion into a database,"
he explained.

Davila noted that they are not relating the animal with any
known creature because that could be premature. He did say that
the remains belonged to a "heterodont", in other words, a
mammal.

Jorge Luis Talavera, owner of Finca San Lorenzo, who opened fire
agains the Chupacbaras and killed it, claims that "there are
three more left alive: two white ones and a black one. The dead
one was yellow, and in previous weeks a wounded a white one but
didn't manage to kill it."

# # # #

Translation copyright (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU)
Special thanks to Gloria Coluchi.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

               Hybrid Dog, Coyote Sub-Species or Chupacabras?

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:10:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:39:05 -0400
Subject: Hybrid Dog, Coyote Sub-Species or Chupacabras?


Dear Friends,

Here is the first follow-up on the discovery of the canid
creature found in Nicaragua on Monday.

Best regards,

Scott Corrales
Institute of Hispanic Ufology
www.inexplicata.com

============

SOURCE: El Nuevo Diario de Nicaragua (Nicaragua)
DATE: August 31, 2000

COMMOTION IN LEON!

* UNAN authorities have serious doubts but shall withold their
ruling until later this morning * there is doubt about its being
merely a dog, but all agree on singular characteristics *

by Roberto Collado Narvaez

  The hallways of the University of Nicaragua at Leon were abuzz
yesterday with talk about the subject. The photo shows
odontologist Ana Maria Alvarado commenting on the alleged
"Chupacabras" skeleton (photo: Xavier Castro)

The carcass of the alleged "Chupacabras" has caused a commotion
throughout the city of Leon as a team of veterinarians and
biologists from the Autonomous University at Leon maintained a
veil of secrecy over the tests performed on the strange animal's
remains. All that is known is that [the creature] is far from
being an ordinary animal.

A number of different accounts are  circulating throughout Leon,
ranging from the scientific ones, which suggest that the animal
could be a stray canine, a pedigreed canine or a coyote/wolf
hybrid, a hybrid of an unknown species, to what has become a
myth of its own: "It's the Chupacabras."

Ever since the animal's remains were transferred from the morgue
of the Oscar Danilo Rosales de Leon Teaching Hospital to the
UNAN's laboratories, residents from all over the city have
literally flooded all of the Alma Mater's buildings for a look
at the strange specimen that caused such consternation in the
region's farms.

According to the locals, the alleged "Chupacabras" has authored
the deaths of sheep whose bodies have been found exsanguinated
and with perforations on their necks--caused by the mythic
animal's sharp fangs. The creature's remains were found on
Monday at Finca San Lorenzo in Malpaisillo and are now
undergoing rigorous scrutiny by specialists at UNAN.

--- It Could Be A Dog, But... ---

Professor Carlos Gomez, a specialist in morphology at UNAN,
belives that the animal could well be to prove an ordinary
canine (dog) or a canine bred with another family of the same
species, whose altered size and remains are only a byproduct of
the decomposition process.

"The remains could be those of a dog, although we aren't quite
certain yet, since the biology and zoology reports aren't in
yet. With the investigation we've conducted, we can indeed
ascertain that the differences between this species with a
normal canine would be attributable to rigor mortis. Nothing
more." commented the specialist.

According to Gomez's explanation, rigor mortis causes the
relaxation or contraction of certain joints. This would explain
the presence of retracting nails in the animal's claws, since
this is a feline characteristic not found in dogs.

But yesterday, this was the only explanation that the UNAN's
doctors were allowed to provide. To learn more about the skull's
shape, the size of its extremities and the skeleton's length,
Gomez limited himself to stating that their characteristics were
indeed normal and that the results of the investigations will
not be made known until later today.

--- Explanations Which Lead to Doubt --

The fact is that after the arrival of the hitherto unknown
species, all laboratory activity was suspended and the the
alleged "Chupacabras"'s carcass was enshrouded in mystery.

In the hallways, studens commented on the skeleton's
characteristics, its similarities and its differences with
species studied up until yesterday. Odontologist Ana Maria
Alvarado was conducting her research in the Necrology Lab when
the brigade of specalists embarked upon their initial analysis
of the creature. She was there.

"The first interesting element was discovering that the animal's
creatures were smaller than those of an ordinary dog.
Furthermore, upon measuring the skeleton's length, it turned out
to be a meter and a half long--no dog is that long." noted
Alvarado.

"The lower extremities," Alvarado added, "are shorter than the
upper ones. This would make it into an animal capable of bipedal
motion (walking on two feet while remaining a quadruped. Then
there are its claws, which are bow-shaped and elongated, giving
it the ability to attack its victim from top to bottom."

According to Gomez, canines may develop large claws, but he
admitted that these tend not to grow so large. Regarding the
carcass's skull, Gomez stated that its size is as normal as that
of a common dog, but adding that this one is "a little bigger".

"The skull is to be analyzed by a histologist, who shall
determine its species. There is however an interesting
characteristic--this skull is elongated and pointy, measurying
some 20 centimeters, which obviates the likelihood that it is an
ordinary dog," Alvarado explained.

Another element that caught Alvarado's notice was the deceased
creature's spinal column, which is composed by seven vertebrae.
Dogs, she explains, have less.

The official analyses of the alleged Chupacabras will be made
known later today at a press conference to be dictated by a
committee of UNAN doctors. Yesterday, it was unofficially stated
that nothing more than a canine carcass was involved, but the
fact remains that the alleged Chupacabras has managed to stir
doubts in some of the physicians of this institution.

# # # #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special thanks to Gloria Coluchi.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                        Re: 13 Year Russian UFO Study

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:34:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:41:55 -0400
Subject: Re: 13 Year Russian UFO Study


 >From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 19:49:01 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: 13 Year Russian UFO Study


 >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


Dear Sean Jones, and the List

I have just visited this web site, and found the same text which
had been passed recently on UFO UpDates. Text on which I had
made some comments. Perhaps you missed them ?

If EBK does not mind, here they are again: (it seems to be an
endless game)

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


 >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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                   Chupacabras: If It Barks Like A Dog...

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 06:10:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:46:16 -0400
Subject: Chupacabras: If It Barks Like A Dog...


SOURCE: La Prensa de Nicaragua (Nicaragua)
DATE: September 1, 200

It Isn'T A Chupacabras, Just A "Firulais"
by Juan Rodriguez and Clarisa Altamirano

Local residents insist that it was a strange creature that fed
on the blood of their sheep. Several inhabitants of Malpaisillo
and the rancher who shot the animal insist that "The animal
found in that rural area is different from a common hound, since
its teeth were pink in color, it stood differently and it
drained the blood of at least 120 sheep."

"The Chupacabras of Malpaisillo" (Leon) which has caused such
interest at the local and international leval after having been
shot to death by a rancher, has vanished following the
disclosures made by scientists of the Universidad Nacional
Autonoma de Nicaragua-Leon (UNAN), who opined that the animal
discovered was the skeleton of a dog.

"This is our initial impression, that it isn't an unknown animal
but merely a dog. Further analysis is still required to reach a
final conclusion," said Edmundo Torres, the vicechancellor for
research at UNAN-Leon.

The international media--programs such as "Ocurrio Asi" and
"Primer Impacto", flooded the country to confirm the find.

# # # #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology
Special Thanks to Gloria Coluchi.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

             Chupacabras: A Source of Controversy and Pilgrimage

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 08:32:01 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:47:34 -0400
Subject: Chupacabras: A Source of Controversy and Pilgrimage


Dear Friends,

This news article deals with the public's reaction to the
alleged Chupacabras remains found in Nicaragua.


Scott Corrales
IHU
www.inexplicata.com

=========================


SOURCE: El Nuevo Diario de Nicaragua
DATE: September 1, 2000

CHUPACABRAS: A SOURCE OF CONTROVERSY AND PILGRIMAGE
by Marianela Flores Vergara

* Polemics in Leon over the "chupacabras" * Pentecostals see
biblical omens * Bishop Vivas discards any notions of diabolism
* Some citizens upset by use of morgue*

The possible death of the Chupacabras is international news --
to the extent that a news crew from the Miami USA based "Ocurrio
Asi" television program went to Leon to offer permanent coverage
to the strange event. The photo shows a reporter from said
program standing outside the National Autonomous University in
that city (photo credit: Oscar Cantarero.

The alleged arrival of the Chupacabras to the lands of
Malpaisillo and the population's belief that it is a divine
message to mankind has been the source of varying opinons among
members of religious groups. Meanwhile, Francisco Ortiz,   in
charge of the pentecostal assembly in Leon -- CEPAD -- believes
that we should not  isolate incidents like the case involving
the sheep slayer from Biblical prophecy, while the Bishop of the
Leon Diocese, Msr. Bosco Maria  Vivas Robelo, believes that the
relationship to any demonic entity or the end of the world
should be dismissed.

"Its a warning sign, [much like] a traffic light that's on
yellow but could turn red--a sign for men and women to return to
God because we've forgotten about him," stated Rev. Ortiz,
quoting the scriptural passage from the book of Daniel which
states that in the last days there will be phenomena that will
cause astonishment among men.

The pentecostal leader stated that scientific progress has
brought mankind tremendous benefits, but it is also capable of
causing great harm, such as in the case of cloning, which
"contradicts God's mandate." "Knowledge shall increase greatly,
and men shall run to and fro, but not even in the stars will
they be saved, state the Scriptures, and this is precisely what
we're witnessing right now."

In the meantime, Msr. Bosco Maria Vivas does not believe that
[the creature] is the product of genetic engineering, admitting
his scant knowledge on the subject of the alleged Chupacabras.
"I haven't studied the matter in depth since I haven't given it
much credibility, but it if indeed is a strange creature, as the
say, the Church may be prompted to take action...but not just
yet."

-- The Preliminary Report --

Two days of studying the famous specimen have elapsed in the
Department of Morphology at UNAN-Leon since [the creature's]
discovery in Tolapa. According to a preliminary report, no
characteristic that discloses any type of extraordinary trait
has been found.

"The anatomic detail sheds no anomalous infomation. We see a
complete bone structure, a well-formed spinal column resembling
that of a canine, and from what we have ascertained, it isn't a
hematophagous or blood sucking animal, " reported Dr. Pedrarias
Davila, a biologist and member of the forensic team. The
commission will wait until later today to hold a press
conference with the final report on their findings. The question
that arises among members of the public is whether it can be
definitively proven that the remains are not those of the
culprit in deaths of over a hundred sheep, then...where is the
predator who deprived a number of families in Tolapa of their
livelihood?

-- Three Species Capable of Sucking Blood --

Biologist Davila explained that Nicaragua's wildlife features
three hematophagous bat species which can draw blood from
cattle, horses and even humans. However, he noted that none of
them kill their victim, but rather try to keep it alive through
the injection of an anticoagulant agent.

As a result of the controversial manifestation of the
Chupacabras, he has been in contact with colleagues from various
Central American and South American countries, who agree that
the Mesoamerican fauna does not feature a species similar to the
one described by witnesses, and with the ability to kill so many
sheep, although the specialist refrained from venturing any
opinions on the possibility of genetic experiments taking place
within the country or arriving from other countries.

One veterinarian disclosed that in order to cause the death of a
sheep, the assailant would have to suck at least a liter and a
half of blood, whereas vampire bats can barely extract a quarter
of a liter. This leads him to dismiss the possibility that these
flying mammals are responsible.


-- The Public Speaks Out on the Tolapa Animal Slayings --

According to Modesta Sanchez Lopez, there is widespread concern
among the public that the creature which exsanguinated the
Malpasillo sheep may have escaped during some type of
experiment. "We don't know if its a mixture  of several
different types of sperm which led to the creation of a strange
animal," she observed.

On the other hand, Marcos Antonio Martinez, a young college
student, admitted to having knowledge about the strange entity
in other countries by means of the international news, but never
imagined that it would appear in Nicaragua to affect the poorest
families. He rejected the notion that it could be an evil
creature linked to satanic activity, as has been speculated.

The stir caused by the alleged "chupacabras"  is to frighten the
public in regard to the upcoming elections, distracting them
with other subjects, believes Maria Jose Rojas, who refused to
specify the political party in question, but she urged people to
remain serious and level-headed, since the creature in question
only exists in other countries.

Even senior citizens are startled by news of the sheep slayer.
Jose Benito Roque, a lottery ticket vendor, claimed to have
visted parts of Nicaragua without having ever heard anything
about a creature with the characteristics being described.

Specialists at the UNAN-Leon are studying the alleged
Chupacabras' remains. It will not be until tomorrow, after a
long wait, that the final report will be provided (photo by
Oscar Cantarero). Regarding its origin, it has been said that it
could have come from Africa or may have escaped from another
country's circus. The latent truth in Tolapa and its environs is
that one hundred victims died without any explanation, and even
thought the specialists' report discloses that the alleged
Chupacabras is fake, the sheep killings shall remain an open
question, allowing for the possibility of its return to Tolapa
or any other part of the country.

-- Lack of Respect Toward the Hospital --

The arrival of the Chupacabras to the hospital's morgue,
according to forensic specialist Paulino Medina, constitutes a
lack of respect toward the hospital's patients. The building
turned into a circus due to the hordes of people who arrived to
see the remains.

"It was a mistake to bring it here. It would have been better to
take it to the School of Veterinary Medicine or Biology," he
stated. Even yesterday, large groups of people--students and
residents of the surrounding neighborhoods--eluded the
hospital's security detail for a glimpse of the bones in the
morgue. Even wheelchair-bound patients and those wearing casts
came down by elevator to sate their curiosity.

Defending the presence of the creature's remains at the morgue,
the hospital's director, Dr. Manfredo Pentzke Torres, declared
that it was the only place in all of Leon where an animal of
scientifc interest can be preserved, since aside from being
isolated from the hospital [the facility] meets all the
requirements. The species was treated with formaldehyde to avoid
further decomposition of its dissues, and it was transferred to
the department of Morphology to undergo further tests.

# # # #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology (IHU)
Special thanks to Gloria Coluchi






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                  Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua? - Images

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:34:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:49:06 -0400
Subject: Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua? - Images


Hi!

Visit our Hemo Predator web page and read the late news about a
strange skeleton found in Nicaragua, where residents say it
belong to the chupacabras and scientists claim is a dog. See the
photos and made your own conclusion.

http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/index.html


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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                          In Memory Of Cynthia Hind

From: Philip Mantle <pmquest@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:03:47 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:50:17 -0400
Subject: In Memory Of Cynthia Hind


Dear colleagues,

I have only just found out about the passing of my dear friend
and colleague Cynthia Hind. Apparently Cynthia died of cancer
earlier this week.

To me Cynthia was like the achetypical favourite aunt, always
with a smile on her face and a story to tell. She was by far the
best and most amusing story-teller I have ever come across. As
part of her UFO studies she travelled far and wide, especially
across Africa as she lived in Zimbabwe. I clearly remember
Cynthia telling an assembled audience at one of the BUFORA
conferences how she had onced interviewed members of a tribe in
Africa who not long ago had still been canibals. Cynthia being a
rather large lady stated that if they had attempted to eat her
it would have taken them a month. As ever, she had the audience
in her hand.

As a ufologist she remained open-minded but was definitely from
the nuts-and-bolts side of the fence. She had an enquiring mind
and a determination to try and help solve the UFO puzzle.

As a human being she was warm hearted, full of life, and larger
than life in many ways.

The human race will be all the worse without her as will serious
ufo research.

May she rest in peace and my deepest sympathy goes to her family
and friends.

Yours Sincerely,


Philip Mantle.



--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                           Mallove On Free Energy

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:34:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:52:42 -0400
Subject: Mallove On Free Energy


Following is the executive summary of Dr. Eugene Mallove's
memorandum, requested by the President on Sir Arthur C. Clarke's
advice, on the present potential of new hydrogen energy.

The complete memorandum is available at:

http://www.mv.com/ipusers/zeropoint/IEHTML/FEATURE/cover/32/fset.html

(Clinton could sure use a better legacy than he has now!)

Terry

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


The Strange Birth of the Water Fuel Age:
The Cold Fusion "Miracle" Was No Mistake

by Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D.

SUMMARY for President Clinton

Beginning in 1989, a class of new energy technologies has been
developed that has the potential to provide pollution-free
energy of a magnitude far greater than fossil fuel, using forms
of hydrogen from water as the fuel in novel catalytic
conditions. The technologies challenge the understanding of
physics which has been used to justify continued investment in
fossil fuels, nuclear power plants, and the so-called "hot
fusion" energy research programs. The U.S. government has spent
at least $15 billion on hot fusion without achieving the
"breakeven" point already achieved by the new energy
technologies.

Hydrogen as a fuel in engines and fuel cells has been discussed
and demonstrated for several decades. Fuel cells are emerging
into the commercial market, using hydrogen-rich chemical
compounds. These systems are based on chemical reactions whose
energy density (energy per unit of fuel) is very low. There are
serious problems in making, storing, and transporting hydrogen.
The new energy technologies use hydrogen in a far different way
that extracts thousands to millions of times the ordinary
chemical combustion energy of hydrogen. Thus, water is fuel!

In 1989, after five years of work and investment of $100,000 of
their own money, Professors Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann
announced the release of nuclear-scale energy from an
electrochemical cell using palladium as the cathode metal. In
the cell, heavy hydrogen is forced into the palladium until a
new class of nuclear reactions occurs, in which energy of great
intensity is released without the deadly radiation or
radioactive by-products produced by other nuclear energy
processes. The Pons-Fleischmann announcement ignited a
controversy that is documented in the body and references of
this memorandum.

The DOE Energy Research Advisory Board "Cold Fusion Panel" was
convened at the direction of President Bush to review the "cold
fusion" controversy in its early days. The panel relied heavily
on misleading reports from the California Institute of
Technology, Harwell (England), and the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology. Reports from all three sources were negative, and
ERAB recommended against any government investment in "cold
fusion." This had far-reaching consequences, which seriously
impeded but did not stop advances in the field.

After over a decade of work, hundreds of peer-reviewed
scientific papers from laboratories around the world confirm the
Pons-Fleischmann discovery. It was just the tip of an iceberg of
a whole class of nuclear reactions--and other new hydrogen
reactions--which occur in metals that are heavily loaded with
heavy or normal hydrogen by any of several means. These are
often called Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), or
Chemically-Assisted Nuclear Reactions (CANR). There is also a
process, pioneered by BlackLight Power, Inc., that produces
catalytically altered hydrogen atoms. What these processes have
in common is the release of intense, nuclear-scale energies
without damaging radiation or radioactive by-products. Reactors
are small scale, requiring simple apparatus and common materials
with hydrogen as the fuel. Transmutations of the metal cathode
materials are commonly produced. In some cases, where
radioactive materials such as uranium and thorium are used in
the cells, these are rapidly transmuted into harmless
by-products without production of harmful radiation or
explosions. In principle, radioactive waste from nuclear
reactors can similarly be deactivated without the political and
economic costs of burial.

Collectively, these emerging technologies point to a much
brighter future for mankind. They do not require resources
controlled by any small group of countries. They are
concentrated, portable, and democratic. Low cost realization and
distribution of devices and systems based on these technologies
will require the resources of a market economy and the removal
of internal opposition from vested interests in the U.S.
government and industries, including arbitrary blocking of "cold
fusion" patent applications by the U.S. Patent Office.
Originators of these technologies may make fortunes, but in the
end mankind will be the beneficiary. Mr. President, you need do
only one thing now: Publicly state that you are going to
investigate this matter and then do it.

"Anything that is theoretically possible will be achieved in
practice, no matter what the technical difficulties, if it is
desired greatly enough." Arthur C. Clarke, Profiles of the
Future, 1963

<end excerpt>








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                          Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:05:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 10:55:20 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote


This is an old discussion, but I have something new and tangible
to add.

Those who know the Linda Cortile case -- recounted in Budd
Hopkins's book "Witnessed" -- know that traffic supposedly was
stopped after midnight one night on the Brooklyn Bridge in New
York, apparently because of electronic interference from a UFO.

Skeptics argued that this couldn't have happened, because (among
other reasons) so spectacular a stoppage of so many cars -- no
matter what the cause -- would have been all over the media the
next day. And, of course, no such story appeared.

When we discussed this here, I suggested -- as a lifelong New
Yorker -- that very likely no news story would have appeared.
All sorts of things, I said, happen here without news coverage.
I gave various examples, but I doubt the skeptics were
convinced. My examples weren't exactly parallel, after all, and
you have to live in New York, I think, to understand how many
things that would make the news instantly most other places
never even get mentioned here.

But now I have very strong evidence that I was right. Note that
I'm _not_ arguing that the "Linda" case really happened as Budd
describes. That's another discussion, and I'm not going to
resume it here. I'm just offering what I think are conclusive
reasons why this particular skeptics' argument is wrong.

Last weekend, my fiance and I went to a Mets game. We took a
ferry from Manhattan to Shea Stadium, and liked the ride so much
that, instead of getting off at 34th Street on our return trip
as we'd planned, we went all the way down to the South Street
Seaport. It was just fabulous -- wild currents in the East
River, which I'd heard about but never seen, all the bridges,
six of them, all of them different, all spectacular in different
ways.

The last bridge we went under was the Brooklyn Bridge, and
something mildly astounding was happening on it. Emergency
vehicles had taken up positions about a third of the way out on
either side. No traffic was moving on the bridge. And, as we
could see as we moved further south and could see emergency
vehicles blocking the approaches to the bridge, no traffic was
allowed onto it.

Of course we were curious to know what was going on, so when we
got home, we turned on New York 1, the city's 24-hour local news
cable channel. Not a word about the Brooklyn Bridge. The next
morning we scanned the two newspapers we get delivered, the New
York Times and the Daily News. Not a word in either one of them.

I think this proves my point. If there wasn't media coverage of
an event that happened in full view of thousands of people at 11
PM, snarling traffic on both sides of the river, and with police
and paramedics right in the middle of the action, why should
there be coverage of something that (allegedly) happened to a
relatively small number of cars, with no police present, much
later at night?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

              Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:36:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 11:13:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & You
 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:48:33 -0400

 >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.

I might first say that I'm not a believer. In his book on
abductions, Peter described me very kindly as "the most balanced
of researchers leaning toward belief in the reality of
abductions," or something like that. And while I'm grateful for
the "most balanced" compliment, what I really like in that
description is its accuracy. I _lean_ toward believing in the
reality of the phenomenon. But I know that reality hasn't been
proved, so I'm not forming any final opinions, and I'm certainly
not letting myself get carried away by belief.

This is a crucial distinction, which Serge seems to miss. If
I've been strong in criticizing abduction skeptics, it's not
because I'm an abduction true believer, but because I think
their arguments are shoddy and often insulting. It's the tone I
object to, and sometimes the ignorance underlying what's being
said, not the content. Serge should understand that my favorite
abduction writing is the study by Stewart Appelle, from the
Journal of UFO Studies, of arguments for and against abduction
reality. As I've said here many times, it gives little comfort
to skeptics -- or to believers.

And to say that I've "turned my back on the psychological
aspects of alien abduction" -- much less that I've "obviously"
done so -- is amazing to read. I wonder how much Serge knows
about my abduction work. I might refer him to my essay "The
Abduction Conundrum," which originally appeared in Dennis
Stacy's publication, The Anomalist, and can now be found on my
UFO website, http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo. I've read reasonably
widely about the psychological issues involved with abductions,
both in books and journal articles. Not abduction books, let me
stress, but books on trauma and memory by serious psychologists.
I'm far from an expert on these issues, but when I read that
I've "obviously turned my back" on subjects that interest me
greatly -- and which I've discussed on UpDates many times -- I
have to wonder about a man who derides me, along with Peter and
Kevin, for not doing my "freaking homework."

That said, I'm grateful to Serge for recommending an impressive
five year-old scientific paper on the important topic of False
Memory Syndrome, especially one questioning whether such a
condition even exists. I'm grateful, even though I'm familiar
with these discussions, and have read other papers questioning
FMS. I don't want to shock Serge too much, but the thinking in
the paper he insists that I read might be newer to him than it
is to me.

I'll repeat his recommendation, for those who might not remember
its delightful tone:

 >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


This is patronizing nonsense. I'll leave myself out of any
further comments I make, and say how offended I am for Kevin's
and Peter's sake. I've disagreed with both of them, but I'd
never insult them the way Serge has. Kevin has a PhD in
psychology, and wrote an abduction book that describes at great
length many of the psychological issues involved. Peter also
wrote an abduction book, that, like Kevin's, gives ample
evidence of the care he's taken in studying the background of
this phenomenon. I'd feel free to point out things both men seem
to ignore, or that I interpret differently from them. But I'd
never talk about them as if they were careless children, as
Serge does here.

Greg Sandow







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

             Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:43:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:19:06 -0400
Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:47:51 -0400
 >Subject: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Dear Friends,

 >The protean entity known as the Chupacabras has resurfaced yet
 >again--not in Chile but much closer to home, Read on.

 >============
 >Source: La Prensa de Nicaragua (newspaper)
 >Date: August 30, 2000

 >CHUPACABRAS REMAINS FOUND
 >by Maricely Linarte and Clarissa Altamirano, Special
 >Correspondents

 >** Specialists described the animal as an uncommon species after
 >a careful examination of its skeleton. It presents yellow hair
 >on its short tail, large eye-sockets, soft skin like that of a
 >bat, large claws and fangs, and a crest on its main vertebrae.
 >Could this be the Chupacabras? A team of biologists and
 >veterinarians from Leon must now answer the question **


Hello Scott!

This is indeed novel, some remains at long last.

Can you tell us anything about La Prensa de Nicaragua?

If LP de N is a tabloid, one may well question their editorial
policies of course. A web browse might help, but I can only read
Spanish very slowly. Perhaps a listing of their other headlines
could give some clues.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

              Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:20:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -


 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:02:45 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:24:59 -0400
 >>Subject: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Source: El Nuevo Diario (Nicaragua)
 >>Date: August 30, 2000

 >>Strange Entity Causes Astonishment * Chupacabras Killed in
 >>Tolapa * Farmers and Zootechnician at a loss to find a suitable
 >>classification * It was wounded and its corpse appeared several
 >>days later as a bare skeleton * Fangs, lobes and maw are source
 >>of confusion and fear

 >Original article with images is available at:

 >http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/nacional/nacional4.html


Hello John:

I clicked on the first link above (Nicaragua) and only found
some local political diatribe. There was no mention of
Chupacabras, dead or alive, that I could see.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

               Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 13:50:33 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:22:40 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles



 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:49:10 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>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

 ><snip>

 >>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.

 >Yes, and he waited weeks before putting a statement down on
 >paper. Maybe he hoped it would all go away.



Hi,

My understanding is that the matter was reported immediately.
But there was some problem between the UK and US over
jurisdiction (after all this was on UK land where the USAF had
no real authority since it was well off the base).

Halt's British commander (Squadron Leader Donald Moreland) was
the liaison with the MoD and the Halt memo was really issued at
his request as a sop to the UK authorities for their records. It
understated the case (making no mention of the tape, photographs
and soil samples Halts team then had obtained). It was really
just protocol and Halt told me he would have made this other
data available to the UK authorities but they showed no interest
in it whatsoever.

About a month later Brenda Butler and Dot Street visited
Moreland and he started to talk to them. He soon realised they
were not (as he initially supposed) from the MoD - as he
understandably expected nobody else to know about the case at
this early date. But this little incident shows that there was
surprise between both Halt and Moreland that the MoD completely
ignored their memo (Moreland sent a cover letter with it to the
MoD)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                         Latest Of The Hemo Predator

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 12:28:35 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:25:42 -0400
Subject: Latest Of The Hemo Predator


Hello Everyone!

You may want to check out the latest of the Blood Predator on
our web page: "Autopsy & Cross Section of a wound".

Have a happy summer!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                       Re: 1970's UK Sightings - Kean

From: Victor J. Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 12:54:04 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:28:55 -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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:47:09 +0100

 >>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 02:50:11 -0400
 >>From: Victor J.Kean <VICTOR_J_KEAN@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: 1970's UK Sightings
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


I do apologise if you really consider that my attempt to get you
to substantiate your claim that the Bacup (Lancs) - Todmorden
area is the area of greatest UFO activity in the UK (Possibly in
Europe) is "bizarre hounding".

Jenny wrote:-

 >I'm certainly not wishing to fall out over this, I just truly
 >dont see what more I can say about this that I havent already in
 >my previous postings. But if you have specific questions, by all
 >means ask.


No, no, Jenny... You could claim any further questions were
"bizarre houndings"

It was pretty obvious that you were not only 'moving the
goalposts' but were also widening the distance between them!
Thus, "UFO activity" became that plus "alien abductions" and
Bacup - Todmorden became "the Pennines"

If you really *must* have the last word...Feel free.

Victor










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                   CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Moosomin,

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 10:32:37 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:31:14 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - 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

September 2, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #2 - MOOSOMIN, SASKATCHEWAN CROP FORMATION


Following is a field report from Dennis Eklund, who did a ground
study of the Moosomin, Saskatchewan 'dumbbell' formation found
August 20. The formation is 250' long, in wheat and beautifully
constructed, with no initial pathways found leading in or out
(it should be noted too that this field, like most in North
America, does not have tramlines). Some very unusual physical
deformities have been found on the stalks of the flattened wheat
crop (in addition to the more well-known node anomalies).
Details on this are pending; a full report will be issued by the
BLT Research Team in the near future after a thorough study has
been completed (the formation was sampled extensively). This
formation, as also the one at Oro-Medonte Township, Ontario, has
received many hundreds of visitors, with a steady stream of
people coming to view it even up until a couple nights ago when
I last spoke with the farmer.

Additional ground photos from Dennis have also been added to the
report on the web site, and the diagram has also been revised
based on the aerial photos and ground survey:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/moosomin00.html

Dennis also went to the site of the Grenfell, Saskatchewan
circle (between Moosomin and Regina), the small ten foot circle
in wheat with radial lay pattern, found August 10. Report,
images to follow.


Paul Anderson



MOOSOMIN REPORT

After being informed of this formation on August 25th by Nancy
Talbott of the BLT Research Team, I immediately telephoned the
owners of the land to get permission to do a ground study of the
site for the next day. Although in the middle of an important
harvest and concerned about the damage that the already hundreds
of visitors to the site might be causing, they kindly gave me
permission to do a thorough study. The 5 hour drive from
Saskatoon to Moosomin was long, but it turned out to be worth
every minute of the drive.

My wife Jan and I arrived in Moosomin and began following the
directions given to us, we realized right away that the site was
very out of the way and secluded to a point where it would never
be noticeable except by air as it was first discovered by a crop
sprayer. If not for a little red ribbon marking a thin path
placed by a concerned neighbour to discourage the already
increasing amount of people visiting the site in creating more
paths, causing more damage to the crop, we would of never found
it.

The crop of wheat being 3 to 4 feet high made the site totally
invisible from the dirt trail where we parked. We followed the
path through the crop for 140 yards until all of a sudden we
entered into a large circle with a corridor path going slightly
downhill joining another circle, the classic dumbbell
formation... but yet with a few surprises.

Measuring the large circle in two different directions, it
turned out out to be a perfect circle measuring 105 feet in
diameter both directions. The corridor path joining the circles
measured exactly 98 feet long and 6 feet wide which joined the
smaller circle which measured 47 feet wide in 2 directions,
making the total length of the formation exactly 250 feet.

Surprisingly, the lay and the weave of the crop was in pretty
good shape considering the amount of people that had visited the
site. The large circle had a very neat counter clockwise weave
effect. Further study indicated that under the top weave effect,
another layer underneath traveled in the opposite direction. The
smaller circle proved to be just one layer also going in a
counter clockwise direction.

The corridor path joining the two circles were fascinating. The
crop lay from the large circle ran down the corridor in the
direction of the smaller circle as the crop lay from the small
circle ran up to the large circle, both joining each other
exactly half way up the corridor to create a tuff of crop
pointing to the outside of the corridor. (see photo).

In our initial visual examination I noticed an interesting
aspect where the edge of the large circle joined the edge of the
corridor path. At first glance it looked like the weave of the
circle was overlapping the downed crop of the corridor path, but
on closer examination I discovered there was absolutely no
overlapping, they both joined exact.

There were no power lines or towers in close vicinity of the
formation. Although this formation must had been a couple of
weeks old, we did do compass and battery checks but did not
discover any abnormalities. One final note - I called the owners
of the land again last night to keep them informed of what is
happening. They are very interested in this phenomenon and
informed me of strange animal behavior (friend's dog) at the
site. They will keep me informed of any additional happenings
they hear of. By far, my most interesting formation experience.

Dennis Eklund
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
email: dbrentt@home.com


_____________________________


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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:47:05 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:32:34 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:49:10 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>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

 ><snip>

 >>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.

 >Hi, David, Peter:

 >Has anybody plotted all of this on a map and is this available
 >on an URL, somewhere?

Bob,

I have a couple of general area maps scanned at:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/bntwtr.htm

Having spent many a long summer break on the Welsh coast close
by both lighthouses and beacons in all types of weather. I
cannot see anyone being taken in by identifying these coastal
lights for anything other than just that, fixed coastal lights,
they were there for years before hand and they've been there for
years since, so why the misidentification just on those couple
of nights only?.

Just a thought.
Neil.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 15:09:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:34:59 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:05:55 -0400

 >This is an old discussion, but I have something new and tangible
 >to add.

 >Those who know the Linda Cortile case -- recounted in Budd
 >Hopkins's book "Witnessed" -- know that traffic supposedly was
 >stopped after midnight one night on the Brooklyn Bridge in New
 >York, apparently because of electronic interference from a UFO.

 >Skeptics argued that this couldn't have happened, because (among
 >other reasons) so spectacular a stoppage of so many cars -- no
 >matter what the cause -- would have been all over the media the
 >next day. And, of course, no such story appeared.

 >When we discussed this here, I suggested -- as a lifelong New
 >Yorker -- that very likely no news story would have appeared.
 >All sorts of things, I said, happen here without news coverage.
 >I gave various examples, but I doubt the skeptics were
 >convinced. My examples weren't exactly parallel, after all, and
 >you have to live in New York, I think, to understand how many
 >things that would make the news instantly most other places
 >never even get mentioned here.
 >

Greg,

The difference in nature between the above incident and the
blocking off of the Brooklyn Bridge you mentioned below -- with
no apparent follow up in the next day's paper -- should be
apparent.

Let's look at it in a little detail. You and your girlfriend
look at each other and wonder, "Hmmm,  I wonder why the bridge
is closed off? I'll check the papers in the morning to see."

Probably every other New Yorker who saw it thought the same
thing. No need to pull over and call the cops because obviously
they already know something's going on -- as they're the ones
doing the blocking. They'll look to their morning papers, too.

Meanwhile, down at the newspapers, at least one second-shift
reporter at each paper is monitoring the police channels and now
pretty much _knows_ what is going on that caused the bridge's
closure. It goes up to the night editor, who now has to decide
whether the cause of the closing is something that would
interest his audience -- after the fact, of course. (By the same
token, you'd have thought the TV station would have announced it
if only as a way of avoiding a traffic jam on the way home, but,
like you said, this is New York!)

Now, let's say that what caused the bridge to be closed was the
fact that a truck carrying nuclear waste rods from 3-Mile Island
had jack-knifed. _That_, no doubt, would have made the papers,
even in news-jaded NYC.

So, whatever it was, must not have gotten the editor's
attention, thus no story. In other words, the actual cause must
have pretty mundane.

(I should also point out that your sampling included only three
media outlets out of a city media pool that probably numbers in
the hundreds. How do you know it wasn't mentioned on radio, for
example? Beyond whether it made the media or not, its cause was
certainly on file in police records. Did anyone check the latter
in the Cortile Case?)

Contrast that with the Cortile Case. Witnessing a large, glowing
flying saucer that floats somebody out of an apartment window
and stalls your car in the bargain is pretty, to coin a cliche,
paradigm-shifting stuff. Everybody there that night -- which
assumes that anyone was there -- now _knows_ they're here, and
here for real.

You'd think at least some of them -- if only in a "You're not
gonna believe this, but..." mode -- would have reported same to
someone, the police, the papers, or, for that matter, a UFO
group. This is the sort of stuff that gets your attention. We're
not talking distant nocturnal light or even daylight disk stuff,
but up close observation accompanied by physical effects.
Presumably, some of these people would have seen the object
disappear into the river as well -- where for all intents and
purposes, as far as they would have any way of knowing, the damn
thing would still be there the next day.

Unfortunately, this happens to be the _least_ of the Cortile
Case's problems. It's futile to argue that it _should_ have been
reported at this stage (or was, but wasn't followed up on)
because that's an argument that can never be confirmed, only
suggested.

As we all know, though, this was only the beginnining of the
Cortile Case. Next comes Richard, Dan, and the Secretary General
of the United Nations, not to mention diving helmets and
"altered" sand samples. (Any updates on the latter, btw?)

I'm as loathe as Greg to raise this case again, but the question
remains: if ufologists out there (and you know who you are) are
willing to grant the Cortile Case even the semblance of
credence, what UFO case _wouldn't_ you believe? How outrageous
and unbelievable on the surface would it have to be before you
shook your head and said, "No, no. Look, guys, I've swallowed
quite a bit in the last few years, but don't you think this is
stretching it just a little bit? I mean, at some point,
extraordinary claims really _do_ demand extraordinary proof --
and this would seem to be one of those times, if ever there was
one."

Note: "You" in the above graf refers to the ufological community
in general, not to Greg Sandow personally.

Dennis Stacy http://www.anomalist.com San Antonio

(Home to Jacques Barzun) The City That Never Sleeps And Where It
Never Rains (Ever)
But at least traffic jams get reported (on radio)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 2

              Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 15:41:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:36:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & You
 >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:36:12 -0400

<snip>

 >And to say that I've "turned my back on the psychological
 >aspects of alien abduction" -- much less that I've "obviously"
 >done so -- is amazing to read. I wonder how much Serge knows
 >about my abduction work. I might refer him to my essay "The
 >Abduction Conundrum," which originally appeared in Dennis
 >Stacy's publication, The Anomalist, and can now be found on my
 >UFO website, http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo.

Greg,

Yeah, and howabout a plug for The Anomalist over there, anyway!?

<BG!>

Dennis Stacy
http://www.anomalist.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 >
   Sep > Sep 2

                   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro  <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 17:32:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:38:06 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:05:55 -0400

 >This is an old discussion, but I have something new and tangible
 >to add.

 >Those who know the Linda Cortile case -- recounted in Budd
 >Hopkins's book "Witnessed" -- know that traffic supposedly was
 >stopped after midnight one night on the Brooklyn Bridge in New
 >York, apparently because of electronic interference from a UFO.

 >Skeptics argued that this couldn't have happened, because (among
 >other reasons) so spectacular a stoppage of so many cars -- no
 >matter what the cause -- would have been all over the media the
 >next day. And, of course, no such story appeared.

 >When we discussed this here, I suggested -- as a lifelong New
 >Yorker -- that very likely no news story would have appeared.
 >All sorts of things, I said, happen here without news coverage.
 >I gave various examples, but I doubt the skeptics were
 >convinced. My examples weren't exactly parallel, after all, and
 >you have to live in New York, I think, to understand how many
 >things that would make the news instantly most other places
 >never even get mentioned here.

 >But now I have very strong evidence that I was right. Note that
 >I'm _not_ arguing that the "Linda" case really happened as Budd
 >describes. That's another discussion, and I'm not going to
 >resume it here. I'm just offering what I think are conclusive
 >reasons why this particular skeptics' argument is wrong.

 >Last weekend, my fiance and I went to a Mets game. We took a
 >ferry from Manhattan to Shea Stadium, and liked the ride so much
 >that, instead of getting off at 34th Street on our return trip
 >as we'd planned, we went all the way down to the South Street
 >Seaport. It was just fabulous -- wild currents in the East
 >River, which I'd heard about but never seen, all the bridges,
 >six of them, all of them different, all spectacular in different
 >ways.

 >The last bridge we went under was the Brooklyn Bridge, and
 >something mildly astounding was happening on it. Emergency
 >vehicles had taken up positions about a third of the way out on
 >either side. No traffic was moving on the bridge. And, as we
 >could see as we moved further south and could see emergency
 >vehicles blocking the approaches to the bridge, no traffic was
 >allowed onto it.

 >Of course we were curious to know what was going on, so when we
 >got home, we turned on New York 1, the city's 24-hour local news
 >cable channel. Not a word about the Brooklyn Bridge. The next
 >morning we scanned the two newspapers we get delivered, the New
 >York Times and the Daily News. Not a word in either one of them.

 >I think this proves my point. If there wasn't media coverage of
 >an event that happened in full view of thousands of people at 11
 >PM, snarling traffic on both sides of the river, and with police
 >and paramedics right in the middle of the action, why should
 >there be coverage of something that (allegedly) happened to a
 >relatively small number of cars, with no police present, much
 >later at night?

 >Greg Sandow

Dear Listers et Al,

If the issue under discussion is the closing of the Brooklyn
Bridge, as Greg indicates, then it would be worthwhile to
determine whether or not it was or wasn't shut down and by whom.
If it was shut down to traffic on the authority of those on the
bridge having witnessed a strange phenomenon, then unless one or
more of those witnessing reported this to authorities, this
matter would not have been transmitted on any of the com links
(my specialty as a consultant to law enforcement is data and RF
com). Then, the matter would not have been reported and as a
consequence, would not likely appear in the media.

Of course, the copy of Budd's book is, thanks to my Rosie,
burried deep in one of the myriad boxes she used to pack mostly
my stuff prior to our move north. I still cannot find my
collection of Dylan's songbooks, every single one ever printed,
much to the relief of those who abhor everything Froggy says. I
do it to make them uncomfortable, like some folks get when you
run your finernails down a chalk board. Besides, most of these
people don't need no wax job. They're smooth enough for me.
(Travelling Wilburry's, Wllberries... whatever).

I will look into the matter personally, hoping to utilize the
substantial number of contacts I have garnered since beginning
my own investigation on the matter of me. I've determined that
people, even those in authority, (except for the Federal
Government and the military) are generally respectful of one who
speaks truthfully and seeks answers to honest questions.

As a side bar, in dealing with state and local authorities
ranging from state police (which is a paramilitary organization
in many states including New York), sheriff's offices, marshals,
county and local police covering the six counties nearest to
NYC, ARC, etc., information is not so difficult to come by as
many have experienced. Strange two, I have never even had a bad
day in Paris. Not even with Paris cab drivers. Wonders will
never cease.

Must be karma.

Anything turned up (or not turned up), will be reported here.

My best to those interested.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                    Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Lemire

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:49:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:29:51 -0400
Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Lemire


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:21:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: ElectroMagnetic Attack? - Rudiak
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>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>

 >A proposed weapon, that has been tested in the laboratory, acts
 >as a wireless taser stun unit. It utilizes an ultraviolet laser
 >to ionize a narrow beam of air between the laser and target.
 >Once ionized, the air briefly forms a highly conductive path
 >(thus forming the wireless wire). The target can then be
 >stunned by passing a high voltage pulse of current down the
 >ionized path.

 >Range is limited (tens of feet as I recall). An ultraviolet
 >laser powerful enough to do this would also cause a burn where
 >it "painted" the target Practical use as a portable weapon
 >(stun ray) is also currently limited by the lack of a powerful,
 >compact UV laser.

 >People being burned or stunned by UFO close encounters, or
 >having their cars stalled and electrical components blown out,
 >could conceivably be the result of a similar targeted stun
 >weapon. However, I think high-power, pulsed microwaves are the
 >more likely culprit. According to the Air Force Scientific
 >Advisory Board Web paper a few years back, the Air Force
 >already has these weapons, which can also be used to scramble
 >aircraft navigation and communications.

 >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,

Two excellent references along these lines are Alan C. Holt's
work, of which reports appear in the 1983 and 1984 Mufon
Symposium Proceedings.  These reports are titled, "UFO
Propulsion:Pulsed Radiation And Crystalline Structure", and "UFO
Light Beams:Space-Time Projections", respectively.  I highly
recommend these sources.

Todd Lemire
Michigan UFO CENTRAL
http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html
--
The only barriers thrown in the way of legitimate scientific
study of the subject (of UFOs) are political.

 From "Clear Intent" - Fawcett and Greenwood









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                     New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda

From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:10:32 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:33:22 -0400
Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda


 >Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 13:50:47 -0300
 >From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
 >Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hi List:

 >The subject conference,sponsored by THE UFO/ET WORLD TRAVELING
 >MUSEUM & LIBRARY OF SCIENTIFIC ANOMALIES will hold the 11th
 >UFO/ET CONGRESS on October 7 & 8, 2000 at the Days Inn in
 >Bordentown, New Jersey, NJ Rt. 206 at exit 7 of the New Jersey
 >Turnpike. For information write: Pat Marcattilio- DR UFO, 221
 >joan Terrace, Hamilton, New Jersey 08629 or call(609)631-8955
 >between 11am and 3 pm week days or Saturday/Sunday or e-mail Tom
 >Benson at sparkle@earthlink.net. or write: Tom Benson, P.O. Box
 >1174, Trenton, New Jersey 08606-1174.

 >The group that sponsors the above conference, the Trenton UFO
 >Study Group has held meetings once a month since the Fall of
 >1984, one of the oldest in the country. The meetings are open to
 >the public on the first Wednesday of the month at 7:30 pm at the
 >Hamilton Township Library (609)581-4060.

 >Tom


To List:

Addenda:

The Conference will cost $85 for both days, if sent by September
23, 2000. One day pass is $50, 1 lecture only $20,  workshop,
$20. Checks payable to Pat J. Marcattilio, 221 Joan Terrace,
Hamilton, N.J. 08629.

Speakers include:

Thomas J. Carey - UFO Crash at Roswell, New Eyewitness come
forth.  The lecture will focus on key issues surrounding the
case and what the future holds for its further investigations.
Emphasis will be placed upon new discoveries made during the
last two years and what further might be in the offering.
Thomas has worked with Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt for the
past ten years on the Roswell incident.

Michael Mannion - Project Mind Shift - Michael is author of this
book and he will tell us about the forces in the US Government
who have been conducting a 50 year campaign of re-education,
using the media, first to conceal, then slowly reveal to the
public the possibility of ET life.  He will also discuss his
work with experiencers whose encounters suggest that there is a
healing and transformational aspect to the ET-Human encounters.

Hans Holzer - Ghosts - Life Beyond Death & UFOnauts. Hans will
give two separate lectures on these topics.  He is author of
over 100 books including: Yankee Ghosts, Ghosts that walk in
Washington, D.C., Psychic Investigator, travel Guide to haunted
Houses.

Vicki Ecker - Editor in Chief of UFO magazine, based in |Los
Angeles, California.  Vicki will discuss In Search of the Secret
Knowledge Keepers, Who Really Controls American UFO Scene. Is it
MJ12 or some other clandestine group?  This presentation from
little known sources, outlines a strange secret cabal that may
or may not have "special access to the situation."

Don Ecker - Director of Research for UFO magazine. Don will The
Dark Side of the Moon.  His illustrated talk will show us the
Lunar Anomaly reports and photographs that show us that the Moon
is not just a dead body.  He will critically evaluate the Lunar
photographs and other research he has conducted for 8 years.

Jim Moseley - Editor-In- Chief of Saucer Smear and other
publications since 1954. Jim has spoken on various UFO topics to
100's of college and other audiences since the 60's. He held the
largest UFO Conference in New York City in 1967 that was
attended by 6000 people.  Jim is Permanent Chairman of the
Oraganizing Committee of the National UFO Conference which is
the oldest U.S. UFO organization continually holding annual
conferences since 1964. Jim will discuss Ufologist thoughts an
ideas of the times and other areas.

Pat Marcattilio, Conference host will also lecture on Origins of
Civilizations throughout history with a focus on ET or other
intelligence involvement with humans in their development.

Antonio Huneeus - MUFON International Coordinator, FATE
columnist and science journalist will discuss UFO Chronicles:
2000- From historical research to the latest UFO waves in South
America.  This veteran journalist from the international UFO
front lines, reviews the field with his intensive slide and
video collection. Military generals of Chile speak out on their
official UFO Investigations Committee.  Surprisingly, and clear
footage of UFOs by Russian Cosmonauts from the new DVD, Ultimate
UFO, is one of Antonio's latest projects shown.  Historical
insights  from one of the co-authors of the recently released
Dell paperback: "UFO Briefing Document", the acclaimed Lawrence
Rockefeller- funded report given to U.S. Congress and selected
VIP's worldwide.  Also discussed is the latest from the San
Marino (Conference in Europe, that he attended and lectured to.

Other speakers to be announced.

Tom Benson










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                       Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-2-00

From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 17:56:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:35:52 -0400
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News  9-2-00


----------------------------------------------------------------
                     Jeff Rense Weekly E-News
----------------------------------------------------------------

                         The Week Ahead
                      9-3-00 thru 9-8-00

            Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories
                          From rense.com

                 Jeff Rense E-News is distributed
                 exclusively by Free Subscription.

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                         * GUEST CORNER *

                  WELCOME TO THE VIRTUAL VILLAGE
                    & 'ER' THE NEW WORLD ORDER
                          By David Icke

Just been watching CNN (Criminal News Network, Claptrap No News)
and there is clearly a new code for centralised global control �
the Virtual Village.

It was a documentary on the use of the Internet in the
"developing world" and all the classic triggers were there &
everyone on the planet is now just a click away, the Virtual
Village crosses all borders and makes them
irrelevant...etc..etc... and in the advertisement breaks we had
propaganda from the Illuminati's World Bank in which it said it
wanted the whole world "connected" (controlled, monitored) and
free from poverty.

What a joke.

This from an organisation which has been responsible for massive
grants to support the agenda of the transnational corporations
in these same "developing countries", a policy that has
destroyed again and again the ability of those people to be
self-sufficient, thus creating widespread poverty, hunger, and
death.

So we have had "The Global Village" (New World Order), the
"Global Commons" (New World Order), "One World" (New World
Order) and now the latest, the "Virtual Village" (New World
Order).

That is not to say that connecting the world's population for
inter-action and dialogue is not a desirable development - in
the right hands with the right motivation. But that is not we
are talking about here. One World - discussions and negotiations
for mutual benefit - is not what is being offered here. It is a
centrally controlled dictatorship.

The environmental movement has bought this illusion, so has much
of the "New Age" and by the time they realise what One World
really means it will be too late.

As always, the Internet is very much a two-edged sword. On one
side it has allowed suppressed information to be communicated,
but on the other it allows the Elite to monitor communications
very easily, see who knows what, and to justify the destruction
of the national state and national borders by crossing them
electronically at will to create the "Virtual Village". Once
again it is not the principle we need to look at so much as the
motivation behind it.

And once the world government is in place, they have the global
base to legislate against the Internet and begin to remove its
benefits while keeping what suits them. The Internet is a
stalking horse for the agenda and that's why they allowed
military technology to be used to make it possible.

We need to use it while we can to expose and reveal while being
aware of its true agenda.

David
http://www.davidicke.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, 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

                 --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                      * FAVORITE QUOTES *

"The philosophy of a generation in the classroom will become the
   philosophy of the government in the next." - Abraham Lincoln
                    Sent by: Richmond, Robert

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

     "PRIOR PLANNING MAKES BETTER EXECUTION OF THE MISION"
                    Sent in by: timothy m hall

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

    �Most folks claim to have a few skeletons in their closet.
                   I own several cemeteries.�
                   Sent in by: Marcia McGuire

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

   �Who would ever recognize Einstein without his 'bad hair'?�
                      Sent in by: jules w.

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

      "Rules are rules" is the cry of the irresponsible,
      not the responsible. When rules come before humanity,
   then we must be aware that the guile of the New World Order
      has already done its job and we are already slaves.�
                       - Peter farley
                     Sent in by: Batbordc

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

     "Any government big enough to give you everything you need,
           is big enough to take everything you have"
                    -  Thomas Jefferson
                     Sent in by: Ron Davis

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

          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

   * Confirmed: Bill S2009 - Handgun Safety and Registration Act
        of 2000
   * New Info From Oz On Gun Confiscation & Army Anti-Terrorist
        Training
   * Bats And West Nile In New York - First Time In Wild Mammals
   * P.M. Tony Blair - "We Will DNA Test Every Criminal In Britain"
   * USA TODAY Clarifies Noni Juice Article
   * Another Major Crop Formation Appears In Montana
   * New Remote Viewing Website Launched - Everyone Invited To
        Participate
   * The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS
   * American Cities Target Of 13 Of China's 18 Long-Range Nuclear
        Missiles
   * The Truth About The Jews
   * Touching Old Vinyl Toys May Disrupt Body's Endocrine System
   * UPDATE  Chupacabra Killed - Corpse Found in Nicaragua - Photo
   * US-Israeli Laser Knocks Out Two Rockets At Once
   * Robotic System Can Design And Make Other Robots
   * St. John's Wort 'Best Treatment For Depression' - British
        Medical Journal
   * Electrolyzed Water Destroys Deadly Food Pathogens
   * SOHO Space Observatory Discovers Its 202nd Comet
   * Why Self-Tickling Doesn't Work
   * Tens Of Thousands Of Chinese In Sudan 'To Guard Sudanese
        Oilfields'
   * Dazzling August Crop Circles In England
   * Moosomin, Saskatchewan Crop Formation Photos
   * Al Fayed To Sue US Government In Death Of Son Dodi & Princess
        Diana
   * Dental Water Sprays Contain Bacteria That Could Kill Some
        Patients
   * New Armed 'Roboguard' Debuts - 'You Have Twenty Seconds To
        Comply'
   * 'Beaming' JonBenet Parents End Police Interviews
   * Geo-Meteors, Tunguska - & Pulsed Electromagnetic Weapons
        Tests In Oz?
   * Immortality Protein May Offer Cancer Vaccine
   * Top 10 Lies About West Nile Virus and Anvil Insecticide Spray
   * NY Blue Crab Dieoff May Be Caused By WNV Pesticide Spraying

Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                          The Immortal
                          By J J Dewey

        A POWERFUL book � read the first book FREE at:
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index24.html

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
                       9-3-00 thru 9-8-00

              (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can
             change due to late breaking stories, etc).

SUN 9-3
    Encore from Thursday 8-31
    Capt. Joyce Riley:  Air Force Spray Unit Indentified
    Dr. Roger Leir:   Alien Implants

MON 9-4
    John Carman: US Customs Corruption

TUE 9-5
    George Filer: UFO Sighting Highlights
    Dr. Robert And Ryan Wood:  New Roswell Witness Account

WED 9-6
    Pending

THU 9-7
    MUFON National Report

FRI 9-8
    Brad Steiger:  A Paranormal Evening

Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                         Rulers of Evil
                        By Tupper Saussy

    Think you know the organizations that control the world?
  Okay, who controls them.  Mr. Saussy points to one man � and
    gives an incredible amount of research to make his point.
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index107.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:  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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:38:29 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 15:09:32 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >The difference in nature between the above incident and the
 >blocking off of the Brooklyn Bridge you mentioned below -- with
 >no apparent follow up in the next day's paper -- should be
 >apparent.

Well., right here you're raising the ante. When we had this
discussion long ago, all you said was that the interruption of
traffic, all by itself, regardless of its cause, would have been
in the media. Not that I had only you in mind when I wrote my
new post -- you're not the only one who made that argument --
but I wanted to show that the mere interruption of traffic isn't
enough to make the news here.

 >Probably every other New Yorker who saw it thought the same
 >thing. No need to pull over and call the cops because obviously
 >they already know something's going on -- as they're the ones
 >doing the blocking. They'll look to their morning papers, too.

At the time I kicked myself for not strolling a couple of blocks
uptown from the South Street Seaport to ask the cops what was
happening. I've seen this kind of thing before -- a posse of cop
cards, for instance, screeching to a stop outside my local
subway station, arriving from all directions, disgorging cops
who rush down the stairs. Not a word in the press about that
one, either. I've learned to ask if I want information, and
should have done that this time.

 >Meanwhile, down at the newspapers, at least one second-shift
 >reporter at each paper is monitoring the police channels and now
 >pretty much _knows_ what is going on that caused the bridge's
 >closure. It goes up to the night editor, who now has to decide
 >whether the cause of the closing is something that would
 >interest his audience -- after the fact, of course. (By the same
 >token, you'd have thought the TV station would have announced it
 >if only as a way of avoiding a traffic jam on the way home, but,
 >like you said, this is New York!)

Do you mean a radio station? Not much reason for traffic reports
on TV. You've got a point, though. I should have turned on the
radio.

 >Now, let's say that what caused the bridge to be closed was the
 >fact that a truck carrying nuclear waste rods from 3-Mile Island
 >had jack-knifed. _That_, no doubt, would have made the papers,
 >even in news-jaded NYC.

 >So, whatever it was, must not have gotten the editor's
 >attention, thus no story. In other words, the actual cause must
 >have pretty mundane.

Are you imagining that the Brooklyn Bridge gets closed to
traffic -- by a dozen emergency vehicles, lights flashing --
every night? In a lifetime in the city, I've never seen anything
like that, on any NYC (or vicinity) bridge. To me, the stoppage
itself was notable, no matter how mundane the cause was.

 >(I should also point out that your sampling included only three
 >media outlets out of a city media pool that probably numbers in
 >the hundreds. How do you know it wasn't mentioned on radio, for
 >example? Beyond whether it made the media or not, its cause was
 >certainly on file in police records. Did anyone check the latter
 >in the Cortile Case?)

Always good to talk about NYC media with an expert. Yes, the
city might have 20 or so major media outlets, counting
newspapers, TV, radio, and a whatever magazines might report
city news. I can't pretend to have sampled many of them. Forgive
me if I just chose three of the most prominent -- the two major
dailies and the 24-hour local TV news channel, a Time-Warner
enterprise that's the CNN of New York, and is more likely than
any other station to report breaking local news. I can't prove
that whatever happened on the bridge that night was completely
absent from the media. But if it didn't make the Times, the
News, or New York 1, it obviously (to any New Yorker) wasn't a
serious media item here.

 >Contrast that with the Cortile Case. Witnessing a large, glowing
 >flying saucer that floats somebody out of an apartment window
 >and stalls your car in the bargain is pretty, to coin a cliche,
 >paradigm-shifting stuff. Everybody there that night -- which
 >assumes that anyone was there -- now _knows_ they're here, and
 >here for real.

 >You'd think at least some of them -- if only in a "You're not
 >gonna believe this, but..." mode -- would have reported same to
 >someone, the police, the papers, or, for that matter, a UFO
 >group. This is the sort of stuff that gets your attention. We're
 >not talking distant nocturnal light or even daylight disk stuff,
 >but up close observation accompanied by physical effects.
 >Presumably, some of these people would have seen the object
 >disappear into the river as well -- where for all intents and
 >purposes, as far as they would have any way of knowing, the damn
 >thing would still be there the next day.

Oh, of course, because we know that most UFO sightings are
immediately reported to someone in authority.

Ooops, wait a minute. I got that backwards. The vast majority of
UFO sightings are never reported anywhere. If you want to
unilaterally repeal that rule of thumb for the Linda case, feel
free, but I'm just going to look at you quizzically, and repeat
that famous line from the Reagan-Carter presidential 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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:46:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:41:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 15:09:32 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:05:55 -0400

 >>This is an old discussion, but I have something new and tangible
 >>to add.

 >>Those who know the Linda Cortile case -- recounted in Budd
 >>Hopkins's book "Witnessed" -- know that traffic supposedly was
 >>stopped after midnight one night on the Brooklyn Bridge in New
 >>York, apparently because of electronic interference from a UFO.

 >>Skeptics argued that this couldn't have happened, because (among
 >>other reasons) so spectacular a stoppage of so many cars -- no
 >>matter what the cause -- would have been all over the media the
 >>next day. And, of course, no such story appeared.

 >>When we discussed this here, I suggested -- as a lifelong New
 >>Yorker -- that very likely no news story would have appeared.
 >>All sorts of things, I said, happen here without news coverage.
 >>I gave various examples, but I doubt the skeptics were
 >>convinced. My examples weren't exactly parallel, after all, and
 >>you have to live in New York, I think, to understand how many
 >>things that would make the news instantly most other places
 >>never even get mentioned here.

 >Greg,

 >The difference in nature between the above incident and the
 >blocking off of the Brooklyn Bridge you mentioned below -- with
 >no apparent follow up in the next day's paper -- should be
 >apparent.

 >Let's look at it in a little detail. You and your girlfriend
 >look at each other and wonder, "Hmmm, I wonder why the bridge
 >is closed off? I'll check the papers in the morning to see."

 >Probably every other New Yorker who saw it thought the same
 >thing. No need to pull over and call the cops because obviously
 >they already know something's going on -- as they're the ones
 >doing the blocking. They'll look to their morning papers, too.

 >Meanwhile, down at the newspapers, at least one second-shift
 >reporter at each paper is monitoring the police channels and now
 >pretty much _knows_ what is going on that caused the bridge's
 >closure. It goes up to the night editor, who now has to decide
 >whether the cause of the closing is something that would
 >interest his audience -- after the fact, of course. (By the same
 >token, you'd have thought the TV station would have announced it
 >if only as a way of avoiding a traffic jam on the way home, but,
 >like you said, this is New York!)

 >Now, let's say that what caused the bridge to be closed was the
 >fact that a truck carrying nuclear waste rods from 3-Mile Island
 >had jack-knifed. _That_, no doubt, would have made the papers,
 >even in news-jaded NYC.

 >So, whatever it was, must not have gotten the editor's
 >attention, thus no story. In other words, the actual cause must
 >have pretty mundane.

 >(I should also point out that your sampling included only three
 >media outlets out of a city media pool that probably numbers in
 >the hundreds. How do you know it wasn't mentioned on radio, for
 >example? Beyond whether it made the media or not, its cause was
 >certainly on file in police records. Did anyone check the latter
 >in the Cortile Case?)

 >Contrast that with the Cortile Case. Witnessing a large, glowing
 >flying saucer that floats somebody out of an apartment window
 >and stalls your car in the bargain is pretty, to coin a cliche,
 >paradigm-shifting stuff. Everybody there that night -- which
 >assumes that anyone was there -- now _knows_ they're here, and
 >here for real.

 >You'd think at least some of them -- if only in a "You're not
 >gonna believe this, but..." mode -- would have reported same to
 >someone, the police, the papers, or, for that matter, a UFO
 >group. This is the sort of stuff that gets your attention. We're
 >not talking distant nocturnal light or even daylight disk stuff,
 >but up close observation accompanied by physical effects.
 >Presumably, some of these people would have seen the object
 >disappear into the river as well -- where for all intents and
 >purposes, as far as they would have any way of knowing, the damn
 >thing would still be there the next day.

 >Unfortunately, this happens to be the _least_ of the Cortile
 >Case's problems. It's futile to argue that it _should_ have been
 >reported at this stage (or was, but wasn't followed up on)
 >because that's an argument that can never be confirmed, only
 >suggested.

 >As we all know, though, this was only the beginnining of the
 >Cortile Case. Next comes Richard, Dan, and the Secretary General
 >of the United Nations, not to mention diving helmets and
 >"altered" sand samples. (Any updates on the latter, btw?)

 >I'm as loathe as Greg to raise this case again, but the question
 >remains: if ufologists out there (and you know who you are) are
 >willing to grant the Cortile Case even the semblance of
 >credence, what UFO case _wouldn't_ you believe? How outrageous
 >and unbelievable on the surface would it have to be before you
 >shook your head and said, "No, no. Look, guys, I've swallowed
 >quite a bit in the last few years, but don't you think this is
 >stretching it just a little bit? I mean, at some point,
 >extraordinary claims really _do_ demand extraordinary proof --
 >and this would seem to be one of those times, if ever there was
 >one."

 >Note: "You" in the above graf refers to the ufological community
 >in general, not to Greg Sandow personally.

Dear Weary Listers and Dreary others, and of course, EBK,

What Mr. Savvy Stacy forgets is that this is New York. You can't
imagine how much goes on in this city which goes unreported.
Notice I did not say unnoticed. I said "unreported".

Let me give you an example of something which I witnessed on or
about the summer of 1990. I was on the East Side, somewhere in
the fifties stuck in a really rotten traffic jam. Nothing was
moving. Alongside me on the block, was a fine eatery which name
escapes.

There must have been no fewer than 20 automobiles, many with
cellular phones within seeing distance of what was about to
occur. About five VERY well dressed men nonchalantly walked up
to this restaurant and attempted to get inside. The restaurant
was closed.

The doorbell either did not ring or no one was inside to answer.
Or whomever was inside was not interested in answering the door.
The perps tried everything from banging on the door to
attempting to push it in using quite a repertoire of implements.
I saw a sledge hammer, three garbage cans (metal and apparently
full), and finally got a little suspicious when one of the men
(who was standing by idly) produced a shotgun from his rain
coat. (Dupione and handcrafted, I was that close). Inside the
raincoat (it was a warm and sunshiny day) was another Dupione
silk hand tailored suit in charcoal gray. Cuff links, silk tie,
what looked to me like a gorgeous and out of the box white silk
shirt, etc., etc. These dudes were well dressed.

Thinking at first that these men were police or other law
enforcement, I decided not to do anything. However when a
combination of garbage can and shotgun blasts to the door
produced the desired entry for the perps, and out came other
semi automatic weapons, I decided to call the local precinct. I
reported what I saw. By radio on the interagency frequency.

This took place in a period of approximately five minutes (knock
to entry). Even some Boombats walking down the street (and there
were countless of those - who did absolutely NOTHING) would
suspect something was rotten in New York and report it via 911
at any phone booth on the street. And there were a bank of them
on the corner not more than 20 feet from the restaurant.

Because of my work, I carry lots of communications gear in my
car. There was only one dispatch to a car, the rest of the
police calls were for backup and some portables reporting what
was going on. So I _know_ that no one else called. When there
are multiple calls on an event occurring in New York City, there
is usually a second or even a third call to the responding
officers, saying something to the effect that there have been
more calls to 911 on this job.

There was only one call for backup and that was to a supervisor
(sergeant) because this was apparently an unusual case.

By now I had double parked my car, not that it mattered, with
emergency lights going so as not to be shot by a citizen who was
upset over my blocking blocked traffic. After the police arrived
(by foot from their car now parked on a N/S Street), they
entered the building with weapons drawn. About five minutes
later the supervisor arrived, followed in five minutes by a
radio report that no further was needed at the location and
things were under control. A number of detectives arrived after
the premises was secured and arrests made, likely to retrieve
whatever evidence needed retrieving.

The perpetrators exited the restaurant in handcuffs and leg
restraints, followed by thesergeant and that was it except for
the detectives arriving shortly after.

Mind you folks, shots were fired. This was dispatched as an
"armband and dangerous" call. The shotgun sounded like a 12 Ga.
to me and looked like a short or shortened barrel. In broad
daylight on the East Side of Manhattan in a really posh
neighborhood.

The following day, or anytime thereafter, there were no reports
of the incident in any of the papers, nor on the radio or TV. I
should know, I looked.

Whilst I never called the media to ask about the incident, this
is proof ample, that stuff which happens in NYC never gets a
second glance by the citizens or the press. The news media said
nuttin honey.

Looking at the Cortile incident on the bridge (which I indicated
I would check on personally) from that perspective and from the
perspective of the witnesses, I don't doubt that nothing was
said, if indeed this all occurred as reported in "Witnessed."

Think about it. "Uh, hello 911? Uh, I just saw a flying saucer
beam a cupla dudes outa this apartment house. I can see it all
from the Brooklyn Bridge. Uh, Hello? Hello?"

Stacy, your perspective is too southern. And your attitude much
to skeptical. A turn to the left might help you adjust to the
fact that some of the things you deny as being impossible, may
indeed be possible. Notice the word "probable" never left my
lippies.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 01:54:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:42:53 -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? - Lushman
 >Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:47:50 +0100

 >Well we'll just have to wait and see what the footage shows
 >there then. I do have a few questions in mind but who knows
 >Chris may even answer them during his talk.


Hi Rory,

An excellent way to approach the whole debate, lets hope Chris
can answer your questions!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 01:55:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:45:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale


 >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 Withheld? - Rhodes


 >What do you believe this footage shows?

 >Terry



Hi Terry & All,

Terry would you like to meet up at Chris Martin's meeting, set
out below?


London UFO Studies (Roy Lake)
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
Friday 8th September
Doors Open 7-30Pm
Admission: �4 On the door.


Because you seem very interested in the footage of Chris' it
really would be an excellent chance for you to see the footage
at close hand, enabling you to have a better perspective, and
understanding of the footage' also you can fire any questions at
Chris you may have concerning the footage, but most importantly
you will get to hear the background and history of Chris and how
he filmed his footage.

I think it will also be a good opportunity to break the ice with
each other and start to get along a bit better' and find out a
bit more about each other concerning the ufo subject as I know
you are new to updates, and well I must admit I know nothing of
your background or where you are coming from as far as ufos and
research goes, most people on here know roughly what others have
done in ufo research over the years, so I feel it would be an
enlightening evening for both of us ( I promise not to bore you
to death ) 'as I think we got off on the wrong foot so to speak
. We would be more helpful to each other if we got along
together.

So how's about it Terry, see you at Chris Martins meeting on the
8th?

If you have any problems with knowing how to get to the meeting
please let me know, and I may be able to give you directions.
And if all is okay and you can go, e-mail me and perhaps you can
meet up with myself and colleagues and we can take you to the
meeting, seeming we know where it will be held.

Oh, and yes the first coke will be on me <g>

Kind Regards,

Regards 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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:10:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:48:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale


 >From: Martin Jeffrey <martin-j@lineone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:32:33 +0100

 >I think that if you bear in mind that London UFO Studies doesn't
 >have the best reputation in productive ufology, (if there is
 >such as term) that Chris Martin is just one of a long line of
 >storytellers aiming to make money.


Hi Martin,

Can I thank you for this helpful insight into London UFOS, I
shall bear this in mind, I may raise this point on friday as one
of my questions at the meeting if this is okay with you?

 >Roy Lake, their "leader" is best friends with Tony Dodd and
 >share the same ET thesis and this is carried through their
 >publications.

Could you point me to a place where I can pick up a copy of the
above mentioned publication?

 >LUFOS also brought us Robert La Mont, the Hypnotherapist who
 >tricked LUFOS and a few hundred believers with a dodgy UFO video
 >he had faked in Mexico. (Confession available)

If it isn't too much trouble Martin' would you be able to
forward me a copy of the aforementioned confession?

 >I think I might go to the Leeds conference, especially with the
 >Karl Woods and Chris Martin arguments brewing.

Would you consider sending a review of the conference to me
as I am unable to reach Leeds? I would be interested on your
perspective of the events.

Kind Regards,

Roy..
roy@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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

              Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:12:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:52:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:48 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua

 >>From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:02:45 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:24:59 -0400
 >>>Subject: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Source: El Nuevo Diario (Nicaragua)
 >>>Date: August 30, 2000

 >>>Strange Entity Causes Astonishment * Chupacabras Killed in
 >>>Tolapa * Farmers and Zootechnician at a loss to find a suitable
 >>>classification * It was wounded and its corpse appeared several
 >>>days later as a bare skeleton * Fangs, lobes and maw are source
 >>>of confusion and fear

 >>Original article with images is available at:

 >>http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/nacional/nacional4.html

 >Hello John:

 >I clicked on the first link above (Nicaragua) and only found
 >some local political diatribe. There was no mention of
 >Chupacabras, dead or alive, that I could see.

 >Best

 >- Larry Hatch

Hi!

You may want to check out the latest photos and news of a
supposed Blood Predator or "Chupacabras" that was killed in
Leon, Nicaragua in our web page:

http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/index.html

There are three daily newspaper, not tabloid, carring the news:
La Prensa. El Nuevo Diario and La Nacion. Also, we are receiving
news, in English, on local TV, like FOX channel 7, in Miami, CNN
and NBC channel 6 in Miami, thats besides the Spanish TV
channels. It goes world wide. For example; we received reports
from Spain, in TEVE 5 and TV Valenciano channel 9, and so
on... News is posted almost daily and everybody is waiting the
scientist's final report, in spite of some loops in their
opinions.

Also, try a direct contact, in English, with Mr. Kim Burrafato,
of "La Prensa" at: lensman@stardrive.org

Regards,

Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center  (Espaol)   http://ufomiami.nodos.com
Miami UFO Reporter (English)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/index.html
Depredador de Sangre(Espaol)    http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html
Hemo Predator (English)  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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                       Soviets Smart On UFOs Over US?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 07:25:12 +0200
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:54:16 -0400
Subject: Soviets Smart On UFOs Over US?


Forwarded from "alt.ufo.reports".

Stig

***

Subject: Soviets Smart On UFOs Over US?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 23:29:06 GMT
From: Joseph Palermo <dmsllc@earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: alt.ufo.reports

**

Dream Masters Studios, LLC. News Release Hot Wire

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(*If you have already received this please accept our apology
and disregard)

**Television and radio news directors please feel free to go to
the program and pull video or audio clips as provided under the
U.S. "Fair Use" Copyright law to report on this.**

For Interview Availability CONTACT:

Joseph L. Palermo, Organizer/Manager

dmsllc@earthlink.net

Dream Masters Studios, LLC.

http://home.earthlink.net/~dmsllc

**

Soviets Smart On UFO's Over U.S.?

ST. LOUIS, MO - August 17, 2000 (DMSLLC) -- Dream Masters
Studios, LLC., of St. Louis, Missouri has made available to the
"streamers" of the world a free, RealPlayer presentation by
nuclear physicist Stanton T. Friedman on what Russia may have
over the United States in terms of UFO investigation and
research. This is the first part of a double presentation titled
Soviet Ufology/The Starchild Project.

The second part, The Starchild Project, gives us Lloyd Pye (who
was seen on the television program "Extra" in the fall of 1999
about the skull) presenting the full story of the anomalous
skull that has gotten mixed reviews as to it's origin.

"The anomalous skull stands out so much because it would appear
to be a complete redesign of a human skull. The question of 'how
did it happen?' has resulted in one theory of extraterrestrial
causation." says Dream Masters Studios executive producer and
program producer Joseph L. Palermo.

Soviet Ufology/The Starchild Project follows the Dream Masters
Studios streaming media program Chupacabras! The Legend Begins
both found at StreamSearch.Com. The biggest difference this time
is that Soviet Ufology/The Starchild Project is offered for free
instead of pay-per-view.

Palermo arranged for this and sites his reasoning. "Yes, there
is a lot of money being dumped into e-commerce with an expected
world wide return of billions of dollars. And, yes, it has cost
money to produce the programs we're offering 'streamers' but
there has to  be other considerations. I want to make our
programs available to the world population for free at least
once. Television used to be that way. If a viewer likes it, they
can choose to buy the video."

To view "Soviet Ufology/The Starchild Project", go to

http://www.ss.com

and search for "Dream Masters Studios" on screen right, which
will take you to the Dream Masters Studios page. The
presentation will look better if viewed with a high speed
connection.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hayes

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 08:05:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:57:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hayes


Hi Roy,

Do you know Martin Jefffrey?

In the message below he mentions you, LUFOS and Robert La Mont
in a not too flattering light. Roy Hale has NOT mentioned you or
LUFOS.

Thought it only correct to let you see it.

Regards,

John.


 >From: Martin Jeffrey <martin-j@lineone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:32:33 +0100

 >>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:44:35 -0700
 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?

 >>>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..

 >Hi Roy and Rory

 >I think that if you bear in mind that London UFO Studies doesn't
 >have the best reputation in productive ufology, (if there is
 >such as term) that Chris Martin is just one of a long line of
 >storytellers aiming to make money.

 >Roy Lake, their "leader" is best friends with Tony Dodd and
 >share the same ET thesis and this is carried through their
 >publications.

 >LUFOS also brought us Robert La Mont, the Hypnotherapist who
 >tricked LUFOS and a few hundred believers with a dodgy UFO video
 >he had faked in Mexico. (Confession available)

 >I think I might go to the Leeds conference, especially with the
 >Karl Woods and Chris Martin arguments brewing.

 >Regards

 >Martin Jeffrey



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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

              Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 08:31:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 09:58:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:48 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua

 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:02:45 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 08:24:59 -0400
 >>>Subject: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Source: El Nuevo Diario (Nicaragua)
 >>>Date: August 30, 2000

 >>>Strange Entity Causes Astonishment * Chupacabras Killed in
 >>>Tolapa * Farmers and Zootechnician at a loss to find a suitable
 >>>classification * It was wounded and its corpse appeared several
 >>>days later as a bare skeleton * Fangs, lobes and maw are source
 >>>of confusion and fear

 >>Original article with images is available at:

 >>http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/nacional/nacional4.html

 >Hello John:

 >I clicked on the first link above (Nicaragua) and only found
 >some local political diatribe. There was no mention of
 >Chupacabras, dead or alive, that I could see.

Hello Larry,

I posted that message just before Errol announced the list was
offline until Friday. On checking the site I have found the
story has moved to the archives for 30th August at:

http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/archivo/2000/agosto/30-agosto-2000/nacional/naci
onal4.html

Best wishes,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 01:04:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 10:01:28 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Hatch


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 18:47:05 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris

<snip>

 >Bob,

 >I have a couple of general area maps scanned at:

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

 >Having spent many a long summer break on the Welsh coast close
 >by both lighthouses and beacons in all types of weather. I
 >cannot see anyone being taken in by identifying these coastal
 >lights for anything other than just that, fixed coastal lights,
 >they were there for years before hand and they've been there for
 >years since, so why the misidentification just on those couple
 >of nights only?.

 >Just a thought.
 >Neil.

Hello all:

I don't want to argue the merits of the Orford Ness case here,
but I need to review my own database listing based on the
general discussion.

Can anyone give me the precise date and time of day the "events"
were first perceived? I have several entries for the general
area on different dates.


Thanks in advance.

- 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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains -

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 06:20:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 10:07:14 -0400
Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains -


 >Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:43:43 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains


 >Hello Scott!

 >This is indeed novel, some remains at long last. Can you tell us
 >anything about La Prensa de Nicaragua? If LP de N is a tabloid,
 >one may well question their editorial policies of course. A web
 >browse might help, but I can only read Spanish very slowly.
 >Perhaps a listing of their other headlines could give some
 >clues.

 >Best - Larry Hatch


Dear Larry,

You're quite correct to suggest that LP de N might be a tabloid, which
automatically makes it a "leper outcast unclean" to us. But I don't
detect a gossipy, sensationalist tone to any of the materials I've
translated. The exposition of facts is quite straightforward, IMHO. If
what they found was a dog, then so be it. The initial black and white
photo was unconvincing at best.

Best,

Scott Corrales








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

               UFO Meeting, Clacton-on-Sea, UK - 6th September

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:23:19 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 10:09:23 -0400
Subject: UFO Meeting, Clacton-on-Sea, UK - 6th September



6th September

Essex UFO Research Group Meeting

Venue: Friends/Quakers Meeting House, Granville Road,
             Clacton-on-Sea, Essex.

Guest Speaker: Ann Andrews - author of 'Abducted'

Time: 7.00pm to 9.45pm

Admission: �3.00 - includes refreshments

Details: Phone 01255 821 121


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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                              Schweinfurt UFOs

From: Andy Roberts <AndyRoberts@ancientassociates.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 15:09:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 10:41:31 -0400
Subject: Schweinfurt UFOs


Hi,

Listers may be interested in the following article. It has no
copyright - feel free to send, post, print where you will. Just
credit it to me please.

Happy Trails

Andy

_______________________________


Schweinfurt - A Mystery Solved?

In 1990 I wrote an article entitled W.W.II Document Research -
In Search of Foo-Fighters, which primarily dealt with the 'UFOs'
allegedly seen in the 14th October 1943 Schweinfurt raid(1).
This has since been posted on the Project 47 site (2) and now
forms the background to the present article.

The tone of my 1990 piece was very sceptical of the case
because, despite having gone to great lengths, I had been unable
to track the source of the case down. The source was an alleged
UK government document quoted in author Martin Caidin's Black
Thursday, a book which dealt with the events of the bombing raid
of Thursday 14th October 1943(3).

Having done quite a bit of research into foo-fighters, and
having a general interest in W.W.II, I have been quite obsessed
by the story over the years. All avenues of enquiry seemed to
lead nowhere and in 1999 I went to the Public Records Office
(PRO) at Kew and searched many files connected to the
Schweinfurt raid. At that time I found nothing at all relating
to Caidin's claims and this only strengthened my feelings it was
a fabrication. However.....

In July 2000 I spent another few of days at the PRO and this
time hit pay-dirt. Besides finding several hitherto unseen
references to what would later be termed 'foo-fighters', much
new material on ghost rockets and 1950s UK government UFO
research,  I again went through all the available Schweinfurt
related files and came across something of great relevance. But
first here is how Martin Caidin reported the incident in Black
Thursday.

"As the bombers of the 384th Group swung into the final bomb run
after passing the Initial Point, the fighter attacks fell off.
This point is vital, and pilots were queried extensively, as
were other crew members, as to the position at that time of the
German fighter planes. Every man interrogated was firm in his
statement that "at the time there were no enemy aircraft above."
At this moment the pilots and top turret gunners, as well as
several crewmen in the Plexiglas noses of the bombers, reported
a cluster of discs in the path of the 384th's formation and
closing with the bombers. The startled exclamations focused
attention on the phenomenon, and the crews talked back and
forth, discussing and confirming the astonishing sight before
them.

The discs in the cluster were agreed upon as being silver
colored, about one inch thick and three inches in diameter. They
were easily seen by the B-17 crewmen, gliding down slowly in a
very uniform cluster.

And then the "impossible" happened. B-17 Number 026 closed
rapidly with a cluster of discs; the pilot attempted to evade an
imminent collision with the objects, but was unsuccessful in
this manoeuvre. He reported at the intelligence debriefing that
his "right wing went directly through a cluster with absolutely
no effect on engines or plane surface."

The intelligence officers pressed their questioning, and the
pilot stated further that one of the discs was heard to strike
the tail assembly of his B-17, but that neither he nor any
member of the crew heard or witnessed an explosion.

He further explained that about twenty feet from the discs the
pilots sighted a mass of black debris of varying sizes in
clusters of three by four feet.

The SECRET report added: "Also observed two other A/C flying
through silver discs with no apparent damage. Observed discs and
debris two other times but could not determine where it came
from."

No further information on this baffling incident has been
uncovered, with the exception that such discs were observed by
pilots and crew members prior to, and after, Mission 115 of
October 14, 1943.

Memorandum of October 24 1943, from Major E.R.T. Holmes, F.L.O.,
1St Bombardment Division, Reference FLO/1BW/REP/126, to M.I. 15,
War Office, Bombardment Division, London, S.W. (copy to Colonel
E.W. Thompson, A-2, Pinetree)"(4)

Caidin's account of this event via the alleged UK document has
existed in UFO legend for forty years without proof. Now I can
reveal that the document exists and is almost as Caidin records
it.

The document, which Caidin obviously based his account on, reads
as follows. All spelling and punctuation is in the original. The
file in which the document can be found is: AIR 40/464

At the top right of the document is a rubber stamp giving
details of circulation to:

1. Col Kingman Douglas
2. A.I.3. ? (W/Cdr Smith)
3. A.I. 2. ? (W/Cdr Heath)

(Author note: the ? refers to a squiggle or letter I cannot
decipher, although it could well be 'to'. Also the background of
the stamp on which the above was written says:
"Received 17 Oct 1943"
"Copies sent to A.I.8 (USA))

The rest of the document is as follows:

EKG.                               TELEGRAM EN CLAIR        4112
                                          Recd. AMCS. 171129a hrs Oct.43

To- OIAWW, OIAJX, OISHL, HBC, AMY.

 From - OIPNT

IMPORTANT - CONFIDENTIAL

8 BC 0-1079-E
Annex to Intelligence Report Mission Shweinfurt 16 October
1943

306 Group reporta partially unexploded 20mm shell imbedded above
the panel in the cockpit of A/C number 412 bearing the following
figures 19K43. The Group Ordnance Officer believes the steel
composing the shell is of inferior grade. 348th Group reports a
cluster of disks observed in the path of the formation near
Schweinfurt, at the time there were no E/A above. Discs were
described as silver coloured - one inch thick and three inches
in diameter. They were gliding slowly down in very uniform
cluster. A/C 026 was unable to avoid them and his right wing
went directly through a cluster with absolutely no effect on
engines or plane surface. One of the discs was heard striking
tail assembly but no explosion was observed. About 20 feet from
these discs a mass of black debris of varying sizes in clusters
of 3 by 4 feet. Also observed 2 other A/C flying through silver
discs with no apparent damage. Observed discs and debris 2 other
times but could not determine where it came from.

Copies to:-

P.R. & A.I.6.
D.B.Ops
War Room
D.A.T.
A.I.3. (USA) (Action 2 copies)

Analysis

Presumably Caidin must have seen a copy of this document from
one of the American recipients. The following points seem
relevant:

* I have tried to check the reference Caidin gives three times
now at the PRO, once by using a professional researcher. It does
not exist. However the AIR files were all re-numbered at some
point prior to them being located at the PRO and it is possible
the reference refers to the files' original designation.

* It is also possible the reference pertains to the accompanying
letter when it was sent to the USA. This is unlikely however, as
the memo is stated to have been sent from one UK source to
another and then on to the USA. The Rubber stamp clearly states
it was received on 17 October, pre-dating Caidin's reference by
seven days. But the sheer number of channels through which
documents went be the reason for this confusion and now the
original document has been located I don't think we need get
hung up on the original reference any more.

* I have found no record of  most of the personnel listed.
However a Squadron Leader Heath was involved in the UK's
investigations of the Scandinavian 'ghost rockets' in 1946.

* Besides the above, other than some possibly excusable
authorial hype, Caidin has recorded the incident more or less as
the document states

Conclusion

At least we now know Caidin's reference exists! Besides that
there is little to say really. The objects reported are
intriguing but not completely mystifying. There were many types
of flak being used by the Germans in W.W.II and several files in
the PRO refer to coloured flak, flak which threw off unusual
fragments, and so on. This explanation is made more likely by
the fact that the 'F.L.O.' in Caidin's reference stands for
'Flak Liaison Officer', at least suggesting that the Air
Ministry were treating it within a flak context.

The objects could also have been some kind of 'window' dropped
by the Germans in an attempt to disrupt radar or radio
communication among air crew. The explanation as to what the
small objects were is now more of a task for the air historian
than it is for the ufologist. What is clear from the original
account is that the discs, whilst unusual, were clearly not any
type of 'craft', under intelligent or purposeful control or
dangerous to the air craft or crew.

In my opinion these objects do not belong in the category of
sightings referred to as 'foo-fighters', both by their physical
description and by their behaviour and characteristics. Although
often lumped in with foo-fighter reports they are clearly
different. This story has been a staple of UFO writers for the
past three four decades. Now we have further clarification and I
believe that this particular mystery is more or less laid to
rest.

References

1. UFO Brigantia July 1990
2. http://www.project1947.com/
3. Caidin, Martin. Black Thursday, Dell 1960








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 11:53:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

<snip>

 >Oh, of course, because we know that most UFO sightings are
 >immediately reported to someone in authority.

 >Ooops, wait a minute. I got that backwards. The vast majority of
 >UFO sightings are never reported anywhere

Greg, anybody interested:

Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

The Linda case involved, as Jim just pointed out, a flying
saucer hovering over Manhatten, beaming up Linda over the
Brooklyn Bridge, also seen by the Secretary General of the
United Nations.

Does this suggest that the Linda Case is an IFO or true UFO, or
something else?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                             FOIA Research - URL

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 12:13:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:12:35 -0400
Subject: FOIA Research - URL


Thought I'd pass this along.  It may be of help to someone.

http://notes.ire.org/FOIAedFO.nsf/FOIA%20Case%20Log%20Database?OpenView

Todd Lemire
Michigan UFO CENTRAL
http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.html
--
The only barriers thrown in the way of legitimate scientific
study of the subject (of UFOs) are political.

                 From "Clear Intent" - Fawcett and Greenwood









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 11:43:54 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:13:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

 >Ooops, wait a minute. I got that backwards. The vast majority of
 >UFO sightings are never reported anywhere. If you want to
 >unilaterally repeal that rule of thumb for the Linda case, feel
 >free, but I'm just going to look at you quizzically, and repeat
 >that famous line from the Reagan-Carter presidential debates.

 >Greg Sandow


You mean the one about lust in my heart?

<BG>

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:32:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>Oh, of course, because we know that most UFO sightings are
 >>immediately reported to someone in authority.

 >>Ooops, wait a minute. I got that backwards. The vast majority of
 >>UFO sightings are never reported anywhere

 >Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.


Here we go again. What informed consent? This number (95%) has
no basis. Repetition doesn't make it correct.

Some facts:

1. 21.5% of 3201 sightings investigated by Battelle Memorial
Institute under Contract to the USAF Project Blue Book were
finally labelled as 'Unknowns' (all 4 of the evaluators had to
agree before a sighting could be listed as 'Unknown') completely
separate and distinct from the 9.3% listed as Insufficient
Information. So overall only 70% were identified.

2. According to the AIAA UFO Committee 30% of the 117 cases
studied by the U. of Colorado (Condon Report) could _not_ be
identified... again leaving only 70%.

3. "The UFO Evidence" reports that there were 746 Unknowns
remaining of 4500 cases investigated, or more than 15% Unknowns.

4. It is totally false reasoning, apparently subscribed to by
certain UK sceptics, that says that since most sightings can be
explained, it is likely that all can be. This is as foolish as
suggesting that since 99% of naturally occuring isotopes cannot
sustain a chain reaction, none can. Since 99.99% of the
population do _not_ have Hemophilia, nobody does. Since 99% of
the people are not 7' tall, nobody is. Of course, no eggs are
fertilized by sperm since more than 99.999% of sperm never reach
an ova. Therefore none do and none of us were born.

When working on radiation shielding for high performance nuclear
reactors for propulsion applications, I learned very quickly
that absorbing 99.99% of the radiation leaving the reactor was
just not good enough. One would still kill people in the area.
It is the neutrons and gamma rays that get out that matter, not
the ones absorbed. It is the sightings that are _not_
explainable that matter.

 >The Linda case involved, as Jim just pointed out, a flying
 >saucer hovering over Manhatten, beaming up Linda over the
 >Brooklyn Bridge, also seen by the Secretary General of the
 >United Nations.

 >Does this suggest that the Linda Case is an IFO or true UFO, or
 >something else?

Wasn't the sighting late at night? I certainly don't expect many
New Yorkers are walking around looking at the sky after dark
rather than being worried about being mugged or being hit by a
taxi. There isn't much skyline easily accessible from the narrow
canyons between tall buildings. It isn't Roswell, after all,
with lots of clear sky or even Fredericton.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

                            'The People's Front'

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:34:25 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:33:20 -0400
Subject: 'The People's Front'


Hi all,

Has anyone out there ever seen Monty Python's 'Life of Brian'?

Well for those who haven't there's an interesting scene, where
the Peoples Front of Judea (hope I spelt that right) have their
usual meeting.

The only thing they can think to talk about it is another group
called The Judean People's Front.

Brian stands up and says something like "shouldn't we be
discussing the real matter?!" Their reply is "YES! The Judean
Popular Front!!"

"NO!" says Brian, "I'm talking about the Romans!".

They all look at each other..."The Romans...? Yes of course the
Romans!"

After being on UpDates for some time I finally get the joke.

If we exchange the People's front of Judea for LUFOS, MUFOS,
CUFOS, BUFOS and DUFOS I think you might also get it.

I even heard of a group calling themselves 'That In The Sky' but
since the acronym is TITS they might have to rethink that one.

I have received far too many private mails naming names... like
it matters.

It's saddening to see that most of the cat-fighting seems to go
on within UK ufology, it must be quite amusing to the rest of
the world as it sometimes is to me.

Anyway, on to the Chris Martin footage.

Regardless of who is who's best friend or who is now a member of
this group but was once a member of that group the footage still
remains. (Try not to make your comments until you have actually
seen the footage please).

For anyone who cannot make it to Leeds but are interested in
having a look I will extend my invitation.

I have received some mail from those who either cannot download
from Roy's site or simply do not have the ability to view the
zipped files I have sent them.

Send me your home address and I will send you a CD containing
the full sized images and .AVIs (uncompressed and unzipped) for
your viewing pleasure.

Please remember the .AVIs are uncompressed and range from 100
to 280 meg in size, if your machine has less than 64 meg of
memory on board you might want to decline.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 3

             Re: COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:19:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:37:30 -0400
Subject: Re: COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997

 >Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 04:27:47 +0200
 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca,
 >Subject: COMETA Release and Republication of CIA's 1997 Report

 >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.


I have to correct you on the French media.....

After the release of the Cometa report, there were very few
reactions : Three articles violently opposed to it (prominently,
one full page by Pierre Lagrange in the daily 'Liberation',
comparing it to the X Files and Independance Day). The weekly
"L'Express", labelled it a "delirious report".

One good article in the provincial paper "Ouest France", and a
few small pieces here and there, presumably.

A little radio (two minutes early morning), nothing on TV (a
programme on UFOs on France 2, two months later, did not say a
word about it) Liberation refused a "right of answer", but at
the end of the year, corrected Lagrange in a short, mildly
favorable article.

The two major daily papers, Le Figaro and Le Monde, said
nothing. But Le Figaro printed a full-page story on the new
release of the CIA report!

In the US, the Boston Globe is a kind of exception. So, the
analysis made by Michael Lindemann in CNI News sounds good to
me.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                                    Test

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 21:45:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 21:45:27 -0400
Subject: Test





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 19:10:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 21:54:16 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:49:10 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

Bob asked:

 >>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.

 >Hi, David, Peter:

 >Has anybody plotted all of this on a map and is this available
 >on an URL, somewhere?

Bob,

On my web site there's a map showing the relative positions of
the bases, 'landing site', Orford Ness lighthouse and Shipwash
lightship - see:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/map2.jpg

Incidentally, there is a detailed understanding about how the
perspective of the lighthouse and other landmarks is affected as
you walk towards it along the same, due east route that was
taken back in December, 1980. I know from recent discussions
with Ian Ridpath that he has studied this. Also, one of the
UFORL subscribers lives close to Rendlesham forest and has
coincidentally only just provided some exceptional local
knowledge about this and other relevant case issues.

Personally, I wouldn't spend a lot of time on this aspect,
there's already sufficient evidence that the light Halt
witnessed and couldn't identify was Orford Ness lighthouse.
However, if time permits, I'll summarise what we do know about
the terrain and how the lighthouse does 'move about' as you head
towards it.

I'm not sure why there apparently remains some doubt that Orford
Ness lighthouse did fool the security police, it's documented in
the participants testimonies and verified in two others which
confirm what was reported over the radio.

 >>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.

 >Yes, and he waited weeks before putting a statement down on
 >paper. Maybe he hoped it would all go away.

As Jenny notes, the delay was largely down to procedural issues,
however, another factor was that Halt didn't interview the three
security police involved in the first incident (26 December)
until a week later. He has explained this was simply due to the
holiday period. It seems this was hardly being viewed as an
urgent, important matter.

Still, when Halt did receive the written statements requested
from those involved in the first night's incident, he would have
learned, for the first time, how that three-man patrol ended up
chasing the beacon from Orford Ness lighthouse for an incredible
two miles through forest and countryside at 3 o'clock in the
morning.

In 1997, Halt was interviewed by journalist Salley Rayl and
acknowledge the UFO hysteria which had affected the 81st
Security Police Squadron following the inaugural 'UFO sighting'.
He also confirmed that on the night of 27th December, having
been told that the security police thought the 'UFO was back',
he immediately followed this up and effectively investigated the
location where the first 'UFO' was believed to have been seen:

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 in the police squadron, and they seemed to be more
focused on UFO activity than their primary duty. [End]


In early January 1981, Halt finds out from those statements that
the UFO scare which sparked events involved the two mile pursuit
of a lighthouse beacon.

Worse... by far... it was in this exact same location, Halt and
others had observed an unidentified flashing light, which he
even noted on his microcassette recording was "clear off to the
coast".

Surely, common sense dictates that he verifies the lighthouse
was responsible for the light he witnessed, or perhaps,
incredibly it wasn't and that's just a remarkable coincidence.
Either way, you check it out.

Instead, Halt propagates the UFO hysteria.

I would be very interested to know if Halt ever revealed to his
base commander that the lighthouse was now confirmed as a factor
in the 'UFO' frenzy.

When Halt writes his memo to the MoD, he doesn't refer to the
misidentified lighthouse and by this time seems to believe of
the "red sun-like light" which he observed, that, "At one point
it appeared to throw off glowing particles and then broke into
five separate white objects and then disappeared".

That never happened, as was proven when a copy of Halt's
microcassette recording from that night became available. It is,
nonetheless, still a part of the 'UFO' story Halt relates to
this day. Similar to the more recent discovery of those written
statements from early January 1981, the facts confirm our UFO
tales have grown somewhat substantially in the telling.

This 'pulsating light' which Halt witnessed next to the
farmhouse and in a direct line of sight to Orford Ness
lighthouse, was seen again and described by Halt on his
recording, _after_ he documents that five white lights were
visible in the distance:

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]

I understand those white lights may have been from the five
radio masts at Orford Ness. These are much taller than anything
else at Orford Ness and housed the 'Cobra Mist' radio antennas.

In his memo, Halt also omits to say he is using the 'starscope'
image intensifier during many of his observations. Again, it's
only from the microcassette recording that we hear Halt refer to
this: "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".

When Salley interviewed Halt, she asked him some questions on my
behalf:

"A question that I would like to pass on to you is why have
there been variances in the dates given for both incidents? Your
memo claims that the dates were on the evening, early morning of
the 26th, 27th and 28th, 29th of December, respectively. But
elsewhere, you know, the dates have been given as 25 to 26 and
29 to 30, he says. So why, why are there differences in those
dates?"

Halt responded:

HALT: Well, I tried to go back and recover the police blotter
and the security blotter think I mentioned to you earlier to re-
affirm the dates. Keep in mind, I wrote the memo several weeks
later. And it was not a really important memo. The date was not
critical. The critical portion was, you know, what happened and
are you interested? And how about getting involved and let's
investigate this. It's possible that I, I put the date down
wrong. But I don't believe so. [End]

In his 'not really important' memo, the dates of both incidents
are of course wrong, as is Halt's central claim about the 'light
exploding' and we can see how this all evolved amidst the UFO
excitement at that time.

As I've said before, some critical appraisal and cursory further
investigations, indeed any, would perhaps have quickly put to a
end to the UFO terror, however... it was Halt who had
responsibility for this.


Looking at a transcript of the interview with Salley, I see that
Halt provides a direct answer to the question you've asked:

RAYL: Okay. Now, two weeks later on January 13, 1981 you issued
a memorandum to the British Ministry of Defense.

HALT: That's correct.

RAYL: And why did you do that?

HALT: At the request of the R.A.F. Liaison Officer or the R.A.F.
Base Commander, as we called him, Don Moreland.

RAYL: Okay.

HALT: I went and approached him, and I said, "You know, this
happened off base". Well, I did discuss this through our
channels and the real answer from our channels was, "Hey, we
don't want to touch this with a pole. This was a British
incident. It happened off the installation. Let them handle it".
So, I contacted him. In fact, I contacted him earlier and the
only reason the memo was dated that late was that he was on
vacation and I wasn't able to find out what he wanted and how
much detail he wanted and what he wanted to do with the
information. When I finally caught up with him on the, about the
10th or the 12th, he said, "Well, write a brief memo. Kind of
sanitize it and we'll send it to London. We'll see what
happens." So, that's what I did. [End]

I wonder if Morland was informed that the original UFO, or more
exactly 'unidentified lights', sighting resulted in three
security policemen chasing the beacon from Orford Ness
lighthouse, or that Halt's own sighting of 'weird lights' was
from the same location, in the identical direction and "clear
off to the coast".

It seems reasonable to conclude that he wasn't.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:31:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:02:29 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

<snip>

 >Always good to talk about NYC media with an expert. Yes, the
 >city might have 20 or so major media outlets, counting
 >newspapers, TV, radio, and a whatever magazines might report
 >city news. I can't pretend to have sampled many of them. Forgive
 >me if I just chose three of the most prominent -- the two major
 >dailies and the 24-hour local TV news channel, a Time-Warner
 >enterprise that's the CNN of New York, and is more likely than
 >any other station to report breaking local news. I can't prove
 >that whatever happened on the bridge that night was completely
 >absent from the media. But if it didn't make the Times, the
 >News, or New York 1, it obviously (to any New Yorker) wasn't a
 >serious media item here.

Greg, List

Slow Sunday/Labor Day Salutations!

I now solemnly promise never to post anything here about which I
am not a working expert. (Well, you can dream, anyway!)

Don't take it personal. I wasn't faulting you for not personally
checking every media outlet in town, just saying that it _might_
have been reported somewhere. I know that in Ft. Worth, when I
was growing up, one of the papers used to publish two or three
issues a day. I know there was a Home and Street edition, and I
think the Star-Telegram used to do an afternoon edition, too.
But that was back in the days when they delivered the mail twice
a day, too. Maybe the News publishes two editions, I don't know.

<snip>

 >Oh, of course, because we know that most UFO sightings are
 >immediately reported to someone in authority.

 >Ooops, wait a minute. I got that backwards. The vast majority of
 >UFO sightings are never reported anywhere. If you want to
 >unilaterally repeal that rule of thumb for the Linda case, feel
 >free, but I'm just going to look at you quizzically, and repeat
 >that famous line from the Reagan-Carter presidential debates.

 >Greg Sandow


Again, sticking strictly to things in which I am expert...I can
only say that my one and only good UFO sighting got reported --
to Carswell AFB yet, home of the infamous Roswell press
conference. I was told that they'd gotten "several" reports
about it. I'm sure I looked to see if it was in the morning
papers, but I honestly don't remember whether it was or not. I
was 14 at the time. Just doing my civic duty.

I don't find it remarkable that most UFOs don't get reported, as
the great majority of "UFOs" are unremarkable nocturnal lights.
Mine was a night light, too, but with clearly visible shape.

I suspect, though, that the more remarkable the UFO, the more
likely it is to get reported, viz., Levelland, 1957, and the
Hudson Valley sightings. The Brooklyn Bridge UFO, if true, would
have ranked among the most spectacular UFO sightings of all
time.

Not that it matters, but I've subscribed to the NY Times for
years, the Texas/ regional edition, of course. (I wonder if they
dumb it down for us?) Started reading the Village Voice in
college but have recently had to give it up. Can't keep up with
everything. Recently let my sub to the New Yorker lapse, too.

Had three friends from high school and college who were flight
hosts with American Airlines, based out of New York City. Used
to stay with them on the way to and back from Europe, or while
on the way to visit my then girlfriend in Montreal.

Star sightings? Saw Yoko Ono play a little club on E. 81st or
83rd, somewhere around there. (She got a bad rap. I thought she
was very good.) In the Village (where one of my friends lived),
once saw Sophia Loren come out of a showing of "Oh, Calcutta!"
Got busted the next day in Central Park, but that's another
(long) story. Last in NYC the weekend they were looking for
Kennedy's plane.

Not claiming honorary citizen status or amateur expertise, mind,
just saying I've been off the farm once or twice. Or is it
plantation? Even if it may not always sound like it.

And Jacques Barzun now calls San Antonio home!? Go figure. I was
surprised, too.

Everyone have a safe and pleasant holday, watch the skies, and
remember the Alamo.

If you live in NYC or environs, visit your local bookstore and
pick up a copy of my latest book, The Field Guide to UFOs,
co-authored with Patrick Huyghe and illustrated by Harry
Trumbore. Non-New Yorkers use the following link:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380802651/qid=968007308/
sr=1-1/102-5 014327-2420104

Gotta get that Amazon ranking down!

Also available via http://www.anomalist.com

Dennis Stacy
Sweltering in San Antonio








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                          In Search Of Other Worlds

From: Michael Wysmierski <wufor@ldnet.com.br>
Date: 03 Sep 2000 17:27:59 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:21:00 -0400
Subject: In Search Of Other Worlds


Source: BeliefNet

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/40/story_4062_1.html

In Search of Other Worlds
They're there, but the news Is not encouraging

by
Gregg Easterbrook

Will extraterrestrials have religion? This is one of the
provocative questions people ask as they look outward to the
stars. More basic is the question of whether there is or will be
extraterrestrial life, and more basic to that, in turn, is
whether there are other planets similar to Earth. On that final
point, scientists have recently made a burst of discoveries with
many implications for the question of whether there are other
thinking beings in the universe.

As recently as six years ago, no "extra-solar" planet--meaning
beyond our solar system--had been found. Because planets don't
make any light and emit only slight amounts of heat, they
produce little for astronomers to detect. Pluto, the outermost
planet in this solar system, was not discovered until 1930, and
then by accident, by an astronomer who was looking for something
else. Today, even the Hubble Space Telescope has a hard time
getting a decent view of Pluto , because the planet is so far
away. And Pluto is only about five light-hours from Earth,
making it a much more "nearby" object than extra-solar planets
that are dozens, hundreds, or thousands of light-years distant.

Because today's telescopes cannot obtain a standard visual image
of an extra-solar world, astronomers search for distant planets
using two inferential methods. They examine the movements of
other stars to determine if the stars "wobble" in a way that
would indicate the gravitational tug of planets. And they watch
some nearby stars to see if they can catch an extra- solar
planet in "transit," passing across the disc of the star and
causing a momentary, moving dim spot. Using these two
techniques, astronomers have since 1995 located almost 50 extra-
solar planets, including one orbiting Epsilon Eridani, the
closest star that is similar to our sun. (Epsilon Eridani is
about 10.5 light-years away.) Another planet has been found
orbiting the sun- like star designated 51 Pegasi. A full solar
system of several planets has been detected spinning around the
star Upsilon Andromedae. And here's the common denominator in
these discoveries: Every one of the planets found so far is
utterly uninhabitable by any kind of life we can imagine. Let's
start by contemplating what kinds of life can be imagined. Based
on what is known to us, at least, life must have access to
liquid water or a similar liquid, and life must be either
organic--that is, carbon-based--or silicon-based. Liquid as a
necessity for any physical form of life seems an inescapable
requirement. (All living things, including Homo sapiens, are
primarily made of liquids, because liquids can engage in complex
chemical reactions and yet hold an information-storing form:
Life based entirely on solid materials wouldn't have metabolism,
or if it did would evolve unimaginably slowly, while life based
on gaseous substances might be too nebulous to have any
information-storing equivalent of DNA.) Meanwhile, all living
things we observe are carbon-based, because carbon is one of
only a handful of elements capable of forming, breaking, and
reforming chemical bonds with the kind of relatively low energy
input available from sunlight. (This happens for a techno-reason
concerning the number of electrons in its outermost "valence
level.") Silicon, like carbon, also has the ability to form
complex molecules with small energy inputs, which is why
scientists speculate about silicon-based life. All other
elements with this property are metals, which seems to rule them
out.

Now how do these rules--liquid water, amenable to carbon or
silicon chemistry--apply to the extra-solar planets found so
far?

All are huge, roughly the mass of Saturn or larger. (Saturn's
volume is about 766 times greater than Earth's.) This means the
extra-solar planets have crushing gravity, which seems to rule
out Earth-like biochemistry. Some of the discovered planets are
spectacularly huge, much larger than Jupiter, the king of our
solar system--one extra-solar world, spinning around a star
designated HD162020 on charts, is 14 times the size of Jupiter.
Complex carbon and silicon compounds might survive on such
high-gravity worlds, but it wouldn't be in forms of life
recognizable to us.

Heft, however, is just the beginning of what's wrong with the
extra-solar planets, from the standpoint of the one form of life
we know to be possible. Standard theories of how planets form
hold that above a certain size (not too many times larger than
Earth), planets cannot coalesce of solid materials, but must be
frozen gas. Saturn and Jupiter are mainly frozen hydrogen. If
the extra-solar worlds discovered so far really are as enormous
as they appear, astronomers assume they must be "gas giants,"
again ruling out the form of biochemistry known to us. Some of
these gas giants are sufficiently gigantic that they may be
"brown dwarfs," or structures that are almost stars, but don't
have quite enough gravitational pressure to ignite.

And there's more wrong with them. Many lack the neat, stable
orbits of our solar system. One planet, found around a star
called 70 Virginis, has such a loop-shaped "eccentric" orbit
that it spends extended periods in the deep-freeze, far from its
sun, followed by brief jaunts of close-up overheating. Instead
of four seasons, it would have two: frozen and boiled. Other
extra-solar planets spin so far from their stars that they would
simply always be below the freezing points of all liquids. The
planet orbiting 51 Pegasi goes to the other extreme. It spins so
close to its star-- only five% as far from 51 Pegasi as the
Earth is from the sun--that its surface would always be above
the boiling point of all liquids, to say nothing of being
constantly bathed in levels of radiation lethal to all forms of
life we can imagine. If you could stand on this planet, the sun
would not be a shiny dollar coin in the air. The entire sky
would be intense, glaring yellow, with solar flares thousands of
miles long rippling toward you.

Of course, it's possible there are forms of life capable of
existing in conditions that seem incredible to us. (Our
conditions may seem incredible to them: "What do you mean these
Earth beings breathe oxygen? Nothing can live in oxygen!") It's
possible that "wobble" measurements and other techniques make
planets seem larger than they really are. Most of all, it stands
to reason that since small planets would be harder to detect
than big ones, there must be Earth- sized extra-solar worlds
that we simply haven't spied yet.

But would an Earth-sized world in another solar system
necessarily be an Earth-like world? Here enters one of the more
disturbing calculations in astronomy, that of the "continuously
habitable zone."

A few decades ago, an astronomer named Michael Hart calculated
how far from a sun-like star a planet would have to be in order
to have liquid water on its surface and the right temperatures
and pressures for carbon-based or silicon-based life. What Hart
found was that the planet would have to sit almost exactly where
Earth sits, or be too hot or too cold. Venus and Mars seem
evidence of this. Venus, the next planet closer to the sun than
Earth, has a runaway greenhouse effect and 900�F surface
temperatures much hotter than fire; Mars, the next planet out,
is locked in what appears to be a permanent ice age. Hart called
the star-distance relationship that allows for liquid water and
carbon or silicon chemistry the "continuously habitable zone"
and found that for a sun-like star, the zone is less than 1% of
possible orbits. This means that other things being equal, an
Earth-like planet has 99 chances out of 100 to form in such a
way as to be uninhabitable.

Many astronomers have since tried to punch holes in Hart's work,
for it implies that unless there are fundamentally different
forms of existence, planets with life will be exceedingly rare.
About a decade ago, a group of astronomers led by the late Carl
Sagan offered a revision of Hart's calculations, suggesting that
for various reasons (Earth-like planets may tend to form in the
middle orbital bands, and different atmospheres may moderate
temperature better than ours can) the continuously habitable
zone will turn out to be 5% of possible orbits for a sun-like
star, not 1%. But this still means the conditions for organic
life will be highly improbable. Most planets won't be Earth-like
to begin with (in this solar system, only three of nine are:
Earth, Mars, and Venus), and of 20 Earth-like planets that do
exist, 19 will fall outside the habitable zone. Human
understanding of distant space is in its infancy, so many of the
assumptions made today may turn out to be wrong. And we know
precious little about what causes life, since we still can't
even answer whether the life of our own world is natural or
divine in origin.

But what's known about other worlds so far, and what can be
projected about their habitability, suggests that even in an
immense cosmos, life may be rare. Certainly, the absence of
artificial radio signals in our galaxy--SETI searches haven't
found one yet--suggests intelligent life is atypical. That in
turn makes our lives and the living creatures of our Earth all
the more precious. If God placed us here, then we may indeed be
the sole thinking beings of the cosmos, or one of just a few
such species. If natural forces placed us here, our rarity may
be the same, and the entire cosmic enterprise is dependent for
its meaning on our survival and maturation to wisdom.


MW








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 14:41:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:22:36 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400


Stan,

 >>Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

 >Here we go again. What informed consent? This number (95%) has
 >no basis. Repetition doesn't make it correct.

Good point. This 95% figure gets recycled endlessly even by
those who ought to know better, but that doesn't make it any
truer.

Besides the evidence you cite that the IFO percentage is not
really that high, you might have mentioned the Blue Book
statistics during the Ruppelt era, the last time the Air Force
was conducting really serious investigations of UFO reports
rather than conjuring up farfetched explanations based on little
or no reseach. Ruppelt found that the unknowns comprised between
20 and 25% of the total, and even then he was arbitrarily
tossing out most close-encounter cases as inherently
unbelievable. Interestingly, the Condon Committee found a
slightly higher percentage of unknowns, and even then, as Jim
McDonald and others documented, some of the solved cases really
weren'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 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 15:31:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:24:39 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

<snip>

 >Wasn't the sighting late at night? I certainly don't expect many
 >New Yorkers are walking around looking at the sky after dark
 >rather than being worried about being mugged or being hit by a
 >taxi. There isn't much skyline easily accessible from the narrow
 >canyons between tall buildings. It isn't Roswell, after all,
 >with lots of clear sky or even Fredericton.

 >Stan Friedman

Stan,

Does this mean that you haven't read'Witnessed' by Budd Hopkins?

Off the top of my pointy head, it happened between 3-4 am. It's
a terribly complicated case (the Sec. Gen. of the UN was
allegedly a witness of same, for example).

Some of the witnesses on the Brooklyn Bridge reportedly had a
very good view of the UFO as it beamed Linda Cortile out of her
apartment building, as it also caused their cars to stall on the
bridge and their headlights to go out. I don't remember the
exact numbers w/o looking them up, but let's say some 20 cars
were so stalled.

The pseudononymous Dan and Richard were reportedly guarding the
UN guy, Perez de Cuellar, at the same time. What this trio was
doing up at this hour is anyone's guess, but in Witnessed they
were parked underneath an overpass, and Dan or Richard, I forget
which, first became aware of the UFO when he saw its reflection
in a gum wrapper. It's suggested that de Cuellar was abducted,
too. Later, he's identified as the man who reportedly gave one
of Cortile's sons a diving helmet as a gift.

The UFO, after abducting Cortile, was said to have dived into
the Hudson River.

I'm not making this stuff up!

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671570315/qid=968011052/sr=1-1/102-50143
27-2420104

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 >
   Sep > Sep 4

              Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:07:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:28:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua -


 >From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
 >Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 08:31:57 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua

 >>Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:48 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Chupacabras-Like Entity Slain in Nicaragua

<snip>

 >>Hello John:

 >>I clicked on the first link above (Nicaragua) and only found
 >>some local political diatribe. There was no mention of
 >>Chupacabras, dead or alive, that I could see.

 >Hello Larry,

 >I posted that message just before Errol announced the list was
 >offline until Friday. On checking the site I have found the
 >story has moved to the archives for 30th August at:

 >http://www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/archivo/2000/agosto/30-agosto-2000/nacional/na
cional4.html



Hello John and Scott:

Well! The link (above) was certainly worth the wait!

Some earlier accounts (links provided by Scott) seemed to
indicate a dog or other canine cross-breed out on a wild blood
feast, but the skeleton shown looks more reptilian to me,
especially the skull and vertical "ribs" on the upper vertebrae.

I'm no biologist. Unless this is some elaborate hoax, we may
have found a new species of critter! How it could have escaped
attention for decades or centuries, especially given its nasty
habits, is quite beyond me.

Biological scientists should be able to distinguish between
mammals and reptiles... the lines having diverged millions of
years ago. If this is an assembly of very different critters,
something like the "Piltdown Ma " only worse, it should become
apparent before long.

If it was a genuine living entity, there should be other
skeletal remains out in the wild waiting for discovery.

This specimen does not much resemble the more fanciful artists
renditions however. One of these (from Scott's website) looks
like an unlikely cross between an oversized flea and a standard
issue grey alien, complete with large teardrop eyes.

Of all these conjectures, some exotic canine crossbreed sounds
the least fantastic, but that does not explain the special
skeletal features like some elaborate hoax would.

I will watch this with interest.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: How about a blood-thirsty iguana? No, I suppose not.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                       Iguana Salad: A Quickie Recipe

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:20:46 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:32:57 -0400
Subject: Iguana Salad: A Quickie Recipe


Dear Scott, John and all:

A quick browse eliminates any sort of iguana as the "chupabras".
Far from blood sucking predators, iguanas are strict
vegetarians!

Here is a link for "iguana salad". The top line reads " first
you catch an iguana." But no, the innocent iguana is not an
ingredient.

http://www.sonic.net/~melissk/ig_diet.html

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: If it weren't for Walt Disney, millions
of kids couldn't tell the good animals from
the bad ones.

__________________________________________

http://www.sonic.net/~melissk/ig_diet.tml


Iguana Salad



This is an abbreviated form of the iguana diet from my Iguana
Care, Feeding and Socialization article. I strongly recommend
that you read the full section on food selection and preparation
that appears in the ICFS article for the full discussion on
foods, rationale, etc.

How to make iguana salad

First, you capture an iguaua...!

Basic Recipe

1/2 cup shredded raw green beans

1/2 cup shredded raw orange-fleshed squash (such as acorn,
banana, kabocha, spaghetti, and pumpkin) - you can occasionally
alternate with carrots

1/2-3/4 cup alfalfa pellets (rabbit food pellets) or crumbled
alfalfa hay

1 med or 2 small raw shredded parsnips (in areas where these are
seasonally hard to find, you can substitute with asparagus or
cooked or canned lima, navy or kidney beans that have been well
rinsed and minced or mashed. If you use beans, add extra calcium
to offset their high phosphorus)

1/4 cup mashed/minced fruit (strawberries, raspberries, mangos,
papaya, figs, cantaloupe, cactus pear)

Thoroughly mix all ingredients together. Makes about 3.5-4 cups.

Add in a multivitamin supplement (any multivitamin supplement
for birds or reptiles is fine - best, actually, is a crushed
Centrum tablet) and a calcium supplement. You do not need to get
a calcium supplement that has phosphorous or D3 in it, as the
iguana is already getting considerably phosphorous from the
plants and multivitamin, and their D3 is best metabolized in
their bodies by regular exposure to direct sunlight or special
UVB-producing fluorescents.

If you will be freezing any of the food, mix in some Brewer's
yeast to replace the thiamin (B1) that will be lost when the
green vegetables are thawed.

Serve the salad in the morning. Once the iguana is freely eating
the salad, greens (collards, mustards, dandelion, escarole,
occasionally some kale and chard) can be served on the side. If
the iguana will only eat the greens, stop feeding them greens
and only put down salad, fresh every day. When they start
feeding on the salad and are generally clean-platers, you can
then start offering greens in the afternoon. Once they
assimilate that, you can serve the two together. The salad is
actually more nutritious than the greens, not the least of which
because they can fit more of the salad into their guts, and it
is more efficiently digested, than the greens. In no event
should greens exceed 40-45% of the total diet.

Iguanas have evolved as late morning/early afternoon feeders; if
you feed them when convenient for YOU rather than when they need
to eat, you end up with an iguana who is not eating as much as
it should and who is not digesting as effectively as it could.
Iguanas can only extract out 40% of the nutrients in the food
they eat, making it imperative that we not only feed them only
healthy nutrition-loaded foods, but that we feed them at the
proper times, as well.


Related Articles:

Iguana Care, Feeding & Socializations

Lighting & Heating

Illustrated "MK Diet"

Vegetable and Fruit Name Translations








Kaplan, Melissa. 1995. Melissa Kaplan's Iguana Salad: A Quickie Recipe. Availabl
e online: http://www.sonic.net/~melissk/ig_diet.html

Created: 1995
Last Updated:
Minor typographical/link errors corrected:

Website 1995 Melissa Kaplan
All rights reserved.

Giant Green Iguana Care

About Iguanas...

Melissa Kaplan's Iguana Care, Feeding & Socialization

Health, Illness, and Injury

Behavior, Breeding & Reproduction

Food and Feeding

Salmonella

Captive Environment

Food Plant Identification Sites

Reptile Societies & Veterinarians

Lighting & Heating

Plants & Herpetoculture

Translations of Articles



Herp Care Collection

Before You Get A Reptile...

Care Article Pages

Health & Behavior

Not Just For Teachers

General Herpetology, Conservation & Education

Captive Environment

Kid Stuff
(Something for kids of all ages)

Literature & Supplies

Pet Trade Issues and Activism

Working the Internet

Herp Resources

Herp Humor

Zoonoses
(Salmonella)

About Melissa Kaplan

Reprints and Copyrights



No living organism is immune.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 4

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Blanton

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:25:54 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:35:30 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Blanton


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>Does this suggest that the Linda Case is an IFO or true UFO, or
 >>something else?

 >Wasn't the sighting late at night? I certainly don't expect many
 >New Yorkers are walking around looking at the sky after dark
 >rather than being worried about being mugged or being hit by a
 >taxi.

I have spent many lonely days in NYC and the one thing that New
Yorkers absolutely do not do is 'look up'. Anyone in Manhattan
who walks around looking up is a tourista.

It is one truth which supports the 'Linda' case.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 4

             Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 15:38:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 22:38:30 -0400
Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains - Hatch


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 06:20:09 -0400
 >Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains

 >>Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:43:43 -0700
 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: More on Nicaraguan Chupacabras Remains

 >>Hello Scott!

 >>This is indeed novel, some remains at long last. Can you tell us
 >>anything about La Prensa de Nicaragua? If LP de N is a tabloid,
 >>one may well question their editorial policies of course. A web
 >>browse might help, but I can only read Spanish very slowly.
 >>Perhaps a listing of their other headlines could give some
 >>clues.

 >>Best - Larry Hatch

 >Dear Larry,

 >You're quite correct to suggest that LP de N might be a tabloid, which
 >automatically makes it a "leper outcast unclean" to us. But I don't
 >detect a gossipy, sensationalist tone to any of the materials I've
 >translated. The exposition of facts is quite straightforward, IMHO. If
 >what they found was a dog, then so be it. The initial black and white
 >photo was unconvincing at best.

 >Best,

 >Scott Corrales



Hello Scott:

I didn't say anything about leprosy etc., in fact I enjoy the
headlines of the Weekly World News while standing in line at the
Supermarket. Its almost always worth a good chuckle. One time
the front page was filled with the photo of a space alien (who
looked like an ordinary man wrapped in white tape like a mummy)
pushing an aged crippled ex-President Kennedy around in a
wheelchair.

But! Browsing for la Prensa de Nicaragua, I found no real
indication of tabloidism in the WWN vein. Most articles were
ordinary reports much like you would find in the mainstream
press elsewhere.

Two articles dealt with the "Chupacabras" skeleton matter, and
neither seemed sensational in tone.

This one in Spanish:

http://www.laprensa.com.ni/nacionales/nacionales-20000903-09.html

has it that the skeleton being examined is indeed that of a
domestic dog, if I mis-translate. correctly. Talavera, the man
who shot the critter is claiming that the skeleton was switched.
I think he is saying that he had taken a rear foot section from
the original remains as proof.

I suppose that's where the matter rests until somebody can
verify Talavera's foot evidence!


Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: If the link above gets truncated, please tediously piece it
back together. I have no way to shorten it. You might try
navigating from the Prensa national news page:

http://www.laprensa.com.ni/nacionales









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                           E-Mail Server Problems

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 10:42:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 10:42:40 -0400
Subject: E-Mail Server Problems



Gentle Subscribers,

Sympatico.ca are having problems with the POPserver the List
uses - I'm able to send messages out but not able to D/L
incoming mail.

I've been assured that "all in-bound mail is stacking up
and will be in your mailbox once the problem is resolved."

So, when I receive the in-bound, I'll pass it on to the
List - "it could take up to 24 hours..."

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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                Chupacabras Study Leaves Questions Unanswered

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:09:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:03:15 -0400
Subject: Chupacabras Study Leaves Questions Unanswered



SOURCE: Diario La Prensa de Nicaragua (Nicaragua)
DATE: September 3, 2000

CHUPACABRAS STUDY LEAVES QUESTIONS UNANSWERED
by Clarisa Altamirano and Maricely Linarte--Correspondents

* Dissatisfaction in Malpasillo with University Conclusions *
Jorge Luis Talavera, the beast's slayer, claims "researchers
left many questions unanswered, such as the cause of death and
why it fed on blood" * For Sor Hidalgo, the experts' testimony
left serious gaps, such as the question of why an ordinary dog
engaged in a random act [of violence] such as draining the blood
of 12 sheep in a single night and leaving them uneated, unlike
any other wild animal *

LEON.- Leonel Navarro, mayor of Malpasillo, and Sister Paula
Hidalgo were not satisfired by the scientific results of the
UNAN research laboratory, which established that the alleged
Chupacabras skeleton was indeed that of a dog.

Such a conclusion was reached after having perfomed an anatomic
and morphological appraisal and comparison of the specimen's
bone structure, said university authorities.

However, for Sol Hidalgo, the experts' statment leaves several
gaps, such as [the unanswered question] of why a common dog
engaged in random acts of violence such as draining the blood of
12 sheep in a single night and leaving them uneaten, unlike any
other wild animal.

Furthermore, Jorge Luis Talavera, who shot the beast, claims
that "the researchers left many questions unanswered, such as
the cause of death and why it fed on blood."

Talavera says that from the day that the skeleton was found,
there were no renewed sheep attacks in the area, in spite of the
fact that the remaining three animals have prowled the region.

VIcechancellor and research coordinator Dr. Edmundo Torres
explained that the study conducted was purely scientific and
proper of a serious university and scientific institution, and
that they have no interest in concealing the truth.

He added that the canids (zoological branch which includes dogs)
are solitary hunters who catch their prey thanks to their speed
and on certain occasions to their endurance. Experience and
learning are also very important. Canids are highly adaptable
and spread over 12 branches and 34 species which included
coyotes, dogs, foxes, etc. and can reach speeds of up to 75
km/hour., he explained.

# # # #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special thanks to Gloria Coluchi.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                         "This Isn't My Goatsucker!"

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:18:22 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:05:40 -0400
Subject: "This Isn't My Goatsucker!"

From: lornis1@juno.com

SOURCE: Diario La Prensa de Nicaragua
DATE: September 3, 2000

THIS ISN"T MY GOATSUCKER!
Owner alleges skeleton was swapped for that of a dog.


"That animal was switched around at the university," claimed
Jorge Luis Talavera, who a week ago opened fire against the
alleged Chupacabas on his property, San Lorenzo, in the
jurisdiction of Malpaisillo.

Jorge Luis Talavera's reaction followed disclosures by UNAN
specialists that the skeleton allegedly belonging to the mythic
Chupacabras was that of a domestic dog.

Talavera claims that there are several pieces of evidence [to
prove] that the skeleton was indeed changed at the UNAN-Leon's
laboratory. The first of these is that "the skeleton is
complete, although I kept a piece of its front leg". He also
claims that the bones turned from a dark color to a lighter one,
the teeth turned from pink to white, and from 22 teeth that he
counted there are now 40 as well as "more skin on the legs".

On Monday, Talavera will report to the university's Medical
Campus to claim the skeleton and return it to Malpaisillo. "They
offered to return it even aftery saying that they would not,
that they were going to keep it in the municipality because even
thought it may have been a dog, it was an uncommon one, given
that it fed on blood," he fumed.

He added that he is willing to turn it over to international
researchers for a better analysis of the animal's remains, given
the fact that local residents are dissatisfied with the UNAN
results.

# # # #

Translation (c)2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                           Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:25:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:09:49 -0400
Subject: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'


SOURCE: Diario El Nuevo Dia (San Juan, Puerto Rico
DATE: Saturday, September 2, 2000


As a result of press reports concerning the discovery of a
strange creature in Nicaragua, identified by that country's
peasants as the "Chupacabras", speculation was once more rife in
Puerto Rico...as well as the willingness for adventure.

For this reason, during a recent radio broadcast, Chemo Soto,
the intrepid mayor of Canovanas, indicated that he was hoping to
run into the "chupacabras" to battle the now-folkloric entity
and "shoot it to death". When his interviewer asked if he would
be willing to negotiate with the chupacabras rather than resort
to violence, the mayor claimed that he would do so, but that the
creature runs very quickly and that it would disappear at the
slightest hesitation.

Therefore, "Chemo Jones" reiterated that the best approach to
deal with the ravager of birds and quadrupeds would be  to shoot
it with no questions asked.


# ## #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:11:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

<snip>

 >>>The vast majority of UFO sightings are never reported
 >>>anywhere

 >>Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

 >Here we go again. What informed consent? This number (95%) has
 >no basis. Repetition doesn't make it correct.

 >Some facts:

 >1. 21.5% of 3201 sightings investigated by Battelle Memorial
 >Institute under Contract to the USAF Project Blue Book were
 >finally labelled as 'Unknowns' (all 4 of the evaluators had to
 >agree before a sighting could be listed as 'Unknown') completely
 >separate and distinct from the 9.3% listed as Insufficient
 >Information. So overall only 70% were identified.

 >2. According to the AIAA UFO Committee 30% of the 117 cases
 >studied by the U. of Colorado (Condon Report) could _not_ be
 >identified... again leaving only 70%.

Stan, List followers:

According to a later study by J. Allen Hynek and Center for UFO
Studies workers the USAF figure of unexplained  cases was
reduced to 5.8%.

CUFOS' Allan Hendry's later study of 1,307 cases had 8.7% UFO.

 >3. "The UFO Evidence" reports that there were 746 Unknowns
 >remaining of 4500 cases investigated, or more than 15%
 >Unknowns.

The numbers have always depended upon who was doing the
investigating, and when, and also who is doing the counting. How
can you say that the figure of 95% has no basis in fact, Stan?
Are you suggesting that certain investigators are lying about
their results?  I mean, there are differences of opinion about
all of this. If not, after 50 years there wouldn't be a
continuing controversy.

 >4. It is totally false reasoning, apparently subscribed to by
 >certain UK sceptics, that says that since most sightings can be
 >explained, it is likely that all can be.

Allan Hendry pointed out that, in his study, more cases were
identified just by pure luck than remained as UFOs.  I agree
that _if_ 30% is an accurate figure for, your word,
Unidentifiables, the hypothesis that the rest could probably be
solved with enough time, money and up to date info, would  be
questionable.

But, if the unidentified figure is only a few percent, this
could be a good assumption for a working hypothesis.

<snip>

 >Since 99.99% of the population do _not_ have Hemophilia,
 >nobody does. Since 99% of the people are not 7' tall, nobody
is.

The difference is, we have known, proven hemophiliacs, the cause
is understood, as well as the specific tests which can show that
a person is a hemophiliac.  No putative UFO has yet met tests
like these.

As to 7 foot tall arguments, one only has to measure one to
determine the validity of the argument.  No 7 foot tall UFOs
have been proven to exist.  Yet.

Could we agree to the following statement:  Investigations have
resulted in from 30% to a few percent unkowns, depending upon
who is doing the counting?

<snip>

 >It is the sightings that are _not_  explainable that matter.

OK, except that I think that Hendry was right when he pointed
out that what we have learned from the IFOs can probably tell us
a lot about the remaining unkowns.

This thread started out with the Linda incident in NYC. A
probable explanation has been identified: a strickingly similar
story in a novel.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                       Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:05:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:13:13 -0400
Subject: Chupacabras Killed in Nicaragua


Hi!

I received this answer from Mr. Kim Burrafato
<mailto:lensman@stardrive.org> of "La Prensa" newspaper in
Nicaragua:

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

Monday, September 04, 2000 12:40 AM

Virgilio,

I believe your preliminary analysis is an accurate one.  This
matter is far from being resolved.  What's needed is for someone
to speak to the examining pathologists and biologists directly.
There are a number of suspicious contradictions and varying from
proper procedure that raises the red flags as far as I'm
concerned.  I fear that the U.S.people may have gotten to them,
and "convinced" them of the need to squash this immediately.  I
hope I'm wrong..

Regards

Kim Burrafato

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


Comments anyone?

Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center  (Espaol)   http://ufomiami.nodos.com
Miami UFO Reporter (English)   http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/ind
ex.html
Depredador de Sangre(Espaol)    http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html
Hemo Predator (English)  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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 12:01:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:14:40 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >The Linda case involved, as Jim just pointed out, a flying
 >saucer hovering over Manhatten, beaming up Linda over the
 >Brooklyn Bridge, also seen by the Secretary General of the
 >United Nations.

 >Does this suggest that the Linda Case is an IFO or true UFO, or
 >something else?

First we need an absolutely unambiguous sighting report, from
someone whose name is on record. Until we have that, it's too
early to ask what the "thing" was. We don't know that the
reported event -- whatever its cause -- even happened.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                          Re: Alternative 3 - Redux

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 17:52:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:18:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Alternative 3 - Redux


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto [mailto:updates@sympatico.ca]
 >Sent: 29 August 2000 05:25
 >To: 02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers :;
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Alternative 3 - Redux


 >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.

Thanks for taking the time to post that Errol, it was very
interesting.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:01:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:23:19 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:25:54 -0700
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >I have spent many lonely days in NYC and the one thing that New
 >Yorkers absolutely do not do is 'look up'. Anyone in Manhattan
 >who walks around looking up is a tourista.

Very true!

When I was writing about the Linda case, I talked to truck
drivers at the NY Post plant near Linda's apartment building.
They, conceivably, could have seen the UFO. But they don't look
up. Why would they?

And once I was listening to a NYC radio talk show about UFOs. A
skeptic called up to defend one pro-UFO point -- that many
people wouldn't see a UFO if it passed overhead. She said she'd
seen a low-flying weather balloon one day, and no one on the
street looked up.

Me, I've seen one astounding aerial sight -- a commercial jet
(I'm not making this up) fly south over 5th Avenue, so low that
when it went further south and passed it World Trade Center
towers, it was lower than they were. Not a soul on the street
looked up to watch it.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

             S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's Theories

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 08:49:27 +0200
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:17:04 -0400
Subject: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's Theories


Source: Sunday Times (South Africa),

http://www.suntimes.co.za/2000/09/03/politics/pol02.htm

Stig

***

03 Sep 2000

Minister spreads bizarre AIDS theory

CAROL PATON

THE Minister of Health, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, has circulated
a bizarre theory on the origin of AIDS to all provincial
premiers and health ministers. It claims that the virus was
introduced into Africa by a worldwide conspiracy.

The theory claims that the Illuminati - an international
conspiracy to take over the world - introduced AIDS to Africa
through the smallpox vaccine in 1978 to reduce the African
population. It states that although the cure is known, it is
being kept secret until enough people have died.

The theory is contained in a book titled Behold, A Pale Horse
written by William Cooper.

Tshabalala-Msimang circulated a chapter from the book, which
deals with AIDS, to provincial health ministers at their last
meeting held two weeks ago.

The Western Cape Health Minister, Nick Koornhof, confirmed that
ministers had received the document.

It was also distributed to all premiers by Tshabalala-Msimang's
parliamentary officer, Johannes Kgatla. He said he had
distributed the extract "on the instructions of the minister".

Tshabalala-Msimang, who is in Burkina Faso a meeting, could not
be reached for comment.

Nono Simelela, head of the HIV/AIDS directorate, said she had
heard of the book "as something that lands on one's desk" but
had not read it.

Koornhof said that there was no explanation attached or reason
given by Tshabalala-Msimang for circulating it. He said he had
written to the minister expressing hope that she would distance
herself from the theories expressed in the book.

The circulated extract was attached to an anonymous covering
letter addressed to "all African health ministers". The letter
warns that the AIDS virus could be in any vaccine bought by or
donated to any African country.

In his book, Cooper provides a detailed account of how the
Illuminati came up with the idea to "increase the death rate"
after the baby boom following World War Two.

The plan was to "develop a microbe that would attack the immune
system and thus render the development of a vaccine impossible".

Cooper, a former US naval officer, has also written about UFOs
and alien conspiracies.

**

If you have thoughts about this article, then have your say in
one of our discussion forums, or send an e-mail to our editor at

suntimes@tml.co.za









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                      TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.4.00

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:27:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:21:23 -0400
Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.4.00


TMP NEWS
The E-News Service of The Millennium Project

http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews
http://persweb.direct.ca/psa

September 4, 2000

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports

9.4.00



CHUPACABRAS KILLED IN NICARAGUA?

Articles and information on the breaking news concerning the
killing of an unknown creature in Nicaragua, which according to
reports may be a "Chupacabras", which has been blamed by the
local populace for the killing of many domestic farm animals the
past few years. Some scientists say the skeleton may be just a
dog, but others disagree...

http://bloodpredator.homestead.com/index.html


NICARAGUAN EXPERTS STUDY "CHUPACABRAS"

The skeleton of the alleged "Chupacabras" was taken yesterday to
the medical campus of the UNAN at Leon in order to determine
what species it belongs to, according to biologist Pedrarias
Davila...

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/chupacabras.html


LIFE AMIDST GLACIERS THRIVES AND SURVIVES

A new study shows that life can not only survive beneath tons of
ice at the dark, near-freezing junctions between glaciers and
Earth, but actually thrive there. Researchers say the discovery
reinforces the notion that the bottom of the ice cap at Mars'
north pole should be a primary target in the search for life...

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/glacial_life_000829.html


REPORT: GLOBAL WARMING A THREAT TO SENSITIVE ECOSYSTEMS

The Earth's climate is warming so rapidly that many species of
wildlife and plants cannot survive the rising mercury and will
be wiped out, an environmental report warned on Wednesday...

http://CNN.com/2000/NATURE/08/30/global.warming.reut/index.html


SOVIET UFOLOGY / THE STARCHILD PROJECT

Dream Masters Studios presents a RealPlayer streaming
documentary on the current state of Russian ufology with Stanton
Friedman and the famous mystery "Starchild" skull, with Lloyd
Pye...

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/soviet.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 >
   Sep > Sep 5

                   Re: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:04:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:26:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:31:10 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >I suspect, though, that the more remarkable the UFO, the more
 >likely it is to get reported, viz., Levelland, 1957, and the
 >Hudson Valley sightings. The Brooklyn Bridge UFO, if true, would
 >have ranked among the most spectacular UFO sightings of all
 >time.

People with "high strangeness" sightings often don't report them
because they think they'll be laughed at. I've heard this many
times from abductees, and also from the few people I've known
who've had strange sightings. Most of the people I know who've
had any kind of sighting at all never reported their experience.
Most never even thought of doing it.

 >Had three friends from high school and college who were flight
 >hosts with American Airlines, based out of New York City. Used
 >to stay with them on the way to and back from Europe, or while
 >on the way to visit my then girlfriend in Montreal.

 >Star sightings? Saw Yoko Ono play a little club on E. 81st or
 >83rd, somewhere around there. (She got a bad rap. I thought she
 >was very good.) In the Village (where one of my friends lived),
 >once saw Sophia Loren come out of a showing of "Oh, Calcutta!"
 >Got busted the next day in Central Park, but that's another
 >(long) story. Last in NYC the weekend they were looking for
 >Kennedy's plane.

And I spent a lovely weekend in San Antonio once, watching a
production of Rossini's opera William Tell, and getting mightily
drunk on double margaritas. But that's another story....

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 >
   Sep > Sep 6

             Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith

From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:19:45 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith



The Duke of Mendoza, who is beginning to like horses more
than people, presents his weary compliments.

 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >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?

Or rather more miles, I think. But: because it's not masked from
every inland point on God's Earth, that's why. Here is something
or two from a private exchange I had a few days ago (before 29
August anyway) with Ian Ridpath:

[1] IR: It's true that the Orford Ness lighthouse is blanked to
prevent it from shining into the town of Orford but the cut-off
isn't as sharp as some people might think and the beam can
indeed be seen directly from the supposed landing site. The BBC
got it on video back in 1983 and I saw it again for myself on a
visit as recently as October 1998. I think even the lighthouse
keeper (or whatever they call them these days) was surprised to
learn that the beam could be seen that far inland, but he's
never been to look for himself, either.

[2]
    PB: >"I hadn't realized that the light shone directly
into the 'forest'"<

    IR: Nor do many others, of course.

    PB: >"This would have been obvious if I'd actually
checked the bearings of the light against a map, I
spose..."<

    IR: Not necessarily - a map can't give you the effect of the
intervening land. In fact, it wasn't until I went back to the
forest a couple of years ago that I realized the lighthouse was
visible only through that gap on the far tree line. Also,
nothing can quite prepare you for the surprise of having a
lighthouse beam shine into your eyes while standing in a forest.

I hope this helps. This does not:


 >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.

1. "Barely visible": If you've been there you wouldn't say
that.

2. The loom of a lighthouse lamp, as I've explained before, is
not as dim as you seem to think. I wonder if you have ever seen
one. I've seen loads, including this one.

3. As an educated American you, I suspect, would be astonished
at how little your compatriots seem to notice *or accept* when
beyond the confines of their own great nation. There are various
statements scattered throughout the mass of American testimony
on this case that powerfully suggest that many airmen, including
the security police, were remarkably -- to a British country
gent -- unaware of the local sky at night.

 >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

Don't know offhand. Don't care. I thought, following Jenny
Randles' suggestion, we were talking about Night One, not Night
Two. In any case the more elaborate of Halt's own descriptions
were inspired by what he saw through a Starlite scope whose use
and effects he didn't seem to understand (and why should he:
Halt isn't an infantryman). Which accounts for the "red sun-like
light... seen through the trees" that "moved about and pulsed"
that you mention.

 >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

You may find this hard to credit, sunbeam, but having absorbed
Bruce's comments on my original speculations (and information) I
was thinking perhaps they didn't after all. Not having been out
there in the woods at the time, and not knowing what mists were
about nor where, I would now regard reflections, refractions or
whatever of the red and green lights on the tower as iffy at
very best. Even including this comment from Halt's own mouth
about the events of Night One:

"Eventually, a group headed out to the forest. They reported
strange noises - animals, movement, like we heard two nights
later. As they approached the clearing, they reported seeing a
large yellowish-white light with a blinking red light on the
upper center portion and a steady blue light emanating from
underneath. The tower again reported nothing on radar." ["Inside
the Military UFO Underground A.J.S. Rayl - Omni]

Nonetheless, Col Halt speaks of "a steady blue light emanating
from underneath", and you will have noted my earlier comment
about the confusibility of blue and green light or pigment.

 >>And look at me all in a lather over his analysis.

 >No wonder.

Your humor bypass is well-known, Dave, and I'm sorry to tell you
what you best friends won't -- the scars show! -- but I didn't
know you'd had an ironectomy as well. Before you rattle on about
British aristocratic buffonery again, do reflect on what
"wonder" it is you find yourself in receipt of it, and take a
short course in irony (any edition of Fowler makes a good
start).

Let me spell this out slowly. I was *not*, and am *not*, in a
lather about Bruce's analysis. I am grateful for his remarks. I
don't, and you don't, and he doesn't, know enough about the
actual weather conditions to be sure about what may or may not
have veen visible from anywhere the airmen were that night. So I
put my speculations -- and they were never more than that --
about the additional colored lights seen on Night One into a
pending file. Despite Halt's comments quoted above, upon which a
true Klass Klown would probably have leapt like a tramp on a
kipper.

 >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.

I think you exaggerate the potential jeopardy. Indeed mitake it
for something else. The evidence (please go look at James
Easton's website!) would suggest that in fact Halt was covering
his ass -- trying to get his career *out* of jeopardy -- with
that memo. Not least because he & half his men had been
racketing around in the woods on Night Two, where they had no
jurisdiction, and by then UFO gossip was rampant on the base and
likely to leak (as indeed it did).

Curious point of UK law, with which Halt must have either been
fully aware or incompetent at his job if he wasn't: were Soviet
Spesnaz, even, to have landed en masse & without warning to
secure a USAF base, the protocol for the base commander is to
contact the local Mr Plod, as we call the police. Who then
requests aid from the commander of the local military district.
Under whose command SP or other INF-trained US units would then
be placed. In a real unexpected hot war this process would very
likely happen retrospectively, and no one would mind, but that
was hardly the case here. By letting his lads (and himself) nose
around all over the woods Halt was two stages away from doing
what we British aristocrats call "doing the right thing". Or
more likely we'd say what he *did* do was "not on". He surely
had some explaining to do to the MoD.

But, yes, Halt did witness something that to *him* was highly
unusual. I'm reminded of Hynek's comment on unidentified flying
objects: "Unidentified to whom?". Halt didn't know what he was
looking at, or with what. Very unusual indeed. But that does not
an alien visitation make.

best wishes
Pampered D. Macaroni
Mind The Riding Crop









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 6

                Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith

From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:39 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:21:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Brookesmith


Compliments of the Duke:


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:39:53 -0400

 >But aren't they correct, my criticisms? Fascinating
 >how you didn't address the substance of what I wrote.

Greg--

The answer is still "No" -- which was intended to address the
"substance" of what you wrote.

Now, I could be wrong (which case, sorry), but I suspect you
want to draw me out into some public discussion of what you
already know I think even if you don't and I'd be surprised if
you didn't: which is that the context of Cone's account of Janet
and the context of abductologists' "anecdotal" evidence are
completely different. It would take many words (and you know how
prolix I can be) to work through that argument, and I'm not
going to play that game.

And suppose Cone has discussed the Janet case in the
professional literature -- as he may have done, for all I know.
By your lights that would appear to give it some greater
credibility, apparently. Do you see what a twist you get into
here? Just where does "anecdotal" stop and "objective research"
begin when psychologists discuss individual cases?

The question is largely rhetorical. But you may like to think
about it. And we can chew it over when next we meet. But not
here.

best wishes
Psychodynamics D. Motherlover
Problem Child








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 6

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Cashman

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:23:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Cashman


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

I hate to belabor this point again but the proper qualifiers are

1) When there is an organized official UFO report receiving
    agency...

2) Run by the US Government (i.e. widely known)...

3) That discards 99% of close encounters...

4) And engages in dubious statistical practices...

95% of reported UFOs are classed as IFOs. One might expect a
somewhat different profile from

1) A general absence of known reporting points...

2) Non-official, largely non-professional reporting points...

3) Little followup or statistical analysis except for isolated
    local samples...

4) Emphasis away from NL cases...

But what effect that might have has never been properly
analysed.

Another largely unsupported by countervailing figure is that
only 10% of UFO sightings are reported. Hynek's interviews with
astronomers indicates a significant reservoir of unreported UFO
sightings by highly qualified observers, so at least there is a
tiny amount of research on that question. There is also some
reason to believe that more highly qualified observers are less
likely to report their sighting, especially if no officially
respectable resource exists.

We also have no idea about...

1) The degree of reporting prevalent today for all classes of non CE UFOs
2) The degree of reporting of CEs, today or ever.
3) The identification rate of CEs.

Without that knowledge, it is difficult to say anything concrete
about reporting of UFOs, much less the frequency of sightings
that are unreported.

------
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 >
   Sep > Sep 6

             International Space Station Visible With Naked Eye

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:05:12 +0200
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:24:50 -0400
Subject: International Space Station Visible With Naked Eye


Source: Chattanooga Times - Chattanooga Free Press,

http://www.timesfreepress.com/2000/sep/05sep00/WEBLN05SPACESTATIONA1.html

Stig

***

This story appeared in The Times & Free Press on Tuesday,
September 5, 2000 12:00:00 AM

International Space Station is visible with naked eye

BY DUANE W. GANG

Staff Writer

**

If you look up into the sky on a clear evening and see a steady,
bright light rapidly moving across the horizon, it is not a UFO.
It may not even be an airplane. It could be NASA's International
Space Station.

The International Space Station -- set to take on its first
expedition crew in October -- is visible with the naked eye at
certain times and locations. And it is not just the space
station that can be seen. If one knows where and when to look,
the Russian space station Mir, the space shuttle and other
satellites can be seen.

In fact, they are often some of the brightest objects in the
night sky.

Kelly Humphries, a National Aeronautics and Space Administration
spokesman, said, excluding the moon, the International Space
Station is the third brightest object in the night sky.

By the time it is completed, Mr. Humphries said the space
station will be the second brightest, after the planet Venus.

To see the space station, certain conditions must be met, Mr.
Humphries said. First, the observer must be in darkness and
located in a place where the object passes. Then, the space
station or satellite must be in the line of sight. The sun has
to be below the horizon yet still shining on the space station
or satellite. And, he said, the earth's shadow cannot be in the
way.

Mr. Humphries said the sun reflects off the space station or
satellite making it visible. But he also said that the space
station's size helps.

Henry Kuhlman, a physics professor at Southern Adventist
University who teaches astronomy, said it is actually quite easy
to see satellites with the unaided eye. People just need to know
what to look for, he said.

"You need to know your location," Dr. Kuhlman said. "It is very,
very specific. (Satellites) act as a mirror. It is sending the
light on a pretty narrow beam onto the earth."

So, how does one find out when and where to look for the
International Space Station and other satellites? Just hop on
the Internet and choose a city or enter the location's latitude
and longitude.

Go to spaceflight.nasa.gov and follow the links to real-time
data and sighting opportunities. One can either choose a city
from a provided list or type in more specific coordinates.
Chattanooga's coordinates are 35.046 latitude and -85.310
longitude.

The data will then indicate where in the sky to look and when to
look.

"You no longer have to guess," Mr. Humphries said. "You can
punch in your exact longitude and latitude."

Mr. Humphries said NASA has done work to automate the web site,
and it even allows users to print out a map of the night sky to
help people locate objects.

For a quicker and simpler approach, visit www.heavens-above.com.
The site, based in Germany and originally part of the German
Space Operations Center, posts sighting opportunities for a
variety of satellites.

The site gives users a list of more than 2 million locations to
choose from -- including Chattanooga. The site provides
coordinates for areas as specific as North Chattanooga, Highland
Park, Orchard Knob and the Hampton Heights subdivision.

"Most (people) are thrilled when they use the predictions to
then spot satellites, especially the brighter ones such as ISS,
Mir and the Shuttle," said Chris Peat, the developer of
heavens-above.

"The ISS and Mir are already brighter than most stars and the
ISS will be brighter than all of them when complete. Most
satellites are not this bright, but over a hundred can easily be
seen with the naked eye."

Mr. Peat, 41, who is English but lives in Munich, Germany,
originally developed heavens-above in 1999 as a hobby.

According to the site, the next opportunity to see the
International Space Station in the Chattanooga area is next
week. On Sept. 14 at about 6:30 a.m., the space station can be
seen for about five minutes, weather permitting.

The International Space Station travels over the Chattanooga
area at other times, but it is not always visible.

The next chance to see the Russian space station Mir is Sept. 13
at about 9:43 p.m. It will be visible for only a short period of
time.

**

Copyright � 2000, Chattanooga Publishing Co. All rights
reserved. This document cannot be reprinted without express
written 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 >
   Sep > Sep 6

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 04:18:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:27:39 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez


 >Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:31:10 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

<snip>

 >Greg, List

 >Slow Sunday/Labor Day Salutations!

Hi Sasquatch, Greg, All,

Dennis writes:

 >I now solemnly promise never to post anything here about which I
 >am not a working expert. (Well, you can dream, anyway!)

I can't even dream about it Dennis. Someone will come along and
spoil it by telling me it's just a sleep paralysis induced
hallucination. :)

 >Don't take it personal. I wasn't faulting you for not personally
 >checking every media outlet in town, just saying that it _might_
 >have been reported somewhere.

I always thought that the most likely suspect for any reports
would have been the local police precinct. Also, there is a city
wide grid of traffic lights that is monitored 24 hours a day.
I'm not sure if Greg or Budd ever checked out the local police
station for any relevant reports that may have been filed or
called in that night, or if anyone has checked with traffic
control to find out if any of the traffic lights in the grid
surrounding Linda's building suddenly went off line that night.
If the UFO cut off the cars' engine, I would imagine it affected
other nearby electrical devices, traffic lights, street lights,
the lights on the bridge etc.

The one thing that has always left me a bit stunned about this
case is why neither Linda or Budd ever reported her kidnapping
by Dan & Richard to the police or to the FBI. I wish I could
report my own UFO abduction(s) to the FBI without being locked
up or laughed off the phone so I kind of understand why Linda
wouldn't run to the police with her story. It's just that if it
was me, and two men kidnapped me off of the street like that,
I'd report them in a New York minute. Even if I had to tell them
about the 'alien abduction' part of it. I would want those two
lunatics off the street. I wouldn't feel safe until they were.
I've never understood why Linda or Budd chose not to report a
blatant crime (Linda's kidnapping by Dan & Richard) to the
proper authorities. Having the Feds track them down and attempt
to identify them could only have strengthened Budd's case. Not
to mention bringing the Feds into the middle of an alien
abduction investigation.

Greg, has this point (why the kidnapping was never reported)
ever come up in your discussions with Budd about Linda's case?
If so, 'why' wasn't it reported?

 >Star sightings? Saw Yoko Ono play a little club on E. 81st or
 >83rd, somewhere around there. (She got a bad rap. I thought she
 >was very good.)

You can get the same sounds at home in Texas! Just swing a cat
around by its tail while you blast a combination of Rap and
hyper-modern jazz on the stereo. <LOL>

 >In the Village (where one of my friends lived),
 >once saw Sophia Loren come out of a showing of "Oh, Calcutta!"

While walking in Central Park one afternoon I caught Elliot
Gould yelling at his (then) eight or nine year old son. He was
really dressing the kid down verbally. He got all uptight and
embarrassed when he noticed me. I just put my head down and kept
walking. Seeing a "star" that way wasn't as delightful an
experience as it could have been. It was more like walking into
someone's bathroom accidentally and catching them with their
pants down. <LOL>

 >Got busted the next day in Central Park, but that's another
 >(long) story.

Probably for rolling one of those homemade pipe tobacco cigs
that you love to smoke. How long did it take the police lab to
figure out that it was Captain Black and not Maui Wowee! <LOL>

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 21:54:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 00:51:55 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:01:49 -0400

 >>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:25:54 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>I have spent many lonely days in NYC and the one thing that New
 >>Yorkers absolutely do not do is 'look up'. Anyone in Manhattan
 >>who walks around looking up is a tourista.

 >Very true!

 >When I was writing about the Linda case, I talked to truck
 >drivers at the NY Post plant near Linda's apartment building.
 >They, conceivably, could have seen the UFO. But they don't look
 >up. Why would they?


Terry, Greg,

This rather misses the point. The alleged eyewitnesses on the
elevated Brooklyn Bridge would hardly had to have looked "up" at
all. In theory, the glowing UFO pulling Linda out of her
apartment would have been roughly eye-level. And these people
also reportedly had their cars stalled. And don't forget:
Dan/Richard wasn't looking up, either; he first saw the UFO as a
reflection in a gum wrapper! You might as well argue that, of
all New Yorkers, only those employed to guard the Sec. Gen. of
the UN at 3am in the morning, parked underneath an underpass
near Linda's apartment while on his way to a closed heliport,
chew gum. (Btw, does anyone know if he was even headed in the
right direction?)

And I say that not as a claimed expert about anything. I just
get a warm and fuzzy feeling whenever Greg agrees with an
observational NYC "expert" who isn't me.

 >And once I was listening to a NYC radio talk show about UFOs. A
 >skeptic called up to defend one pro-UFO point -- that many
 >people wouldn't see a UFO if it passed overhead. She said she'd
 >seen a low-flying weather balloon one day, and no one on the
 >street looked up.

 >Me, I've seen one astounding aerial sight -- a commercial jet
 >(I'm not making this up) fly south over 5th Avenue, so low that
 >when it went further south and passed it World Trade Center
 >towers, it was lower than they were. Not a soul on the street
 >looked up to watch it.

 >Greg Sandow


But _you_ did. So did the woman who saw the weather balloon
earlier. "Not a soul...?" Surely neither of you actually meant
to speak for the entire rest of the city. Or maybe you do?

As for Terry, next time you go to NYC, don't do it alone. May
you look up and not down. But I guess that would brand you as a
tourista.

Try the double margaritas. And relax. You won't be abducted
tonight. Not in NYC.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:11:52 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 00:56:59 -0400
Subject: Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 08:49:27 +0200
 >Subject: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's Theories on AIDS

 >Source: Sunday Times (South Africa),

 >http://www.suntimes.co.za/2000/09/03/politics/pol02.htm

 >Stig

 >***

 >03 Sep 2000

 >Minister spreads bizarre AIDS theory

 >CAROL PATON

 >THE Minister of Health, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, has circulated
 >a bizarre theory on the origin of AIDS to all provincial
 >premiers and health ministers. It claims that the virus was
 >introduced into Africa by a worldwide conspiracy.

 >The theory claims that the Illuminati - an international
 >conspiracy to take over the world - introduced AIDS to Africa
 >through the smallpox vaccine in 1978 to reduce the African
 >population. It states that although the cure is known, it is
 >being kept secret until enough people have died.

 >The theory is contained in a book titled Behold, A Pale Horse
 >written by William Cooper.


Cooper did not originate the theory and merely repeated what
he has heard.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

              CPR-Canada News: Hazlet, Saskatchewan Crop Circle

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:16:55 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 01:00:04 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Hazlet, Saskatchewan 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

September 5, 2000

_____________________________


HAZLET, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


Preliminary Report - September 6, 2000

Hazlet, Saskatchewan
August 24, 2000

Report received this afternoon of another circle in
Saskatchewan, at Hazlet, near Swift Current. Report received
from farmer Ellis Randy. First found in morning by Ellis while
combining the field on August 24.

Formation is a 22' diametre circle, in duram wheat. Very neat
and tight clockwise spiral lay pattern, a "perfect circle", with
no damage to plant stalks, entry / exit paths, etc. reported
(circle is again in a field with no tramlines).

Digital aerial photo already taken by a local neighbor who is a
pilot, and I should have a copy shortly. Farmer has also taken
ground photos, copies pending of these as well.

Ellis' wife Heather reported odd feelings when she stepped
inside the circle, like suddenly having had " too much coffee",
which she described as like feeling some kind of energy inside
the formation. Also some unusual UFO / alien -related dreams a
couple of weeks before.

Both Ellis and Heather are open-minded and curious about the
crop circle phenomenon, especially after having it finally
"arrive on their doorstep", and don't attribute this circle to
pranksters, based on their physical examination.

The circle is well into the field, not visible from any nearby
pathways or roads.

The circle has also been filmed by a CBC affiliate film crew
from Swift Current.

This is the sixth formation reported in Canada for 2000.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                     Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:40:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 01:02:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - McCoy


Hello, all, buenos dias Scott,


 >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:25:40 -0400
 >Subject: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'

 >SOURCE: Diario El Nuevo Dia (San Juan, Puerto Rico
 >DATE: Saturday, September 2, 2000

 >As a result of press reports concerning the discovery of a
 >strange creature in Nicaragua, identified by that country's
 >peasants as the "Chupacabras", speculation was once more rife in
 >Puerto Rico...as well as the willingness for adventure.

 >For this reason, during a recent radio broadcast, Chemo Soto,
 >the intrepid mayor of Canovanas, indicated that he was hoping to
 >run into the "chupacabras" to battle the now-folkloric entity
 >and "shoot it to death". When his interviewer asked if he would
 >be willing to negotiate with the chupacabras rather than resort
 >to violence, the mayor claimed that he would do so, but that the
 >creature runs very quickly and that it would disappear at the
 >slightest hesitation.

 >Therefore, "Chemo Jones" reiterated that the best approach to
 >deal with the ravager of birds and quadrupeds would be to shoot
 >it with no questions asked.

 ># ## #

 >Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology


Well pards, I've been a hunter and grew up the son of a hunter,
with the 'Chupacabras' it fails some basic lessons of hunting.

1. Don't shoot it unless your'e prepared to eat it. (this goes
for Bigfoot hunters too.)

2. Clearly identfy what your'e shooting at. Cougars tend not to
wag their tail, and do not go"Woof" (this acutually happened to
my Pop who almost shot a neighbor's Great Dane.)

3. If you do manage to get a shot off, or several,      as the
case may be, this is important, -make shure you hit somthing
vital. A  pissed off ah, Bigfoot  or Chupacabra would not be
good.

4. Getting good confimation that what you just offed is what
you were meaning to ah, kill, would be important (see lesson #2)

Thanks,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes

From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 19:26:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 01:02:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes


 >Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:11:30 +0100
 >From: Dave Bowden >grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?

 >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.

But later in your post you stated the footage ONLY shows UFOs,
which does it show, an unidentified flying object or an alien craft?

 >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.

Is it your expert opinion that this military helicopter is also
responsible for the crop formation that was alleged to have been
created by the 'FT' that Chris Martin captured on video?

 >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'.

A similar report still sits on the Lost Haven website that you
have admitted to being a contributor to. How credible are your
associates for portraying the facts about UFO sightings?

 >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.

How does Chris feel about his footage being promoted as showing
the alien visitors themselves?

 >Cutting to the chase however, we have other stuff which just
 >doesn't fit any category.

Not even alien?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

              Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 22:49:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 07:56:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & You
 >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:36:12 -0400

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & You
 >>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 14:48:33 -0400

Greg, (see, not too hard to say allo)

<snip>

 >That said, I'm grateful to Serge for recommending an impressive
 >five year-old scientific paper on the important topic of False
 >Memory Syndrome, especially one questioning whether such a
 >condition even exists. I'm grateful, even though I'm familiar
 >with these discussions, and have read other papers questioning
 >FMS. I don't want to shock Serge too much, but the thinking in
 >the paper he insists that I read might be newer to him than it
 >is to me.

<snip>

Please refer to "Observation 1" below where it is demonstrated
that you didn't know about this 1995 paper in January 1999. You
_never_ _ever_ mentioned the works of Kenneth Pope in _any_ of
your posts since 1995.

I would like also to know, if it's not asking too much, when
exactly you got familiar with such work. Pardon my curiosity
since you addressed the subject of False Memory Syndrome in 1999
in those words:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m30-050.shtml
Re: Abduction - The Issue Of Reality

<snip>

 >We need to use a little common sense when we talk about memory.
 >Recovered memories are tricky, no doubt about it. But some of
 >the writing from critics of recovered memory makes you wonder
 >how any of us could ever trust our minds at all. That was one
 >feeling I had after reading Elizabeth Loftus's book (she being
 >the psychologist most cited in attacks on recovered memories).

<snip>

Strange that only Loftus is mentioned. Especially when others
like Crews, Dawes , Goldstein, Farmer, Ketcham, Ofshe, Watters,
Underwager, Wakefield and Wassil-Grimm are noted in the Kenneth
Pope review which you are sooooo familiar with.

But back to today...

<snip>

 >That said, I'm grateful to Serge for recommending an impressive
 >five year-old scientific paper on the important topic of False
 >Memory Syndrome, especially one questioning whether such a
 >condition even exists.

<snip>

If you knew the Kenneth Pope paper, you wouldn't say that.

Start quote

On one hand, it is crucial that we review all available evidence
and consider the implications that the claims may be valid.

[...]

On the other hard it is equally crucial that we allow for the
possibility that the evidence and logic do not convincingly
establish the validity of some or perhaps any such claims.

End quote

So, the FMS proponents may be wrong; they may also be right. I
know this must be a pain in the neck for abductologists.
Imagine: they could be playing with the minds of people, they
could be implanting false memories. Life sucks.

Are you still grateful? I must ask the question as there are
obvious doubts concerning your objectivity.

 >I wonder how much Serge knows
 >about my abduction work. I might refer him to my essay "The
 >Abduction Conundrum," which originally appeared in Dennis
 >Stacy's publication, The Anomalist, and can now be found on my
 >UFO website, http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo.

<snip>

Please refer to "Observation 2" below where it is established
that you seem to ignore some fundamentals your own work.


<snip>

 >>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

 >This is patronizing nonsense. I'll leave myself out of any
 >further comments I make, and say how offended I am for Kevin's
 >and Peter's sake. I've disagreed with both of them, but I'd
 >never insult them the way Serge has. Kevin has a PhD in
 >psychology, and wrote an abduction book that describes at great
 >length many of the psychological issues involved.

<snip>

I am sorry to bring this up again, but I suggest you read the
following posts.

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m26-027.shtml
Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m28-009.shtml
Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m27-044.shtml
Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle

I am perfectly justified to ask Kevin Randle to read
http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

I am justified also to ask an owner of a PhD in psychology if he
knows about a fundamental paper in his domain, to ask for
enlightenment in order to heighten a discussion. You know, let's
stop hiding behind the conformity to group norms and the
obedience to authority. Put the less you can between yourself
and the search, not for truth, but for honesty. Truth you can't
find. Honesty is a choice.

<snip>

 >Peter also
 >wrote an abduction book, that, like Kevin's, gives ample
 >evidence of the care he's taken in studying the background of
 >this phenomenon.

<snip>

Peter on PTSD:

Start quote

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m27-016.shtml
Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith

 >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.

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m29-027.shtml
Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith

 >Serge, is this a rib? Is this one of the boys in the office? You
 >want *references* for an *opinion*??

End quote

Wow, woohh. I'm on my knees.

<snip>

 >I'd feel free to point out things both men seem
 >to ignore, or that I interpret differently from them. But I'd
 >never talk about them as if they were careless children, as
 >Serge does here.

<snip>

Timely call for reinforcements. But this is an ambush. You
cannot escape reality.

Final words:

http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml
Memory, Abuse, and Science:
Kenneth S. Pope

Start quote

Refusing to consider divergent evidence, disallowing doubt or
skepticism, and discrediting anyone who disagrees, especially
through unsupported claims about character are the hallmarks of
pseudoscience.

End quote

My point exactly,

Serge Salvaille

Observations and contradictions:

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

Observation 1:

<snip>

 >I don't want to shock Serge too much, but the thinking in
 >the paper he insists that I read might be newer to him than it
 >is to me.

<snip>

Contradiction:

The Abduction Conundrum - Greg Sandow
at http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

Start quote

Researchers who study hypnosis and memory haven't quite have the
courage -- if that's the word -- to set up real traumatic
situations. (Though Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who
conducts her own kind of memory experiments, once got children
to falsely believe that they'd been lost in a mall. 13 )

End quote

Kenneth Pope's paper at
http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

Start quote

Does the trauma specified in the lost-in-the-mall experiment
seem comparable to the trauma forming the basis of false memory
syndrome? Loftus (1993) described the implanted traumatic event
in the shopping-mall experiment as follows: "Chris was convinced
by his older brother Jim, that he had been lost in a shopping
mall when he was five years old" (p. 532). Does this seem, for
example, a reasonable analogy for a five-year-old girl being
repeatedly raped by her father? Pezdek (1995; see also (Pezdek,
Finger, & Hodge, 1996) has suggested that this may not be the
case. In attempting to arrive at a more analogous situation-that
of a suggested false memory of a rectal enema-her experimental
attempts at implantation of a suggestion had a 0% success rate.

[...]

On the other hard it is equally crucial that we allow for the
possibility that the evidence and logic do not convincingly
establish the validity of some or perhaps any such claims.

End quote

Further contradictions:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1997/sep/m25-023.shtml
Re: Scientific American 'Explains' Abductions

Greg Sandow addressed the Loftus position on false memories
_without_ _ever_ mentioning Kenneth Pope's paper.

This was in 1997.

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m30-050.shtml
Re: Abduction - The Issue Of Reality

Same. This was 1999.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Observation 2:

 >I wonder how much Serge knows
 >about my abduction work. I might refer him to my essay "The
 >Abduction Conundrum," which originally appeared in Dennis
 >Stacy's publication, The Anomalist, and can now be found on my
 >UFO website, http://www.gregsandow.com/ufo.

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m29-013.shtml
Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

 >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."

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m01-024.shtml
Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

 >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.

Contradiction:

The Abduction Conundrum - Greg Sandow
at http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

Start quote

It's true, of course, that anyone who comes to him knows what he
believes, and that in his support groups it's taken for granted
that abductions are real. So clearly he's at least a little
ingenuous when he says he'll never tell anyone that they've
really been abducted. He might not say the words, but the very
fact of a relationship with him implies what isn't spoken.

End quote








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                          Filer's Files #35 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:05:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:01:40 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #35 -- 2000


Filer's Files #35 -- 2000,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director,  Mutual UFO Network Eastern
September 4, 2000, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, C. Warren
Webmaster. http://www.filersfiles.com. - Majorstar@aol.com.

UFO REPORTS RELATIVELY LOW:  Heavy rains in Eastern US,
sweltering heat in South, fires in West and a mass ejection of
electrified gas from the sun's corona on September 1, 2000,
kept UFO reports low. Sunspot activity remains fairly high in
recent weeks but sightings are reported in New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Canada, and Pakistan.  Debunker Phil
Klass denies that the US Government has ridiculed those who see
UFOs.

NEW JERSEY SILVER UFO SPOTTED

POMPTON PLAINS -- Chis writes that he observed a UFO on August
8, 2000.  It was silver, no lights, and at > first it seemed
long looking but changed shape to typical UFO or disc look.  My
brother and sister saw it too, but I had the first and closest
view.  I took about a two minute video showing the UFO rotating
frame by frame.  Thanks to Chris.

PENNSYLVANIA DISC FLIES OVER POWER PLANT

POTTSTOWN -- I was observing the night sky from a hill in Berks
County, west of town on August 20, 2000, at 10:00 PM.  I saw a
disc shaped object moving slowly and silently from south to
north above the Limerick Nuclear Power Plant.  I was 6 miles
from the power plant and from my point of view, the UFO
appeared about 1/2 inch across, The sky was clear. The object
was flying at approximately 700 feet.  I used binoculars and
could see the object clearly.  It was transparent and glassy
around the entire surface, with bright lights, blue, white,
red, and orange, flashing across the center of the object. I
also observed another, tiny white flashing light below and to
the north of the object, traveling near it. I observed the disc
until it was no longer in my field of vision.  Thanks to Peter
Davenport Director National Reporting Center
http://www.ufocenter.com/

TENNESSEE CYLINDER SHAPED UFO

MT. JULIET -- I saw two cylinder shaped UFOs in close formation
on August 21, 2000.  They were moving across the sky to the
southwest at 7:35 PM. The sun had just gone below the horizon
and the objects seemed to be reflecting sunlight. I'm not sure
of their altitude but it must have been at least ten thousand
feet for them to still be reflecting sunlight.  First, I
thought they were large military aircraft flying in formation,
but as they passed overhead and the trailing object seemed to
break formation and continue in a more southerly direction.
They moved fairly quickly and made no noise.  Thanks to Peter
Davenport Director National Reporting Center
http://www.ufocenter.com/

TAKING A CLOSE LOOK AT ROSWELL CRASH DEBRIS PHOTOS

James Bond Johnson the photographer of the Roswell crash debris
flown to General Ramey's office in 1947 writes, "We have
further evidence that this series of historic photos is not
part of a staged "press conference" but the press camera
chronicling a high level initial personal investigation of the
strange wreckage by the commanding general of the 8th U. S. Air
Force.  "Neil Morris from the University of Manchester,
England' has made fascinating observations that some of the
"debris" displayed in my six Ramey Office Photos "move around"
in some of the shots.  I spent some time carefully comparing
these photo enlargements.  I completely concur with Neil that
many of the debris objects in fact ARE arrayed differently in
some shots!  Further, the later photo taken of Warrant Officer
Newton and the debris was drastically "sanitized" and a number
of key objects seen in my six shots -- including the bars upon
which the glyphs appear -- are not to be seen in the Newton
shot.  It occurs to me that the likely reason for this strange
development is that as General Ramey apparently was conducting
his initial examination during the photo shoot he would have
been picking up various pieces, looked them over and then
replaced them on the pile.  This also is consistent with our
growing beliefs that the Ramey Message -- which obviously is
being read by General Ramey during the photo shoot -- contained
information that caused General Ramey to take several drastic
and unprecedented actions immediately thereafter: 1. He
prevented any further exposure of the Roswell crash debris to
any known members of the media, or any other civilians.

2. He did not hold any "press conference" but only gave vague
answers on the phone or through his staff to questions by the
press.  He never mentioned the Roswell Incident again after
that day and ordered his staff -- at least Colonel Dubose and
Major Marcel -- to "NEVER" discuss this incident with anyone.

3. He ordered his weather officer, Warrant Officer Newton, to
rush to the general's office and after a hurried "briefing"
arranged for Newton to agree that the displayed debris was
"nothing but a weather device!"

4. Ramey then went immediately to radio station WBAP where he
broadcast live to the waiting world that the debris displayed
in his office -- earlier officially announced by the AAF as
being "a captured flying saucer" -- actually was "nothing but a
weather device!" It was quite extraordinary that an Air Force
commanding general in 1947 would take these kinds of personal
and official steps. Normally such announcements would have been
made through his PIO or other staff officer.

5. No member of the media EVER has been permitted to examine or
even to see this debris ever again, even though more than 53
years have passed. Thanks to Col. James Bond Johnson

MISSOURI CONTRAILS

FORSYTH -- I live up high on a ridge which looks toward the
south on September 1, 2000, while having breakfast on our deck,
I watched a precise line of contrails 6 in a row so far; they
are still doing them as I type.  They are short bursts of
contrails probably 10 to 20 miles in length, all in a row, and
the contrails persist and are gradually spreading out.  Earlier
they must have been doing this north of Forsyth because I also
looked directly above my house from the deck and there was two
contrails which had been done earlier because they were very
spread out and turning into cloud-like wisps.  These current
contrails look as if they are drifting slowly toward the
northwest.  Thanks to Ken in Forsyth seven777@inter-linc.net

CALIFORNIA UFO FLIES OUT OF THE PACIFIC OCEAN

PALOS VERDES PENINSULA -- Jeffrey Griffith writes several years
ago, two friends of mine were driving in a convertible along
the Palos Verdes Drive in L.A. County.  They saw a large
glowing light moving very swiftly underwater from the general
direction of just east of Santa Catalina Island towards them.
They watched the light surge toward the cliffs below, but their
view was blocked by the cliffs.  Suddenly a bright UFO flew up
over the cliff's edge and over their heads, and up the ravine
cut into the steep slope of the mountain.  They chased after it
with their sports car speeding up the road, then drove off the
road as high up as they could go.  They then ran further up the
hill toward residences high up the mountain.  Abruptly, they
were accosted by a policeman in an "odd" uniform and police
car, who asked them what they were doing there?  They told him
what they saw and that they were investigating it.  He told
them that they were trespassing on private property and that
they would have to leave, so they did. A few weeks later on the
same area, my friends were paced by a shiny, metallic disc for
some distance before it took off into the night sky.  Thanks to
Jeff Griffith  jwgriffith@earthlink.net   A site focused
exclusively on incidents involving UFOs and water is:
http://www.waterufo.net/index2.htm

CANADA FLYING BLACK TRIANGLE OVER NOVA SCOTIA

CAPE BRETON -- Eugene H. Frison the MUFON Provincial Director
reports that another Flying Black Triangle was observed in the
region by a new set of witnesses on August 1, 2000.  The local
newspaper carried an article claiming three of these flying
black triangles were spotted by multiple witnesses.  Again, on
August 13, 2000, another Flying Black Triangle was viewed by
multiple witnesses.  These sightings occurred in the River
Bourgeois area of Cape Breton near the Atlantic Ocean.   The
Cape Breton Post newspaper article August 25, 2000, contains a
good representation of one of the objects.  This photo was
taken from the television screen as the witness played the
master tape for the media.  Attempts are being made to obtain
copies. In January of this year, a paperboy observed another
Flying Black Triangle in a cemetery. This occurred in Cape
Breton (Glace Bay) and you published the incident in Filer's
Files #6-2000, with an update in #19- 2000.  I am presently
investigating these incidents for MUFON and will keep you
informed.  Thanks to Eugene H. Frison
genefrison@mail.auracom.com.

AUSTRALIAN REPORT OF DISAPPEARING AIRCRAFT

Harry Mason writes, "I have some input for you on the
disappearing aircraft technology?"  I have a friend in a
foreign country who is their top English language translator.
I will not name the country for her safety.  In the early
1980s, she went with a foreign military delegation from her
country to the USA to meet with top US Military.  She
translated for both sides.  One aspect of their visit was to
observe film and hard technology of the operation of a
"cloaking device."  This made ships, aircraft, or airfields
totally invisible in reflected light and radar wavebands.  It
was being offered to her country as an inducement to back US
policy.  The device was capable of retrofitting to any aircraft
etc.  There is "eyewitness" evidence of such a device in
operation at an RAF-NATO airbase on the Mull of Kintyre in
Scotland.  One day a bunch of golfers noticed a 'V' shape wave
rushing across the calm sea surface with a vague shimmering
space in the air above it -- similar to that seen in the movie
"Predator."  The 'V' wave of unsettled water and the shimmering
air shot towards them at a fair speed and the shimmering went
over their heads accompanied by a loud roaring noise -- exactly
in line with the airstrip.  They concluded that a high powered
invisible aircraft had approached low over the water and landed
at the airfield.  Thanks to Harry Mason orbitx@iinet.net.au

US AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS ROOSEVELT

Investigator John Thompson interviewed a crewman from the USS
Roosevelt who told of that the ship was operating near "Gitmo
Bay, Cuba. " On leaving the area on October 18, 1956, the ship
hit "something" that was submerged.  Whatever they hit, it
raised the fully loaded 64,000 ton ship out of the water nearly
three feet!  According to the retired chief they were never
told what they hit.  Scuttlebutt had it that they had hit a
submarine.  What is certain is that they did not hit a reef or
run-aground?  As far as hitting a submarine, the witness is
doubtful.  He said in his twenty-odd years in the Navy he never
heard of a carrier raising out of the water on hitting
something.  The ship soon after went into dry dock in Virginia,
to repair the considerable damage done.   Thanks to John
Thompson and ISUR.
http://www.isur.com/cases/case_fil.cgi?file=100102

DESTRUCTION OF RUSSIAN SUB KURSK

  I am Beth of the Downers grove sighting.  I read Filer's Files
#34, and I feel I must respond to one of the articles on UFO's
and the ocean.  I feel that just because the reason for
underwater crashed and sudden boat sinking are not confirmed
does not mean UFO's are abundant in our sea.  I feel that we
are not given credit for how much we do know about our sea. In
fact there are some very plausible explanations for these
crashes and sinkings.  The seas are extremely volatile.  They
act in sudden changes.  Supercells clouds that form above the
warmer waters of the ocean (like the Bermuda Triangle) can
produce sudden and violent down drafts that can reach over 200
miles per hour with no notice and very little evidence of the
occurrence.  If any aircraft was caught in such a terrible
force, they would crash and sink so fast, there would be
virtually no time to radio help or location.  There are
literally tons of a substance called methane hydrate under the
sediment at the bottom of the sea.  When this sediment is
ruptured or disturbed, then Methane Hydrate releases a lot of
methane gas.  For example, when you are drawing water from a
water cooler in an office, the bubbles start small at the
bottom and then grow until they reach the top and burst,
sometimes hitting the top of the blue container.  The same sort
of thing happens here, but it takes over two miles before it
hits the surface, and then the sea literally boils.  If a ship
was passing over an area where this gas was being released, the
ship would loose buoyancy and sink, immediately.  Also, if you
were a sub and were cruising along at 12 knots and hit a huge
bubble of methane gas, you would feel like you hit another sub,
and if that highly combustible gas were to be drawn in, you
would probably explode.  This, happens without warning.  The
firing of a test missile may have disturbed the sediment.
Methane Hydrade is so powerful, it is being considered as a
fuel source.  Methane Hydrate released from the ocean
contributes to global warming 400 time more than human
pollutants. Thanks to Beth. Editors Note: We may never know
what happened to the Kursk, but the Russian government is
sticking to their story that their sub hit an underwater object
most likely a submarine.  I got a call from a Navy diver who
claims they see some very strange craft underwater.

NORTH POLE ICE 'TURNS TO WATER'

An American scientist DR James says the ice cap at the North
Pole has melted.  Oceanographer McCarthy, says he found a
mile-wide stretch of open ocean on his trip this August to the
North Pole aboard a Russian Ice Breaker.  Some experts believe
it is the first time in more than 50 million years that the
North Pole has been covered in water rather than ice.  They
point to it as further evidence of global warming -- but other
scientists say movements in polar ice regularly create gaps in
the ice cap -- including at the North Pole itself.  "It was
totally unexpected," he said.  Another scientist on the cruise,
paleontologist DR Malcolm C. McKenna, said the ship was able to
sail all the way to the North Pole through only a thin crust of
ice, and arrived on the spot to discover no ice at all.  "I
don't know if anybody in history ever got to 90 degrees north
to be greeted by water, not ice," DR McKenna was quoted as
saying.  In the past the North Pole has been covered by 9 feet
of ice.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_888000/8
88235.stm

EGYPT  PILOTS MAY SUE US OVER CRASH PROBE

CAIRO -- Egypt's Pilots' Federation has threatened to file a
lawsuit against the US President if the US investigation
committee fails to consider all possible causes of last year's
EgyptAir plane crash, including missiles and technical failure.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said earlier
this  month it had been unable to conclude what caused the
crash of Flight 990 from New York to Cairo, which plunged into
the Atlantic on October 31, 1999, killing all 217 aboard.  US
says they are working on a theory that relief copilot Gamil
al-Batouti deliberately crashed the plane.  The NTSB's
assessment dismissed Egyptian theories that technical problems
on the Boeing 767 or that surface-to-air missiles downed the
craft," said Ali Murad, of the Egyptian Pilots' Federation.
`They have no tangible evidence that Batouti committed
suicide,'' Murad said. ``But they have many witnesses of the
fireballs flying towards the plane,'` The Egyptians want the US
authorities to release radar images and to question an air
traffic controller, as well as two pilots from Germany and
Jordan said to have seen a missiles while flying in the area at
the time of the crash.  Five fishermen are possible witnesses.
EgyptAir Chairman Mohamed Fahim Rayan said last week he was 99
percent sure a technical problem in the elevator system caused
the crash, citing Boeing's bulletin as evidence to inspect the
elevators on the horizontal tail surface. Thanks to Ed Komarek
ekomarek@mail.caironet.com and Esmat Salaheddin (Reuters)

PAKISTAN UFO LANDS

DERA GHAZI KHAN -- An UFO from the west side landed in the
tribal area of Dera Ghazi Khan on August 27, 2000, reports
reaching here said.  The UFO which was seen flying over Fort
Munro and Rakhi Gaaj towns hit the ground between Baghalchor
and Rounghin, some 80km from here, at 8.30 PM.  Sources in the
Border Military Police 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.  The area where the
UFO probably landed was deserted and was the second UFO which
landed in the tribal area in the last two weeks.  Its wreckage
was removed by members of sensitive agencies a few days ago.
Thanks to Tariq Birmani and Don Ware donware@earthlink.net

Editors Note:  Some of the seven objects streaking through the
skies in Balochistan on August 15, were probably Ghauri III
missiles, tested by Pakistan deliberately on India's
Independence Day.  The missiles are being developed by Pakistan
to carry its recently exploded atomic bomb against its
potential adversaries such as India. Historically, when the US
and other countries were developing atomic weapons UFOs were
also frequently seen and reported around such areas as White
Sands Proving Grounds.  Intelligence sources indicate Pakistan
has likely obtained the two-stage North Korean Taepodong-1
missile, which uses the Nodong as its first stage.  The rash of
UFO sightings probably indicate the visitors are interested in
Pakistan's nuclear missile progress.

"SPYTIME" THE UNDOING OF JAMES JESUS ANGLETON,

Although a novel "SPYTIME," this latest work by William Buckley
is clearly identified as based on Angleton's career over three
decades in the OSS and CIA, even if half the pages are taken up
by an account of Antonio Crespi, presumably a fictional recruit
and Angleton protg.  According to reviewer Allen Weinstein
the result is an "absorbing but at times disconnected
narrative, illustrating some of modern American tradecraft's
recurrent dilemmas."   Please see below and the follow on
report for a   possible UFO/Mj12 connection:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~rigoletto/reports/tim_james_angleto
n.html

POLICY OF DEBUNKING UFOs BEGAN WITH ROBERTSON PANEL

Debunker Phil Klass writes, "This is to challenge the false
allegation by Jeff Chandler in FF #34 that there is a U.S.
Government "policy of aggressive attacks on [UFO] witnesses,"
and your claim that "there really is a national policy to
ridicule UFO reports."  I herewith offer to contribute $1,000
to your favorite charity for each and every one of the many
dozens of UFO reports publicized in Filer's Files since its
inception--in response to which ANY U.S. Government agency has
issued a statement which "attacked" the person(s) reporting a
UFO sighting or "ridiculed" the report.  Excluded from my
generous offer are the USAF reports which it issued in the
mid-1990s based on its investigation into the "Roswell
Incident," which the USAF conducted at the request of the
General Accounting Office.

     You err in claiming that the Robertson Panel of five top
scientists (including a Nobel Prize winner) "was formed at the
request of the White House to quell the situation."  In fact,
the Robertson Panel was convened by the CIA to assess the best
UFO cases to assist that agency in deciding whether to request
White House approval to launch its own research into UFOs.
This was disclosed in documents declassified and released in
late 1978--as reported in my book "UFOs: The Public Deceived."
(Chapter 3) You err also in your claim that the Robertson Panel
was "given several poor UFO cases to examine."  Among the many
UFO cases presented to the Panel were TWO home-movies of UFOs,
taken by Coomamder Delbert Newhouse and Nicholas Mariana.
According to David M. Jacobs' book "The UFO Controversy in
America" (P. 92):  "The Project Blue Book staff believed the
films were among the best evidence it had to give credence to
the extraterrestrial intelligence hypothesis."

     Reference your claim that "CIA documents reveal one of the
panel's recommendations was that a policy of debunking UFO
reports should be instigated."  What a gross, perverse
distortion of the Robertson Panel's wise recommendations,
highlights of which are quoted below:

     "(1)    Pursuant to the request of the [CIA] Assistant
Director for Scientific Intelligence, the undersigned Panel of
Scientific Consultants has met to evaluate any possible threat
to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects
(`Flying Saucers'), and to make recommendations thereon.  The
Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizant
intelligence agencies, primarily the Air Technical Intelligence
Center (USAF), and has reviewed a selection of the best
documented incidents.

     "(2)    As a result, the Panel concludes that the evidence
presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication
that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to
national security.  We firmly believe there is no residuum of
cases which indicates phenomena which are attributable to
foreign artifacts capable of hostile actions, and that there is
no evidence that the phenomena indicate a need for the revision
of current scientific concepts.

     "(3)    The Panel further concludes that the continued
emphasis on reporting of these phenomena does, in these parlous
times, result in a threat to the orderly functioning of the
protective organs [i.e., Armed Services] of the body politic.
We cite as examples THE CLOGGING OF CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATIONS
BY IRRELEVANT REPORTS, THE DANGER OF BEING LED BY CONTINUOUS
FALSE ALARMS TO IGNORE REAL INDICATIONS OF HOSTILE ACTION
[i.e., Soviet air attack], and the cultivation of a morbid
national psychology in which SKILLFUL HOSTILE PROPAGANDA COULD
INDUCE HYSTERICAL BEHAVIOR AND HARMFUL DISTRUST OF DULY
CONSTITUTED AUTHORITY.  [Emphasis added.]

     "(4)    In order most effectively to strengthen the
national facilities for the timely recognition and appropriate
handling of true indications of hostile action, and to minimize
the concomitant dangers alluded to above, the Panel recommends:

     "(a)    That the national security agencies take immediate
steps to strip 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 more promptly and to react more
effectively to the TRUE INDICATIONS OF HOSTILE INTENT OR
ACTION. [emphasis added.]

     "(5)    We suggest that these aims may be achieved by an
integrated program designed to reassure the public of the TOTAL
LACK OF EVIDENCE OF INIMICAL FORCES BEHIND THE [UFO] PHENOMENA,
to train personnel to RECOGNIZE AND REJECT FALSE INDICATIONS
QUICKLY AND EFFECTIVELY, AND TO STRENGTHEN REGULAR CHANNELS FOR
THE EVALUATION OF AND PROMPT REACTION TO TRUE INDICATIONS OF
HOSTILE MEASURES."  [Emphasis added.]

     In the early 1950s, when the Robertston Panel made these
recommendations, the U.S. was desperately trying to build a
radar network which could warn of possible Soviet nuclear
attack.  But we were still largely dependent on volunteer human
observers (of which I was one: from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m. on Tuesday
nites).  The Robertson Panel wisely warned of the REAL threat
to national security: spurious UFO reports, clogging
communications channels, etc.  Also, spurious UFO reports
breeding "harmful distrust of duly constituted authority."
Thanks to Phil Klass.

Editor's Note:  I certainly am aware of the former Soviet
threat, but as a former Intelligence Office I feel the US
Government made a major mistake in not handling UFOs in a forth
right manner.  They potentially lost thousands of UFO sighting
reports, and some could have been Soviet aircraft, because
their policy of ridicule.  Major Keyhole tells of a sighting by
an Electra airline crew approaching Washington when a strange
flying object hurtled toward the plane.  To the terrified crew
they seemed only seconds from a fatal collision in January 3,
1965.  This started a flap of reports and a huge lying disc
flashed over NASA Wallops Island, Virginia two days later.  The
satellite tracking chief , Dempsey Bruton, calculated its speed
at over a hundred miles a minute.  According to the book
"Aliens from Space", Major Keyhole states, "Dempsey Bruton, and
other Space Administration observers at Wallops Island, were
labeled incompetent.  Without the slightest investigation, AF
Headquarters said the Navy radar was found to be faulty, then
for good measure it branded the radar operators as
inexperienced. Within forty-eight hours, dozens of other
factual reports were hastily explained as mistakes or hoaxes."
I ask anyone who has called a government agency and had them
ridicule your UFO report to please contact me.  I personally
have had this happen when contacting Mc Guire Air Force Base
concerning sightings near the base.

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that
appear on recent Shuttle Tape footage.  Jeff has noticed that
when NASA is picking up UFOs they have tendency to first zoom
in to observe the UFO better and then they cut the feed to the
outside world. Jeff spends hundreds of hours watching the
shuttle broadcasts from space.  He is probably more of an
expert at watching NASA tapes than most NASA personnel.  Even
those onboard the shuttle are unlikely to see what Jeff does
because of his experience watching numerous missions.  Using
Jeff's directions I have learned to pickup up the difference
between space junk, ice crystals and real UFOs.  Using his
experience you can also learn the difference.  One segment has
24 UFOs watching the shuttle from space. I feel confident we
could go into a court of law and convince any jury that there
are UFOs moving at high speed around the Earth.  Send $25 to
Jeff Challender 2768 Mendel Way Sacramento, California
95833-2011

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Another Chupacabra Prowls Malpaisillo

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 06:11:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:06:24 -0400
Subject: Another Chupacabra Prowls Malpaisillo


SOURCE: DIario La Prensa de Nicaragua
DATE: September 6, 2000

ANOTHER CHUPACABRAS PROWLS MALPAISILLO
Maricely Linarte--Corresponsdent

Jose Luis Talavera says he is expecting it to attack sheep, and
its ready to hunt it. "We stay awake all night when the
Chupacabras is on the prowl. We take shifts so we won't be so
tired, but it's becoming unbearable," states Talavera.

"Its a fact that I'm not going to withdraw [the creature], after
they swapped the skeleton, what they're planning to do remains
to be seen. Why should I bother? Let them discard it. " he
added.

LEON.- The new specimen prowling Jorge Luis Talavera's sheep
pen, located at Km. 154 of Malpaisillo at the San Lorenzo Ranch
in the village of El Barrio,  is slightly larger than an a
Pekinese dog. This is the same location where the skeleton of
the alleged "chupacabras" turned up.

Talavera told LA PRENSA that the animal comes up to the pen,
which is adjacent to the living area, and will be allowed to
attack a number of sheep to as bait. [Talavera] will then fire
his shotgun at it, as he did 15 days ago with the first animal.

--A White Chupacabras--

"We'll let it taste blood once more, since that's the way the
seem to develop the taste for sucking sheep. Once it's shyness
has been overcome, I'll hunt it down," stated Talavera, adding
that the new animal prowling around the property is white in
color.

The rancher indicated that the family is tired of keeping watch
for over a month, when the exsanguination of the area's sheep
began.

Concerning recovery of the alleged Chupacabras skeleton he was
scheduled to make this week at the UNAN-Leon's laboratory, he
stated that he would no longer do so, since there was little
sense in spending money on transportation from Malpaisillo to
Leon to collect the bones of a "dog".

Edmundo Torres, vicechancellor for research at UNAN-Leon, denied
Talavera's statement that the university was planning to keep
the remains of the specimen discovered. "This is absolutely
untrue. We have never had any direct communication with
Talavera--only with the mayor of Malpaisillo. We have no
interest in keeping its remains," Torres explained.

He further added that they hope Jorge Luis Talavera will present
himself in order to formally turn the skeleton over to him,
since it is  does not belong to the institution. "If he no
longer wishes to remove it, we will confirm this to make
decisions until they authorize it, and avoid any
misunderstandings about the canine." noted the Vicechancellor.


# # # #
Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special thanks to Gloria Coluchi








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                          Webcams At UFO-Hotspots?

From: Werner Walter <113236.1604@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 06:31:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:07:48 -0400
Subject: Webcams At UFO-Hotspots?


Hello List,

a question from Germany:

How many webcams are installed at so-called "UFO hotpots" - and
what are the URLs???

Greeting

Werner Walter








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:13:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:10:19 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'


Hi,

With regards to the protracted guesswork about what happened in
Rendlesham Forest 20 years ago (and thats all any of us can do).

Here are some key things to bear in mind:

1: The forest today is very different from the forest in l980.
It changed substantially in January l981 when large swathes of
trees in the area were felled (as they were set to do - although
this may have occurred rather rapidly after the discovery of the
damage to the pine tree canopy by a forester). It changed
massively during the hurricane 13 years ago. So making exact
comments on what is visible now and then back relating them two
decades is fraught with difficulty.

2:  The first time I visited the forest at night was over two
years after the incident. It had changed some by then (but much
less than now). The fence knocked over by the men as they
pursued the UFO was still damaged.

3:  As of l983 you could - beyond question - see the following:

(a) the Orford Ness lighthouse beam sweeping over the trees from
the access road to the East Gate. It was clear that something
was 'pulsing' inside the forest (which is how it appeared) and
if you spent any time there you would surely want to know what
it was. If you were new to this place and didnt know you would
be surprised. There is no way from this location in the dark
you'd have a clue that you were looking towards the coast unless
you were reading a map or geographically literate as many of the
USAF servicemen likely were not - through no fault of their own,
of course.

(b) from the area of the field the Orford Ness lighthouse beam
WAS visible. It was not a dim light. It wasnt spectacular either
- and I could never conceive how on its own it could generate
the kind of descriptions that these witnesses are offering.  But
it was not a dim, distant flickering. It was a light that you
would surely describe in your account in relation to the
viretually adjacent UFO (according to the witness testimony).
Nobody does so.

(c) to the side of the lighthouse - through the winter tree
foliage at least - you could also see stationary building lights
(on masts etc on the buildings on the Ness). Some of these
either were blue or looked bluish - probably because of the
distance. They never moved and even though on my first visit I
had to ask what they were they never looked like the sort of
thing you would misperceive as a landed UFO. But they were there
and I know that witnesses do misperceive some odd things in
curious ways during UFO encounters. So from what I saw it cannot
be impossible.

(d)  the Shipwash lightship was visible as you walked through
the forest (maybe not all the time but I wasnt paying such close
attention to it).It was clearly well to the right and a long way
removed from where the UFO was reported as being. So you would
quite reasonably not refer to it if you were seeing what you
thought was a UFO somewhere else ahead of you. It resembled a
lighthouse much more obviously than Orford Ness through the
trees did. It was above ground and in an area you would
instinctively recognise as being the estuary if you even had
vague awareness of local geography.

Now from these circumstances as they were much closer to the
time of the incident - rather than 20 years on (important and
useful as these new comments are I should stress) - what can we
argue?

We are in 'possibility mode' - with all this, of course.

Firstly, there is no doubt that IF the witness testimony from
certain aspects of this case is basically credible these events
are hard to write off as nothing but a misperception (although
its very hard to escape the conclusion that misperception does
occur within this case). The close encounter descriptions by
Burroughs and Penniston, the 'laser beams' etc, the object seen
by several civilian witnesses (eg Gordon Levett at Sudborne who
saw what was clearly not the lighthouse arrive from the north,
hover at rooftop height over his garden and descend into the
forest) - all of this is the kind of material that whilst not
being unimpeachable is sufficient to require caution from any
would be debunker.

Yes, there may be ways round this. Yes, its proper we search for
them. No - in my view - is it right to say this case is not yet
entirely solved. Although large parts of it are indeed heading
that way.

Despite protestations on this list that I keep changing my mind
- this is pretty much what I said in the IUR last year and whats
in 'The UFOs that never were' - where I dont hide the major
problems this case now faces - but equally argue that it has
some aspects that one cannot just wish away because they do not
fit the gathering scenario.

I truly dont know what really happened. Nor, of course, do any
of us. Its reasonable that we argue this out and - like it or
not - the lighthouse clearly did have a far more significant
role in this case than seems likely.

If you study this case thoroughly it seems to me impossible to
escape that honest conclusion.

Theres just no way around the argument for this because these
witnesses were walking right towards it and yet never refered to
it when they should have done so. And Halt at least has
demonstrated in his internet Q & A that despite telling me (and
others) he saw BOTH lighthouse and lightship he appeared to
think that the Shipwash lighthship was the Orford Ness
lighthouse.

Now we can argue till Farmer Higgins cows come home  (sorry -
Rendlesham in joke there!) about how credible this all is, but
those basic questions cannot be run away from. As yet nobody has
explained how or why we get around the non appearance of the
lighthouse PLUS the UFO in the witness testimony.

Beyond that we have all sorts of unanswered questions.

We know there was a tendancy for mist on the first night. We
know sea mist does occur in this area. Theres no way I guess we
will ever know if local pockets did form on those nights save by
looking at references in witness testimony which infer they saw
the UFO riding on a curtain of mist (check out the comments of
Adrian Bustinza for instance).

 From this it is still not unreasonable to infer that the
lighthouse PLUS mist might somehow have EQUALLED the UFO
experience, helping to explain why a light that was modest in
appearance and present before and after the sighting became
something apparently very odd for limited periods of time.

Perhaps psychology can explain all that. Frankly, I'm not
convinced.

Perhaps optics can account for it. Again we can only argue round
it. We will probably never know.

Then there remains the thorny issue of what radar / energy
experiments were or were not occurring in this area by l980
(officially not post the early l970s but there are some reasons
to doubt that official claim).

Again it is supposition that anything connected with that
research could have been a factor in this case. But its a
plausible source of lights, energy fields and distorted
perception and we know some odd things were reported locally
during the currency of the experiments - so we cannot ignore its
possible implications in l980.

As such so far as I can see we can only reach the following
tentative conclusions:

A: If the witness testimony is completely accurate and we can
explain why the written statements are incompatible with what
they verbally report then a real UFO might have been involved.
There is some modest evidence for this (eg alleged radar
trackings, what Levett saw, etc). But its not something we
should leap to defend because its far from a given at this
stage.

B: On the other hand why was the lighthouse never seen and
reported at the same time as the UFO? Without answering that
huge question it is impossible to dismiss the idea that the
lighthouse somehow triggered the experience.

C: Could psychology / or the effects of mist / or the effects of
any energy field experiments on the Ness have turned mundane
stimuli into strange close encounters?

These are the stark questions we have to face up to. They may
never be resolved, which is one reason why I do not believe this
case is as strong as I once thought it was.

But like I said in 'The UFOs that Never Were' - Rendlesham isnt
dead, but it does need a doctor.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:58:56 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:16:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400

 ><snip>

 >>>>The vast majority of UFO sightings are never reported
 >>>>anywhere

 >>>Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

 >>Here we go again. What informed consent? This number (95%) has
 >>no basis. Repetition doesn't make it correct.

 >>Some facts:

 >>1. 21.5% of 3201 sightings investigated by Battelle Memorial
 >>Institute under Contract to the USAF Project Blue Book were
 >>finally labelled as 'Unknowns' (all 4 of the evaluators had to
 >>agree before a sighting could be listed as 'Unknown') completely
 >>separate and distinct from the 9.3% listed as Insufficient
 >>Information. So overall only 70% were identified.

 >>2. According to the AIAA UFO Committee 30% of the 117 cases
 >>studied by the U. of Colorado (Condon Report) could _not_ be
 >>identified... again leaving only 70%.

 >Stan, List followers:

 >According to a later study by J. Allen Hynek and Center for UFO
 >Studies workers the USAF figure of unexplained  cases was
 >reduced to 5.8%.

It is true that Hendry claims (p.245) that CUFOS reexamined all
13,000 Blue Book case in the summer of 1976 and that only about
5% are worthy of being considered genuine UFOs. He says nothing
about who did it, what the standards were, or provide any good
reasons for us to blindly accept this number.  Compare this with
BMI which had scientists and engineers spending full time for
years. They published over 240 charts tables,graphs and maps.
They did quality evaluations of all the cases. They did a
statistical cross comparison between _unknowns_ and _knowns_ on
the basis of six different characteristics.  The probability
that the _unknowns_ were just missed knowns was found to be less
than 1%.

Perhaps I should comment that I was not impressed with Hendry's
approach. Maybe the difference between a scientist and an
artist. I recall his publishing a totally wrong claim that Zeta
l or Zeta 2 Reticuli was a double star based on a footnote to an
article, but without checking with the source.

 >CUFOS' Allan Hendry's later study of 1,307 cases had 8.7% UFO.

 >>3. "The UFO Evidence" reports that there were 746 Unknowns
 >>remaining of 4500 cases investigated, or more than 15%
 >>Unknowns.

 >The numbers have always depended upon who was doing the
 >investigating, and when, and also who is doing the counting. How
 >can you say that the figure of 95% has no basis in fact, Stan?

Has Hendry published more than his proclamation? Phil Klass
proclaims that all sightings have prosaic explanations. Is that
a factual statement or a proclamation? It would help if Hendry's
book had an index. In 100 days that would be 130 cases per day
or about 5 minutes per case.  Anybody who looks over USAF News
releases will find lying, cheating, false reasoning.. such as
suddenly deciding that all single witness cases are
automatically "Not enough Data" and witholding the cases still
under review and converting Possible aircraft to definite
aircraft with no further investigation..

 >Are you suggesting that certain investigators are lying about
 >their results?  I mean, there are differences of opinion about
 >all of this. If not, after 50 years there wouldn't be a
 >continuing controversy.

I am saying they do _not_ provide data to back up their
proclamations. That is what is so special about Project Blue
Book Special Report Number 14. The data is there. There is also
data in the Condon Report and in the UFO Evidence.

 >>4. It is totally false reasoning, apparently subscribed to by
 >>certain UK sceptics, that says that since most sightings can be
 >>explained, it is likely that all can be.

 >Allan Hendry pointed out that, in his study, more cases were
 >identified just by pure luck than remained as UFOs.  I agree
 >that _if_ 30% is an accurate figure for, your word,
 >Unidentifiables, the hypothesis that the rest could probably be
 >solved with enough time, money and up to date info, would  be
 >questionable.

If it were true that better data would solve more cases, than
why is it the truth that the better the quality of the case, the
_less_ likely it could be explained. The duration of observation
was also greater for the _unknowns_ than for the _knowns_.

 >But, if the unidentified figure is only a few percent, this
 >could be a good assumption for a working hypothesis.

 ><snip>

 >>Since 99.99% of the population do _not_ have Hemophilia,
 >>nobody does. Since 99% of the people are not 7' tall, nobody
 >is.

 >The difference is, we have known, proven hemophiliacs, the cause
 >is understood, as well as the specific tests which can show that
 >a person is a hemophiliac.  No putative UFO has yet met tests
 >like these.

I suggest that one look at the 41 cases described in some detail
by Jim McDonald in his congressional testimony. Note also that
random sampling of hundreds of people would probably NOT turn up
a hemophiliac or for that matter a 7' foot tall person.


 >As to 7 foot tall arguments, one only has to measure one to
 >determine the validity of the argument.  No 7 foot tall UFOs
 >have been proven to exist.  Yet.

 >Could we agree to the following statement:  Investigations have
 >resulted in from 30% to a few percent unkowns, depending upon
 >who is doing the counting?

Far more important is the methodology , the detail of the
investigation. Artist or scientists?

 ><snip>

 >>It is the sightings that are _not_  explainable that matter.

 >OK, except that I think that Hendry was right when he pointed
 >out that what we have learned from the IFOs can probably tell us
 >a lot about the remaining unkowns.

IFOs tell us about IFOs. They tell us nothing about _unknowns_.I
disagree. Remember that the _knowns_ and _unknowns_ have different
characteristics.

 >This thread started out with the Linda incident in NYC. A
 >probable explanation has been identified: a strickingly similar
 >story in a novel.

What basis is there for saying this explanation is probable?
Possible? Yes.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:06:33 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:18:02 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman


 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

 >I hate to belabor this point again but the proper qualifiers are

 >1) When there is an organized official UFO report receiving
 >   agency...

 >2) Run by the US Government (i.e. widely known)...

 >3) That discards 99% of close encounters...

 >4) And engages in dubious statistical practices...

 >95% of reported UFOs are classed as IFOs. One might expect a
 >somewhat different profile from

 >1) A general absence of known reporting points...

 >2) Non-official, largely non-professional reporting points...

 >3) Little followup or statistical analysis except for isolated
 >   local samples...

 >4) Emphasis away from NL cases...

 >But what effect that might have has never been properly
 >analysed.

 >Another largely unsupported by countervailing figure is that
 >only 10% of UFO sightings are reported. Hynek's interviews with
 >astronomers indicates a significant reservoir of unreported UFO
 >sightings by highly qualified observers, so at least there is a
 >tiny amount of research on that question. There is also some
 >reason to believe that more highly qualified observers are less
 >likely to report their sighting, especially if no officially
 >respectable resource exists.


At the end of almost all of more than 600 (Mostly college and
professional groups) lectures, I have asked how many in the
audience have seen what I would describe as a flying saucer,
having earlier given a definition.. People hesitantly raise
their hands and I start counting. Typically 10% raise their
hands mostly to the surprise of the audience. (About 30% at
expensive workshops, but that is a select audience). I then ask
how many of the sighters reported what they saw. Typically 90%
drop their hands. If there are any left, I ask if any were in
the military at the time and, if so, will they tell us about it.
Get some great reports that way.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:29 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:14:38 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung


 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
 >From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza ><DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >3. As an educated American you, I suspect, would be astonished
 >at how little your compatriots seem to notice *or accept* when
 >beyond the confines of their own great nation. There are various
 >statements scattered throughout the mass of American testimony
 >on this case that powerfully suggest that many airmen, including
 >the security police, were remarkably -- to a British country
 >gent -- unaware of the local sky at night.

Dear PB, Dave, Other Ranks:

I have a friend who has been a lifelong astronomy enthusiast who
was a member of the airbase security unit at Loring AFB, Main,
USA, at the time of the famous sightings there back in the 70s.
He told me that other guards would report UFOs which were
astronomical objects, and even auroral rays would be reported as
UFOs behind the trees.  He told me it was really wild, that
other guys were reporting "everything" as UFOs.  In his opinion,
and he was out there at night on patrol, was that nothing out of
the ordinary (beyond aircraft and sky objects) happened.

Philip J. Klass proposed that astronomical objects (one light
and no radar contact, for example) and flights by a civilian
helicopter taking survey pictures provided good explanations.
See the details of his investigation in: 'UFOs: The Public
Deceived', Prometheus Books, 1983, pp. 89, 92-97,105.)

Many of the kids in these airbase security units thought they
were going to be in the MPs and get training as policemen. They
are often disappointed to learn that they are just security
guards.  Not to denegrate them, but I doubt that they get any
training regarding what's in the sky.  When they stumble upon
the one spot in a wood where a lighthouse beam is visible, it's
wasn't surprising that they were puzzled.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:16:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung


 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

<snip>

 >Another largely unsupported by countervailing figure is that
 >only 10% of UFO sightings are reported. Hynek's interviews with
 >astronomers indicates a significant reservoir of unreported UFO
 >sightings by highly qualified observers

Mark, others:

Hazard a guess as to what percentage of total reports these might
represent:

<snip>

 >There is also some reason to believe that more highly
 >qualified observers are less likely to report their sighting,
 >especially if no officially respectable resource exists.

Agreed. Also I think there are an unkown number of not reported
investigations about these by these "highly qualified" observers
or investigators. I once had occasion to ask, privately and
individually, the professional astronomers working within 30
miles of me what they thought of UFOs. Nearly all (I think 4 of
5 at the time) told me that they had looked into reports, often
when they were students or early in their careers, and has
concluded that there wasn't anything there.

The problem is, as you point out, "black" (or unknown) data
doesn't mean anything.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:43:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:19:03 -0400
Subject: Re: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's


 >From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 08:49:27 +0200
 >Subject: S. African Minister Spreads Bill Cooper's Theories on AIDS


 >Source: Sunday Times (South Africa),

 >http://www.suntimes.co.za/2000/09/03/politics/pol02.htm

 >Stig

***

 >03 Sep 2000>

 >Minister spreads bizarre AIDS theory

 >CAROL PATON

 >THE Minister of Health, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, has circulated
 >a bizarre theory on the origin of AIDS to all provincial
 >premiers and health ministers. It claims that the virus was
 >introduced into Africa by a worldwide conspiracy.

 >The theory claims that the Illuminati - an international
 >conspiracy to take over the world - introduced AIDS to Africa
 >through the smallpox vaccine in 1978 to reduce the African
 >population. It states that although the cure is known, it is
 >being kept secret until enough people have died.>

 >The theory is contained in a book titled Behold, A Pale Horse
 >written by William Cooper.

 >Tshabalala-Msimang circulated a chapter from the book, which
 >deals with AIDS, to provincial health ministers at their last
 >meeting held two weeks ago.>

 >The Western Cape Health Minister, Nick Koornhof, confirmed that
 >ministers had received the document.

 >It was also distributed to all premiers by Tshabalala-Msimang's
 >parliamentary officer, Johannes Kgatla. He said he had
 >distributed the extract "on the instructions of the minister".

Just what we don't need... the writings of a parnoid delusional
person who has grabbed onto the UFO phenmenon as a "pale horse"
to ride to fame and glory. I checked the guy out years ago and
found him to be, shall we say, of low credibility. His UFO
stories have grown with time.

He was really "big" about 10-12 years ago, giving lectures and
all.  Haven't heard much about him recently. Now he'll probably
be in demand. One can only hope that he will self-destruct in
the light of media exposure.

Unfortunately some of that destruction is likely to rain down
upon credible ufologists (assuming there are any. :-)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:08:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:20:37 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >This thread started out with the Linda incident in NYC. A
 >probable explanation has been identified: a strickingly similar
 >story in a novel.

No way! I've read the novel, and its alleged similarities with
the Linda case are a complete and total myth, promulgated by
George Hansen, Joseph Stefula, and Richard Butler in their
notorious "white paper" on the case. See my study of the case,
on my UFO website, http://gregsandow.com/ufo.

The core of the Linda case is a UFO that allegedly hovers over a
New York apartment building, where it's seen abducting people.
No such incident occurs in the novel. In the book, a UFO lands
on the roof of a New York building, disgorging aliens who come
through the ceiling of a luxurious apartment, where they engage
in a pitched battle with the occupants. Nobody sees it, except
the distraught husband of the family in the apartment, who
rushes to the roof after the battle, just in time to see the UFO
disappear into the sky with his wife aboard. If that's
"strikingly similar" to the case, then the word "similar" has
lost its meaning.

The other alleged similarities are just as dissimilar.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                  Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:21:15 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:26:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow


 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:39 -0400
 >From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Now, I could be wrong (which case, sorry), but I suspect you
 >want to draw me out into some public discussion of what you
 >already know I think even if you don't and I'd be surprised if
 >you didn't: which is that the context of Cone's account of Janet
 >and the context of abductologists' "anecdotal" evidence are
 >completely different. It would take many words (and you know how
 >prolix I can be) to work through that argument, and I'm not
 >going to play that game.

 >And suppose Cone has discussed the Janet case in the
 >professional literature -- as he may have done, for all I know.
 >By your lights that would appear to give it some greater
 >credibility, apparently. Do you see what a twist you get into
 >here? Just where does "anecdotal" stop and "objective research"
 >begin when psychologists discuss individual cases?

The discussion I'd hoped to have is one that should concern all
of us. It's about the double standard we all need to fight
against -- the understandable urge to accept lower standards for
evidence that supports our beliefs, and to demand the highest
standards for evidence that points in directions we don't like.
I've been guilty of that. So have you, Peter, along with nearly
every other human being in this field and every other.

And yes, when I don't know the writer I'd give more credence to
an anecdotal account in a peer-reviewed journal than to
anecdotal accounts either in abduction books or anti-abduction
books.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                          Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:25:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:33:10 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote


 >Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 04:18:41 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>

 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Greg, has this point (why the kidnapping was never reported)
 >ever come up in your discussions with Budd about Linda's case?
 >If so, 'why' wasn't it reported?

"Officer, I want to report a kidnapping. I'm the one who was
kidnapped."

"Tell me all about it."

So Linda tells the story, and the officer asks fairly obvious
questions.

"Have you ever seen this man before? Do you know him?"

How could Linda answer that? If she tells the whole story, the
police won't take her seriously. "Well, I was abducted by a UFO,
and, see, these federal agents..." But if she holds most of it
back -- and she'd have to hold back most of it, or be dismissed
as a nutcase -- any experienced cop will know she's not telling
what she knows. And that, too, will be suspicious.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                   Chupacabra Reappears in Northern Mexico

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 12:18:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:35:04 -0400
Subject: Chupacabra Reappears in Northern Mexico


SOURCE: El Universal (Newspaper) Mexico
DATE: August 30, 2000

CHUPACABRAS REAPPEARS IN NORTHERN MEXICO
by Enrique Proa Villarreal/Correspondent

* Several goats found decapitated beside a "Conalep" in San
Pedro, according to neighbors

SAN PEDRO, Coahuila. - Several goats were found decapitated in
the premises adjacent to a Conalep education center. Some locals
suggest that another animal could have been involved in their
destruction in an effort to suck their blood, or that they were
the victims of a satanic cult or group.

Many locals dared to suggest that the "Chupacabras" has
reappeared in the region, even while many of them have no
certainty regarding such a creature's existence. However, they
said, anything is possible.

  The Municipal Public Safety Office reported that Evaristo
Escareo Ramirez, 64, a resident of Calle Octava 50 in the Agua
Nueva neighborhood and the owner of the decapitated animals,
reported to said jurisdiction indicating that he was the owner
of a herd of goats kept in a field beside the Conalep. He found
that at least 10 of his animals had been beheaded for hitherto
unknown reasons.

The discovery was a source of surprise for the community,
leading police and municipal authorities to pursue
investigations aimed at finding the responsible party or
parties. But it could well be that another creature killed the
animals to feed on their blood.

Indications at this time are that the means used to slay the
goat herd remain unknown, although the attempt can be attributed
to the members of some cult engaging in satanic rituals, where
animal blood is employed in "spells".

Meanwhile, the community is abuzz with the mystery surrounding
the case, yet in fact no one knows with any certainty what
occured with these goats, who were kept in the very same
premises where they were sacrificed.

However, according to Escareo Ramirez, what took place in this
municipality caused fear among the locals, particularly among
those involved in goat farming. He indicated that the
possibility of the "Chupacabras'" reappearance in the area
cannot be dismissed, since it cannot go unnoticed even though no
one has seen it, and society at large believes it has never
existed.



# # # #

Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special Thanks to Leopoldo Carranza.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:44:45 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:37:05 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski


 >From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Cashman

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young

 >>Yes, but by general informed assent, is seems that 95% are IFOs.

 >I hate to belabor this point again but the proper qualifiers are
 >1) When there is an organized official UFO report receiving
 >2) Run by the US Government (i.e. widely known)...
 >3) That discards 99% of close encounters...
 >4) And engages in dubious statistical practices...

 >95% of reported UFOs are classed as IFOs.

Nope, sorry. I'd have to disagree with those qualifiers. We've
been carefully studying UFO sighting reports nationwide for more
than a decade, and the 95% trend does seem to be real. There's
no question that for *raw* UFO data, only about three to five
percent unknowns are found after sifting out IFOs and insufs
*and* looking at the remaining reports carefully for content,
quality and reliability (as per the Vallee classifications). On
the first pass, there may be as many as about 15% to 20%
Unknowns, but these drop dramatically when we start really going
through the cases. And, we've actually done some really
rigourous sifting. We've made copies of all the cases, given
sets to everyone at the table (as many as 15) and then had each
of us pick out high-quality UFOs by consensus. CEs were always
included in the batches every year.

The results of our staistical analyses (not dubious in ANY way) can be
found in our yearly studies, which we make available every year in
report form and even include the raw data for anyone to examine.
The site for the studies is:  www.geocities.com/aristotl.geo

 >One might expect a
 >somewhat different profile from
 >1) A general absence of known reporting points...
 >2) Non-official, largely non-professional reporting points...
 >3) Little followup or statistical analysis except for isolated
 >4) Emphasis away from NL cases...
 >But what effect that might have has never been properly
 >analysed.

We're certainly non-official (for the most part), so this does
appear to counter those points. Yes, discarding NL cases would
certainly change the way the tables and charts would look, but
would that be a fair study of UFO data? CEs form such a small
part of each year's body of reports, it wold be quite a while to
build up enough cases to work with rigourously.

When I look through Peter Davenport's data, it's easy to see
that the 95% rule likely applies. Many cases are obviously of
satellites, stars and whatnot, even from a cursory glance,
without having any real case info available for follow-up. If
we're only interested in high-quality, well-investigated,
well-documented, well-witnessed UFO cases, I think we'd be
_lucky_ to get five percent of the case data per year!



--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

               Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:37:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:42:28 -0400
Subject: Re:  The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee


 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
 >From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>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

 >Don't know offhand. Don't care. I thought, following Jenny
 >Randles' suggestion, we were talking about Night One, not Night
 >Two. In any case the more elaborate of Halt's own descriptions
 >were inspired by what he saw through a Starlite scope whose use
 >and effects he didn't seem to understand (and why should he:
 >Halt isn't an infantryman). Which accounts for the "red sun-like
 >light... seen through the trees" that "moved about and pulsed"
 >that you mention.>

Are you suggesting here that the view through the starlight
scope showed red?  Usually such devices produce a greenish
picture.

Halt's reference to what apparently was a bright red light is
not consistent with the suggestion that he was looking at a
white beaion light 4-5 miles away.

Whether or not Halt was familiar with a starlight scope can be
only speculation without asking him. On the ther hand, it isn't
_that_ difficult to understand.

Anyway, I gather from the description that the red flashing
light was clearly visible without the starlight scope.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                               Roswell TV Show

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:00:47 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 10:53:10 -0400
Subject: Roswell TV Show


Errol:

Some list members may be interested in knowing that on Friday,
Sept. 8, PAX TV will broadcast a one hour documentary about
Roswell at 8 PM Eastern.

It will be rebroadcast at 7PM, Sunday, Sept. 10.

There have already been a couple of shows in the series about
unusual Phenomena. Grizzly Adams Productions did the series.

I was interviewed in Roswell on about July 3. As usual I have no
idea who else has been interviewed or how badly what I said will
be butchered etc.

We don't get PAX Cable here in Fredericton, so I would
appreciate feedback, I think. They tell me that the first shows
had very high ratings. Supposedly PAX has a greater number of
Potential Viewers than any other cable network. Frankly I never
heard of it. Others have.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                 Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 16:19:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:04:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Hale


 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 01:55:29 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Rhodes

 >Terry would you like to meet up at Chris Martin's meeting, set
 >out below?

 >Presents

 >UFOs Over London
 >An illustrated lecture
 >by Christopher Martin
 >plus extra-special guest speaker

 >So how's about it Terry, see you at Chris Martins meeting on
 >the 8th?



Hi,

Is Terry still on this list?


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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

              Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Crop

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:10:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:10:48 -0400
Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Crop



CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 6, 2000

_____________________________


SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


Preliminary Report - September 6, 2000

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
September 6, 2000


Report received this afternoon from Dennis Eklund in Saskatoon,
of a large ringed circle about two miles outside of the city,
found this morning (?) according to initial reports. Reported on
local TV news this morning. Details pending.

Dennis investigated the Moosomin, Saskatchewan dumbbell
formation from August 20, and the Grenfell, Saskatchewan circle
from August 10, and is also now the new Saskatchewan director
for CPR-Canada.

On a related personal note, I again had a dream last night of a
similar looking formation, the second time that has happened in
the past couple weeks, the first with Moosomin, as related in my
report on that formation. The last time before these that I had
any crop circle or related kinds of dreams, etc. was several
months ago, so it is an interesting correlation if nothing else.
Just food for thought.

This is the seventh formation reported in Canada for 2000.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                   Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Corrales

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 05:46:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:16:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Corrales



 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'
 >Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:40:16 -0700

 >Hello, all, buenos dias Scott,


 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:25:40 -0400
 >>Subject: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'

 >>SOURCE: Diario El Nuevo Dia (San Juan, Puerto Rico
 >>DATE: Saturday, September 2, 2000

 >>As a result of press reports concerning the discovery of a
 >>strange creature in Nicaragua, identified by that country's
 >>peasants as the "Chupacabras", speculation was once more rife in
 >>Puerto Rico...as well as the willingness for adventure.

 >>For this reason, during a recent radio broadcast, Chemo Soto,
 >>the intrepid mayor of Canovanas, indicated that he was hoping to
 >>run into the "chupacabras" to battle the now-folkloric entity
 >>and "shoot it to death". When his interviewer asked if he would
 >>be willing to negotiate with the chupacabras rather than resort
 >>to violence, the mayor claimed that he would do so, but that the
 >>creature runs very quickly and that it would disappear at the
 >>slightest hesitation.

 >>Therefore, "Chemo Jones" reiterated that the best approach to
 >>deal with the ravager of birds and quadrupeds would be to shoot
 >>it with no questions asked.

 >># ## #

 >>Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology

 >Well pards, I've been a hunter and grew up the son of a hunter,
 >with the 'Chupacabras' it fails some basic lessons of hunting.

 >1. Don't shoot it unless your'e prepared to eat it. (this goes
 >for Bigfoot hunters too.)

 >2. Clearly identfy what your'e shooting at. Cougars tend not to
 >wag their tail, and do not go"Woof" (this acutually happened to
 >my Pop who almost shot a neighbor's Great Dane.)

 >3. If you do manage to get a shot off, or several,      as the
 >case may be, this is important, -make shure you hit somthing
 >vital. A  pissed off ah, Bigfoot  or Chupacabra would not be
 >good.

 >4. Getting good confimation that what you just offed is what
 >you were meaning to ah, kill, would be important (see lesson #2)


Dear GT,

A cheerful buenos dias to you too!

Mayor Soto gained the (unenviable?) sobriquet of "Chemo Jones"
after he organized the first posses searching for the
Chupacabras in 1995, when the creature's depredations affected
his small municipality.

Wisely, the search parties were unarmed and numbered up to 200
people on one occasion. Dressed in cammo and not at all averse
to the spotlight, Chemo triggered admiration and hostility from
other politicians, many of whom wished they'd had the moxie to
do something similar in their own districts.

Even though people found his antics demeaning and campaigned
actively against him on grounds of his Chupacabras-hunting, he
won the '96 elections handily.

Last thing I heard he was going to commission a statue to the
Chupacabras at the entrance to Canovanas, but it never happened.
An unofficial Chupacabras statue -- made of palm trees -- was
erected on a beach and has since been washed away.

Scott



"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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                  Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:08:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:19:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras' - Mortellaro


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'
 >Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:40:16 -0700

 >Hello, all, buenos dias Scott,


 >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 06:25:40 -0400
 >>Subject: Chemo vs. 'Chupacabras'

 >>SOURCE: Diario El Nuevo Dia (San Juan, Puerto Rico
 >>DATE: Saturday, September 2, 2000

 >>As a result of press reports concerning the discovery of a
 >>strange creature in Nicaragua, identified by that country's
 >>peasants as the "Chupacabras", speculation was once more rife in
 >>Puerto Rico...as well as the willingness for adventure.

 >>For this reason, during a recent radio broadcast, Chemo Soto,
 >>the intrepid mayor of Canovanas, indicated that he was hoping to
 >>run into the "chupacabras" to battle the now-folkloric entity
 >>and "shoot it to death". When his interviewer asked if he would
 >>be willing to negotiate with the chupacabras rather than resort
 >>to violence, the mayor claimed that he would do so, but that the
 >>creature runs very quickly and that it would disappear at the
 >>slightest hesitation.

 >>Therefore, "Chemo Jones" reiterated that the best approach to
 >>deal with the ravager of birds and quadrupeds would be to shoot
 >>it with no questions asked.

 >># ## #

 >>Translation (c) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology

 >Well pards, I've been a hunter and grew up the son of a hunter,
 >with the 'Chupacabras' it fails some basic lessons of hunting.

 >1. Don't shoot it unless your'e prepared to eat it. (this goes
 >for Bigfoot hunters too.)

 >2. Clearly identfy what your'e shooting at. Cougars tend not to
 >wag their tail, and do not go"Woof" (this acutually happened to
 >my Pop who almost shot a neighbor's Great Dane.)

 >3. If you do manage to get a shot off, or several,      as the
 >case may be, this is important, -make shure you hit somthing
 >vital. A  pissed off ah, Bigfoot  or Chupacabra would not be
 >good.

 >4. Getting good confimation that what you just offed is what
 >you were meaning to ah, kill, would be important (see lesson #2)



Then there was the mighty hunter who, after proudly bagging his
six point buck, dressed the critter out and started thinking
about how he was to get his meat out of the woods. As I said,
our hunter was mighty.  So he chose the only method a mighty
hunter could choose.  He carried the carcass on his back and
hauled it out of the woods that way.

On his way out, the deer was shot more than six more times,
miraculously failing to penetrate through the carcass into Mr.
Mighty, who by this time, was mighty concerned.  Not over the
shots, but over the increase in weight (due to the extra lead).
It seems he was just about able to handle the deer as was, but
the extra added lead was the straw.  And then there was this
pain in his chest.

On the way out of the woods, Mighty died of an infarct. One of
his mightiest arteries was blocked by a .270 cal. hollow point
160 grain Spear.

A true story in the anals of the New York State Police. And
speaking of anals, there was one in there too.  They found it
during the autopsy.  Mighty pmusta thought he had hemorrhoids.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 36

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:21:17 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:23:48 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 36


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

       UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 5, Number 36
September 7, 2000
Editor: Joseph Trainor

CHUPACABRA KILLED BY A
RANCHER IN NICARAGUA

       On Friday, August 25, 2000, a sheep rancher shot
and wounded a yellow-furred Chupacabra on the San
Lorenzo farm near Tolapa, Leon statde, Nicaragua.
       Three days later, on Monday, August 28, 2000,
the skeletal remains of the creature were recovered by
a watchman from a cave located about 100 meters
(330 feet) from the ranchhouse.
       The discovery ignited a firestorm of excitement
in Nicaragua and throughout the hemisphere and
especially in the UFO community.
       The shooting came at the end of six weeks of
sheep slayings in the Cordillera de Marisio hills of
Leon state, around the small towns of Malpaisillo,
Tolapa and San Claudio.  An estimated 120 sheep were
killed during the creature's rampage.  All of the sheep
had been drained of blood.
       The Nicaraguan newspaper El Nuevo Diario cited
"massive sheep deaths resulting from the apparent
extraction of blood by an unknown predator equipped
with sizable fangs capable of drilling into the victims'
necks."
      The Chupacabra was described as "bold,
dog-like and capable of making rapid movements."
       Ranch owner Jorge Luis Talavera said, "It came in
search of another sheep on Friday, and I became aware
of its presence in the paddocks.  I fired several shots
with my shotgun until it lost itself in the darkness."
       "On Monday morning (August 28), the presence of
circling vultures heralded the existence of a dead
animal in the farm's vicinity, which aroused the curiosity
of watchman Jairo Garcia."
       Garcia headed towards "the spot where the spot
where the carrion birds circled and managed to reach a
cave-like structure located 100 meters from the house.
Then he found the animal his employer had shot two nights
earlier and was probably responsible for the deaths of
so many sheep."
       "After having viewed the Chupacabra, some locals, like
Milan Rojas, claim that it is neither a dog nor a wolf, but
rather the strange product of a number of dog types."
(That is, a hybrid--J.T.)
       "'I am familiar with all types of wild animal and this
one seems strange to me, given its fur hair, thin
and tall, which differs greatly from a wolf, which is
quite hairy,' he remarked."
       Nicaraguan biologist Giocconda Chavez examined
the skeletal remains and "noted that the animal had
extremely high nails located above its claws which
probably aided it in attacking its victims,
along with an oversized set of fangs.  She further noted
that the eye-sockets were somewhat large in comparison
with its head, making note as did other witnesses to
the site, of several protuberances on the upper
vertebrae 'shaped like a crocodile's crest.'"
      What Garcia "found most startling was the lack of
bodily hair and very small ears, although the animal had
been reduced to a skeleton after the vultures feasted
upon it, it is shaped like a long, yellow-colored dog,
given the pigmentation of the remaining fur that was
found on the tail."
       Since the middle of July 2000, the Chupacabra had
been raiding small sheep farms sponsored by the
Xochitl Acatl Women's Center, a charitable non-
profit group.  The center promotes sheep farming as a
means of helping low-income people of the region raise
their standard of living.
       "In San Claudio, 25 kilometers (15 miles) from
Malpaisillo, the Chupacabra killed two of four sheep
belonging to Sra. Lydia Carrera, one of the supporters
of the Xochitl Acatl Women's Center."
       "I was concerned because I own goats and cows
and, at any given second, the Chupacabra would turn up
and kill my little animals.  I hope that it's the last and
only one of its kind,' said Maria Isable Lopez of nearby
Las Lunas."
       "'We had to kill it.  In fifteen days, it sucked 25
sheep'" at San Lorenzo farm, "'and my neighbor lost
35 sheep in ten days.  It was an average of five sheep
or goats every night,' Talavera explained."
       Talavera also stated that there may be more
Chupacabras in the cordillera, at least three more--
one with white or silver fur and two with black fur.
       Other witnesses in Malpaisillo said the dead
Chupacabra had "yellow hair on a short tail, large eye
sockets, skin like that of a bat, large claws and fangs,"
and seven "crest-like" vertebrae on its spine
(Editor's Comment:  Yellow fur, eh?  It sounds like the
El Lobizon creature seen in Argentina last June.  See
UFO Roundup, volume 5, number 27, "'Wolfman' terrorizes
town in northern Argentina," page 2.).
       The remains were taken to the forensic laboratory
at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Nicaragua-Leon
in the city of Leon, located 100 kilometers (60 miles)
southwest of Malpaisillo.
       According to the newspaper La Prensa de Nicaragua,
the Chupacabra remains were studied by a team led by
Dr. Pedrarias Davila.
       "'We cannot say when the results will be ready,
given that some parts are missing.  Therefore we will
be forced to take some time if it becomes necessary to
send DNA samples abroad,' said Dr. Pedrarias Davila."
       "The skeleton of the alleged Chupacabra was taken to
the medical campus at UNAM in Leon in order to
determine what species it belongs to,'" Dr. Davila added.
       "'On the record sheet was noted the characteristics
of the skeletal system, the number of ribs and vertebrae,
nails, state of decomposition, among others, for
inclusion into the database,' he explained."
       Two days later, an official at UNAM-Leon made a
surprising statement.
       "'There is an initial impression that it isn't an unknown
animal but merely a dog.  Further analysis is still required
to reach a final conclusion,' said Edmundo Torres, vice-
chancellor for research at UNAM-Leon."
(Editor's Comment:  If it's just a dog, then why do they
need "further research?"  Here it comes--the Varginha-
style coverup of this phenomenal event.)
       The killing of the Chupacabra has caused a stir in
Nicaragua's religious communities, as well.
       "'It's a warning sign, like a traffic light' that's on
yellow but could turn red--a sign for men and women to
return to God because we've forgotten about him,' stated"
Dr. Francisco Ortiz, director of CEPAS (Nicaragua's
Pentecostal Assembly--J.T.) "quoting from the Book of
Daniel which states that in the Last Days there will be
phenomena that will cause astonishment among men."
       "In the meantime," Monsignor Juan Bosco Maria Vivas
Robelo, the Roman Catholic bishop of Leon, "does not
believe that it (the creature) is the result of genetic
engineering, admitting his scant knowledge on the
subject of the Chupacabra."
       "''I haven't studied the matter in depth since I haven't
given it much credibility, but if it is indeed a strange
creature, as they say, then the Church may be prompted
to take action...but not just yet.'"
(Editor's Comment:  If you want to see how the Roman
Catholic Church deals with unusual phenomena, check out
the Virgin Mary story in this issue.)
(The Chupacabra stories are from El Nuevo Diario for
August 30, 2000, "Strange entity causes astonishment,"
and September 1, 2000, "Chupacabra--a source of
controversy and pilgrimage" by Mariancia Flores
Vergara; and La Presna de Nicaragua for August 30,
2000, "Chupacabra remains found," August 31, 2000,
"Nicaraguan experts study 'Chupacabra,'" and
September 1, 2000, "It isn't a Chupacabra, just a
'Mutt.'" by Mariacely Linarte and Clarissa Altamiro.
Muchs gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros
Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden
Mexico para esos articulos de diario.)

MORE UFO LANDINGS ARE
REPORTED IN PAKISTAN

       Two more UFO landings were reported in the
Baluchistan province of Pakistan during the last two
weeks of August 2000.
       On Monday, August 21, 2000, around 9 p.m.,
residents of Qlla Abdullah, a small town near Dera Ghazi
Khan saw a bright silent object traverse the sky from
west to east and descend and land in the rugged hills
east of town.
       "The area where the object fell is very difficult to
approach, says Abdul Faiz, who claims he was one of
the crowd who saw the object heading east towards
Punjab province."
       "He told IANS (India Abroad News Service--J.T.) that
'it was something very bright...It was as high as the nearby
TV booster (tower--J.T.)."
       "Faiz, who works in a government department in
Islamabad (Pakistan's capital--J.T.) and was on holiday
at his village near Qlla Abdullah bordering Afghanistan.
'It went straight in and probably crashed.'"
       "He said there was no sound and no blast or
anything else."
       On Sunday, August 27, 2000, "an unidentified
flying object (UFO) came from the west and landed in the
tribal area near Dera Ghazi Khan, reports reaching here
said."
       Dera Ghazi Khan is a large city in central Pakistan
located about 400 kilometers (240 miles) north of Karachi.
            "The UFO, which was seen over Fort Munro and
Rakhi Gaaj, towns of the tribal area, hit the ground between
Baghalchor and Rounghin, some 80 kilometers
(48 miles) from Dera Ghazi Khan at 8:30 p.m."
       "Sources in the Border Military Police (BMP) quooted
tribesmen living in Rounghin as saying the UFO had come
from the west over Baluchistan."
       "'It was nose-diving, and a few minutes later, the sky
lit up,' the tribesmen said."
       "Uranium-rich Baghalchor is a restricted military area"
with no inhabitants "while Rounghin has a small
population.
(Editor's Comment:  Uranium in Baghalchor, eh?
Maybe the aliens have an underground base there.  Sort
of a cosmic gas station for visiting saucers.)
       BMP said "a team has been sent to the area to
uncover the facts."
       Pakistani "official sources say they have not found
any clue to the objects.  They said an aerial
reconnaissance was also sent out to Loralal, Barkhan
and Kohlu, the places where the UFOs were sighted
(on August 15, 2000--J.T.) and where some of these
reportedly feel."
       But officials in Dera Ghazi Khan are downplaying
the UFO reports.
       "'We don't believe in these reports.  Nothing has
been found.  I sent a team to the places mentioned in
one of the newspapers but people living nearby said they
did not see any such thing,' a senior Dera Ghazi Khan
district official told IANS."  (See the Times of India for
September 1, 2000, "Pak still clueless about UFOs."
(Many thanks to Cliff Capers of Skywatch International
and to Gerry Lovell and Rahil Khan for these reports.)

FLYING HUMANOID AND UFO
REPORTED IN ITALY

       On Thursday, August 17, 2000, people in
Carozzo, a town of Italy's La Spezia province,
located about 150 kilometers (90 miles) southwest
of Bologna, became excited when they spotted
un umanoide volante (Italian for a flying humanoid--
J.T.) careening through the clear blue sky.
       Descriptions of the entity were sketchy.  Most
of the witnesses described it as como Batman
(like the comic book character Batman--J.T.)
Three witnesses provided the most description of the
fast-flying apparition.  (See La Nazione for August 19,
2000.)
       On Friday, August 18, 2000, at 7:30 p.m., two
farm workers in Pianella, a town in Pescara province
about 120 kilometers (72 miles) northeast of Rome,
"observed flying in a straight direction a circular object,
light gray in color, measuring 10 meters (33 feet) in
diameter.  On the object were four lights, green and red,
blinking slowly and rhythymically."  (See Il Messaggero
for August 21, 2000.  Grazie a Edoardo Russo, Fabio
di Rahul, Gildo Persone e Roberto Labanti di Centro
Italiano di Studi Ufologici per questi rapporti.)

LUMINOUS UFOs SIGHTED AT
TWO LOCATIONS IN UK

       On Sunday, August 27, 2000, at 11:56 p.m.,
D.H. and his wife were three miles northeast of
Cannock, Staffordshire, UK when they "saw a very
bright circular yellow light appear in the southwest sky.
It just appeared very suddenly.  It was not a plane,
not a strobe light, and was too big and bright for a star.
It started moving towards us and then moved to the
north and dimmed."
       "I followed it with binoculars, and then it seemed to be
a dark object that was lit from behind with the front edges
lit like a halo,  Then it faded as it turned to the north-
northeast," he added.
       D.H. said the UFO appeared on three consecutive
nights, Monday, August 28, through Wednesday,
August 30, 2000.  "On Tuesday night (August 29)
it appeared twice, approximately 30 to 40 minutes later
on."  The UFO "was quite high" and "a bit faster than
a plane."  (Email Form Report)
       On Friday, September 1, 2000, at 11:20 p.m.,
Carla Randle-Conde spotted a UFO south of
Middlewich, Cheshire, UK.
       "It appeared stationary and on the ground but
at 'tree' level," Carla reported, adding that she was
looking south and southeast when she spotted it.
"it was circular in appearance, possibly spherical..
Mainly orange with some red and green.  The lights
were repetitive and the object looked solid."
       But when Carla and her companion "drove back
to get a better look at it, we saw nothing."  She
estimated that the object was "about 10 meters
(33 deet) in diameter."  (Email Form Report)

AIR PASSENGER SPOTS A UFO
HOVERING OVER CLEVELAND

       On Saturday, August 19, 2000, at 2 p.m., Floyd
Juillard was a passenger aboard an America West
jetliner making its final approach into Cleveland
International Airport.  Just then, he heard the
the pilot's voice on the intercom, "Ladies and gentlemen,
Cleveland Center has just cleared us to descend to
12,000 feet (3,660 meters).  Please return your
seats and trays to the upright position."
       As the jetliner entered the inbound air traffic over
Olmstead Falls, Ohio, Floyd peered out his window,
looking north towards downtown Cleveland, and spotted
a rectangular UFO "silent and fast, headed to the west
at (bearing) 260 degrees true.  I was looking north at
first but I followed it west with my gaze."
       He described the UFO as "four lights spread in a
rectangular shape and first moving slightly up and
down  and slightly east and west, close to the
terrain (horizon--J.T.) at times and then moving to
the west and traveling at great acceleration until it
was almost immediately out of sight."
       He added that the four lights "resembled Fourth
of July hand-held sparklers (fireworks--J.T.) viewed
from a distance of 300 yards (290 meters)."
(Email Form Report)

DAZZLING UFO APPEARS
OVER LONDON, ONTARIO

       On Thursday, August 31, 2000, at 11 p.m.,
Ms. R.W. was on her fifth-floor balcony in the city of
London, Ontario, Canada, located approximately
132 miles (211 kilometers) southwest of Toronto,
when she spotted a bright light coming towards her.
       "At first I thought it was an airplane coming towards
me in the night sky," she reported, "As it was blinking an
airborne light.  But as it got closer, we noticed it was
blinking red.  then yellow and seemed to be moving from
side to side."
       "We watched it for quite some time, and I got out
my video camera.  The colour does not come out very
well on the camera, but it does show the pulsing of light
and the movement (side to side--R.W.) and it was taped
on an old film.  About a half hour into watching the object,
there was another object that shot out of the bottom and
what looked like a shooting star."
(Editor's Comment"  Some kind of flying probe?)
       "My son has tried to convince me that it was
a shining star, but I have never seen a star move away
from me over time in the direction I was facing.  And I
have never seen a shooting star come from a star.
Looking off my fifth-floor balcony, it appeared to be
about 10 to 15 miles away.  I watched it until 1 a.m.
when I went to bed.  It appeared to move against
and not in the same direction as the stars around it."
(Email Form Report)

IMAGE OF ELVIS APPEARS ON
A SCOTTISH HILLSIDE

       A strange simulacrum in the Ochil Hills near
Tillicoutry, Scotland has the locals "all shook up."
       "Housewife Linda Conner was the first to spot the
outline of The King (nickname for Elvis Presley--J.T.)
while driving from her home in Tillicoutry."
       "'I happened to glance up and noticed the rocks
and vegetation formed a perfect impression of Elvis,'
says the 37-year-old mother to two.  'I shouted,
'It's Elvis!' and my kids looked at me as if I'd
gone crazy.'"
       "'The image is as clear as day.  When I showed
my sister Pauline, she said, 'I can't believe it.  It's
Elvis's double.'"
       Since then, crowds have flocked to see the
unusual natural outline on Law Hill.  (See the
National Examiner for September 12, 2000,
"King of the Hill," page 11.)
(Editor's Comment:  What's next?  A shower of
blue suede shoes at Graceland?)

VIRGIN MARY STATUE WEEPS
TEARS OF BLOOD IN TEXAS

       "About ten thousand people viewed a Virgin Mary
statue some believe weeps tears of blood before the
image was removed from a church" on Sunday,
August 27, 2000.  The incident occurred at a Roman
Catholic church in Austin (population 500,000) the
state capital of Texas.
       "The church displayed the statue over the weekend
after neighbors complained about the throngs of people
visiting the owners' apartment to view it."
       "Church officials said they have no plans for future
public viewings."  (See USA Today for August 30,
2000, "Texas," page 8A.)
(Editor's Comment:  Uh-oh!  There's Portent Number
Two!  If any Texas readers have the full news story,
please send it to me via email.  Thanks!)

from the UFO Files...

1969: BIGFOOT MIGRATION?

       Loren Coleman, Ray Crowe and other experts in
the cryptozoology field have proclaimed the year 2000
to be the "Summer of Sasquatch."  Yet, a similar
"Bigfoot Summer" took place thirty-one years ago, back
in 1969, in Canada's province of British Columbia and
in the USA's state of Washington.
       The flap began in August 1969 in the Pacific coast
town of Grays Harbor, Washington.  Here are two actual
newspaper reports from the period:
       "British Columbia's best-known Sasquatch hunter is
convinced the latest sighting in Washington state was a
true Sasquatch."
       "'There is no doubt about it being real,' said John Green,
publisher and editor of the Agassiz, B.C. Advance.  Green
returned from a one-day trip to Grays Harbor, Washington,
where a deputy sheriff reported seeing a mysterious beast.
Green said he does not have time to pursue the hunt but
is encouraging other Sasquatch buffs to go into the
heavily-wooded area."
       "The deputy, whose identity has not been released,
told Green he saw the animal in the middle of the road
at 2:35 a.m., while driving home from work.  He said
the animal was not a bear.  It had no snout, and its face
had a leathery look."
       "It was seven to seven-and-a-half feet (2.2 to 2.4
meters) tall, and weighed about 300 to 325 pounds, he
said.  It had hands with fingers, and feet with toes."
       "The deputy told Green he photographed one track
at the edge of the road, and it measured 18 1/2 inches
(46.25 centimeters) long.  The animal walked upright."
(See the Vancouver, B.C. Sun for August 2, 1969.)
       "Many citizens of this region (Nordegg, Alberta,
Canada--J.T.) are convinced that a band of hairy creatures,
of humanoid type, lives in the nearby Rockies."
       "A merchant of this town (Nordegg)--situated 120 miles
(192 kilometers) southwest of Edmonton--has the intention
of setting out on an expedition which will seek 'the
Abominable Snowman of the Pacific.'"
       "'So many people have seen them, and we found so
many tracks that I am convinced that there is something
there,' disclosed the citizen in an interview at the end of
the week."
       "The most recent eyewitnesses of these anthropoids
are five men who are working on a vast builders' yard at
Big Horn Dam, on the North Saskatchewan River."
       "According to one of the witnesses, Mr. Floyd Engen
of Eckville, Alberta, the creature measures some 15 feet
(4.3 meters) tall and is of a dark color, probably because
of his hair, and also has sloping shoulders."
       "The Chief editor of the Agassiz Advance, Mr. John
Green, thinks that this anthropoid is a Sasquatch,
weighing five tons."
       "Many people, including Indians, scientists,
workers and technicians have given descriptions which
correspond to this kind of Yeti, which walks with
giant steps."  (See La Presse of Montreal, Que.
Canada for September 2, 1969.  Both articles are
taken from Extraterrestrial Intervention: The Evidence
by Jacques Bergier and the editors of INFO, Henry
Regnery and Co., Chicago, IL, 1972, pages 98
through 101.)

IN MEMORIAM: World-famous ufologist Cynthia Hind
passed away on Monday, August 21, 2000 following a
short illness.  Ms. Hind, who lived in Zimbabwe, was
an author, raconteur and UFO investigator.  In July
1988, she founded and edited the periodical
UFO AfriNews.  The newsletter ceased publication
with her death.  She was also a contributor to
UFO Roundup.

       That'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 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.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:57:15 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:25:22 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 13:13:52 +0100

<snip>

 >(c) to the side of the lighthouse - through the winter tree
 >foliage at least - you could also see stationary building lights
 >(on masts etc on the buildings on the Ness). Some of these
 >either were blue or looked bluish - probably because of the
 >distance.

Hi, Jenny, everybody:

I believe that lights would redden with distance, at least they
might yellow a bit, particularly if low in the sky, due to the
increased scattering of the blue end of the spectrum. Just like
sunsets.

 >B: On the other hand why was the lighthouse never seen and
 >reported at the same time as the UFO? Without answering that
 >huge question it is impossible to dismiss the idea that the
 >lighthouse somehow triggered the experience.

I agree, this seems to be a crucial point. Why would it not
have been noticed?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:57:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:26:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:58:56 -0300

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>Could we agree to the following statement: Investigations have
 >>resulted in from 30% to a few percent unkowns, depending upon
 >>who is doing the counting?

<snip>

 >Far more important is the methodology , the detail of the
 >investigation.

Stan, List:

Granted.

 >Artist or scientists?

Well, since I am neither, it doesn't matter whose ox I gore.
What kind of scientists do you think are exclusively equipped to
investigate UFO sightings? I assume, here, that not all
scientists are equal. Like a microbiologist vs. an astronomer
or atmospheric physicist, for example. In the same way that not
all artists are equal. Hendry, I believe, had a minor in
Astronomy; he had been one of Hynek's students at Northwestern.

 >>This thread started out with the Linda incident in NYC. A
 >>probable explanation has been identified: a strickingly similar
 >>story in a novel.

 >What basis is there for saying this explanation is probable?
 >Possible? Yes.

Well, whatever.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                  Re: UFO UpDate: Roswell TV Show - Johnson

From: James Bond Johnson <JBONJO@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:07:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:29:15 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Roswell TV Show - Johnson


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Roswell TV Show
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:00:47 -0300

<snip>

I was interviewed in Roswell on about July 3.

<snip>

Stan,

I was interviewed for this PAX TV show at my home in Long Beach,
CA, on July 5. The TV crew was still exclaiming over what an
outstanding interview you gave them in Roswell! They also
apparently interviewed Harold Burt, who was in Roswell signing
his popular new book "Flying Saucers 101." It will be
interesting to see who else they interviewed.

It was good to hear you speak at the Orange
County MUFON recently.

Bond Johnson






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:12:55 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:30:58 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark



 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:44:45 -0500 (CDT)

 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Cashman

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>95% of reported UFOs are classed as IFOs.


Chris,

My remarks below are not directed at you. It's just that before
the usual UFO bashers rush to endorse your conclusions (as they
are certain to do), they'd better have a clearer idea of the
implications of those conclusions.

 >When I look through Peter Davenport's data, it's easy to see
 >that the 95% rule likely applies. Many cases are obviously of
 >satellites, stars and whatnot, even from a cursory glance,
 >without having any real case info available for follow-up.

So it's possible to judge, simply from what they say about what
they saw, that people are describing IFOs? Their testimony is so
accurate that for a proper identification all one needs is a
"cursory glance"? Fascinating.

In other words, are we to believe that eyewitness testimony
isn't so unreliable after all? Surely, then, it follows, of
course, that if we can use it to discern IFOs, we can also trust
it to tell us about UFOs, too -- you know, all those structured,
metallic craftlike objects, seen at close range by credible
people, that look nothing at all like Venus, satellites,
auroras, meteors, or airplanes?

Then again, I may be violating one of debunkerdom's most sacred
laws: that logical consistency isn't necessary if it gets in the
way of bashing UFO reports and reporters. After all, who needs
logic and consistency when you're battling a hated heresy?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:25:44 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:32:36 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:29 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


Bob,

 >I have a friend who has been a lifelong astronomy enthusiast who
 >was a member of the airbase security unit at Loring AFB, Main,
 >USA, at the time of the famous sightings there back in the 70s.
 >He told me that other guards would report UFOs which were
 >astronomical objects, and even auroral rays would be reported as
 >UFOs behind the trees. He told me it was really wild, that
 >other guys were reporting "everything" as UFOs. In his opinion,
 >and he was out there at night on patrol, was that nothing out of
 >the ordinary (beyond aircraft and sky objects) happened.

And how did your friend know that the guards were reporting
"astronomical objects and even auroral rays" and mistaking them
for UFOs? Could it be that their erroneous interpretations
notwithstanding, their eyewitness testimony was accurate enough
to enable him to a proper identification?

If so, you've got me confused. You self-described skeptics are
always telling us that eyewitness testimony is inherently
inaccurate and untrustworthy, in common with anecdotal testimony
(which is, I might add, what you've just give us above). Now, it
turns out, eyewitness testimony is so on target that even
without further investigation we can use it to explain bogus
reports. So it must follow that when people report daylight
discs, humanoids, and the like -- things that couldn't possibly
be IFOs, if you credit the testimony -- we can take the
reporting accuracy just as seriously. Right?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:02:03 CST
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 12:34:46 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:12:55 -0500

 >Chris,

 >My remarks below are not directed at you. It's just that before
 >the usual UFO bashers rush to endorse your conclusions (as they
 >are certain to do), they'd better have a clearer idea of the
 >implications of those conclusions.

Hi Jerry!

Yes, the interpretations of UFO data studies is a pretty dicey one,
and one that I am certain is at the real core of UFO research,
needing a lot more attention than it's currently getting.

 > >When I look through Peter Davenport's data, it's easy to see
 > >that the 95% rule likely applies. Many cases are obviously of
 > >satellites, stars and whatnot, even from a cursory glance,
 > >without having any real case info available for follow-up.

 >So it's possible to judge, simply from what they say about what
 >they saw, that people are describing IFOs? Their testimony is so
 >accurate that for a proper identification all one needs is a "cursory
 >glance"? Fascinating.

In a word, yes. I think it is possible. If I see or hear a
report of something that sounds like a fireball, then I think
it's reasonable to believe it was a fireball, without
considering alien spaceships even for an instant. If a person
reports seeing a stationary light in the western sky that
twinkles and changes colors, and it's there for two or three
hours, then it's proabbly not a hovering space platform but a
star or planet. Not especially rocket science.

 >In other words, are we to believe that eyewitness testimony
 >isn't so unreliable after all? Surely, then, it follows, of
 >course, that if we can use it to discern IFOs, we can also trust it to
 >tell us about UFOs, too -- you know, all those structured, metallic
 >craftlike objects, seen at close range by credible people, that look
 >nothing at all like Venus, satellites, auroras, meteors, or airplanes?

I like your devils advocate position. Yes, and I think this
comes out quite nicely in Stan Friedman's lectures, for example,
when he points out that Grudge and BB Report conclusions show
that "Unknows" have distinctly different characteristics than
the IFOs, which are relatively easy to spot in the data.

To put it bluntly, if there's anything that my 25+ years in the
UFO biz has shown me, it's that eyewitness testimony is
painfully unreliable. It would be so nice if it wasn't, but
that's the fact of the matter. If a person reports a _UFO_ that
is described as a fast-moving ball of fire, giving off sparks,
then it's probably a fireball, not the 5:15 from Zeta Reticuli.

While this view may brand me a Klassic skeptic by some, I think
I'm simply a good UFO investigator and researcher (and a humble
one, too). I've actually taken the time to really study case
reports in depth for a few decades, and I have a good sense of
the limitations of UFO investigations. It seems to be a
reasonable and rational approach to UFO research.

 >Then again, I may be violating one of debunkerdom's most sacred
 >laws: that logical consistency isn't necessary if it gets in the way
 >of bashing UFO reports and reporters. After all, who needs logic and
 >consistency when you're battling a hated heresy?

LOL! Next thing you'll be telling me is that the world isn't
flat!

No offense taken, Four-eyes! :^)

Chris Rutkowski
The (also-self-proclaimed) Anti-Duke of Zendoma


Media Relations Coordinator
Public Affairs Department
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada  R3T 2N2
  voice:  (204) 474-9514
e-mail:  Chris_Rutkowski@umanitoba.ca









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:13:09 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 12:37:21 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Clark


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:58:56 -0300

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300

 >>>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:31:14 EDT
 >>>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>>>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:32:13 -0400


Stan,

 >>>1. 21.5% of 3201 sightings investigated by Battelle Memorial
 >>>Institute under Contract to the USAF Project Blue Book were
 >>>finally labelled as 'Unknowns' (all 4 of the evaluators had to
 >>>agree before a sighting could be listed as 'Unknown') completely
 >>>separate and distinct from the 9.3% listed as Insufficient
 >>>Information. So overall only 70% were identified.

 >>>2. According to the AIAA UFO Committee 30% of the 117 cases
 >>>studied by the U. of Colorado (Condon Report) could _not_ be
 >>>identified... again leaving only 70%.

 >>According to a later study by J. Allen Hynek and Center for UFO
 >>Studies workers the USAF figure of unexplained cases was
 >>reduced to 5.8%.

 >It is true that Hendry claims (p.245) that CUFOS reexamined all
 >13,000 Blue Book case in the summer of 1976 and that only about
 >5% are worthy of being considered genuine UFOs. He says nothing
 >about who did it, what the standards were, or provide any good
 >reasons for us to blindly accept this number. Compare this with
 >BMI which had scientists and engineers spending full time for
 >years. They published over 240 charts tables,graphs and maps.
 >They did quality evaluations of all the cases. They did a
 >statistical cross comparison between _unknowns_ and _knowns_ on
 >the basis of six different characteristics. The probability
 >that the _unknowns_ were just missed knowns was found to be less
 >than 1%.

 >Perhaps I should comment that I was not impressed with Hendry's
 >approach. Maybe the difference between a scientist and an
 >artist. I recall his publishing a totally wrong claim that Zeta
 >l or Zeta 2 Reticuli was a double star based on a footnote to an
 >article, but without checking with the source.

I think that in the larger argument, you're right. Allan Hendry
made many contributions, and he also jumped to conclusions which
later proved wrong. During his life in ufology, I knew him well,
and I liked and respected him, but as you would not know from
the uncritical skeptical citations here, he was not a god, and
he could be mistaken. The UFO Handbook is a very fine book, but
its conclusions deserve more critical scrutiny than all but a
few have been willing to give them. Its fundamental point --
that science cannot address the UFO phenomenon -- is, I believe,
extremely questionable.

Allan was a good investigator, but so was James McDonald, and
McDonald drew on a particularly relevant area of science --
atmospheric physics -- in which Hendry had no particular
expertise.. Ufology has seen other first-rate investigators, who
for some reason never get cited by skeptics and debunkers: J.
Allen Hynek (who probably conducted more field investigations
than anyone in the history of the subject), Walt Webb, Bill
Weitzel, Ted Bloecher, Jennie Zeidman, Ray Fowler, and others.

But in the interest of fairness, I must contest your dismissal
of Allan as a mere "artist." He was (and, I'm sure, still is)
scientifically literate, and not just from his own personal
reading and interest. His B.A. (from the University of Michigan,
no diploma mill) was in _both_ astronomy and art, and he did
further graduate work in astronomy. In fact, his interest in art
was linked directly with his interest in the cosmos. All of the
illustrations of his I saw were of scientific (and of course
ufological) subjects. When he moved to Arizona, leaving ufology
behind, he soon became involved with a public-radio station and
had a regular show dealing with astronomy education. Allan's
scientific credentials are beyond dispute.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 12:46:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:03:59 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Young


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:08:28 -0400

<snip>

 >The core of the Linda case is a UFO that allegedly hovers over a
 >New York apartment building, where it's seen abducting people.

Greg:

Other than Linda, herself, and a letter which she claimed to
have received from "Richard", can you name anyone who has
publicly said they witnessed the UFO/abduction?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:28:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:11:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:25:40 -0400

 >>Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 04:18:41 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Greg, has this point (why the kidnapping was never reported)
 >>ever come up in your discussions with Budd about Linda's case?
 >>If so, 'why' wasn't it reported?

Greg responded:

 >"Officer, I want to report a kidnapping. I'm the one who was
 >kidnapped."

 >"Tell me all about it."

 >So Linda tells the story, and the officer asks fairly obvious
 >questions.

 >"Have you ever seen this man before? Do you know him?"

 >How could Linda answer that?

With very simple and direct answers that do not volunteer any
more information than is necessary. She could easily have turned
the whole thing around on Richard and Dan by telling the Feds
that two men claiming to be Federal agents knocked on her door
one day and accused her of being in cahoots with aliens from
outer space. They then reappeared at a later date and kidnapped
her off of a Manhattan street in broad daylight by shoving her
into a car and driving her out to a remote location on Long
Island.

At no time does she have to 'volunteer' the information that she
herself believes that she is being abducted by aliens. It was a
straight forward kidnapping by two apparent nuts jobs. How was
she or Budd to know (at the time) that there would not be a
repeat performance? Richard and Dan represented a real and
dangerous threat to Linda's well being. Maybe even to her life.
I have just never been able to reconcile in my head why neither
one of them reported the kidnapping.

 >If she tells the whole story, the police won't take her seriously.

As I stated above all she had to do was to put the 'stink' on
Richard and Dan. No need at all for her to volunteer that she
thinks the alien abduction part is true. In fact, without that
admission on her part it makes Richard and Dan look even
crazier. All she had to do was to 'play dumb' about her own
recollections and relate the story to the Feds from the part
where she first met Richard and Dan at her front door. Two nuts
asking crazy questions and making crazy accusations who later
kidnapped her.

Nothing more, nothing less. Linda's hands are clean. Innocent
housewife and mother reporting two dangerous whacko's.

 >"Well, I was abducted by a UFO, and, see, these federal agents..."

I don't see why that is the only way she could have related the
information. Why is more concern being shown for how she or Budd
may be 'percieved' by the police rather than on her safety?

 >But if she holds most of it
 >back -- and she'd have to hold back most of it, or be dismissed
 >as a nutcase -- any experienced cop will know she's not telling
 >what she knows. And that, too, will be suspicious.

Yes, if she puts herself at the center of it all. If she was to
just present the _facts_ (two monkeys claiming to be Feds showed
up at her door accusing her of insane things and who later
returned to kidnap her) would have been sufficient. She doesn't
have to volunteer her own beliefs about the abduction at all.

No big thing. Just that I would have been a wreck wondering if
they were going to come back to try it again- with what may have
been a much more dire outcome. She was lucky to get away. Dan
(especially) represented a very real threat to her life. I would
have reported the kidnapping to every bloody agency concerned
with such matters. Local fuzz, Feds, anybody. The point would be
to get those two lunatics identified, off the street, and put
someplace where they no longer represented a threat to life or
limb for Linda or her family.

I would have reported it. And if I had been around at the time I
would have encouraged her to report it. Linda and Budd both took
a terrible and dangerous risk by not reporting the kidnapping to
the proper authorities.

It's just a detail that has always bugged me. Not because I
don't believe Linda but because I do believe her. I would have
wanted to protect her at all costs. Apparently they were much
more concerned about being perceived as "crazy" by the police
than they were about Linda's safety/life.

Everybody has their own priorities I suppose.

Just as side note. As a researcher/investigator I would have
thought that Budd would have jumped at an opportunity to get the
Federal Bureau of Investigation involved in a major abduction
case. It would have locked it up for him and verified the whole
case. Via the Feds he would have had proof that Richard and Dan
are real and who they worked for. The Feds would have gotten (or
tried to) access to any UN logs and such that would place
Richard, Dan, DeCuellar, et al under the Brooklyn Bridge at the
time of the abduction.

Thanx for the response.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:41:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:13:06 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:30 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 ><snip>

 >>There is also some reason to believe that more highly
 >>qualified observers are less likely to report their sighting,
 >>especially if no officially respectable resource exists.

 >Agreed. Also I think there are an unkown number of not reported
 >investigations about these by these "highly qualified" observers
 >or investigators. I once had occasion to ask, privately and
 >individually, the professional astronomers working within 30
 >miles of me what they thought of UFOs. Nearly all (I think 4 of
 >5 at the time) told me that they had looked into reports, often
 >when they were students or early in their careers, and has
 >concluded that there wasn't anything there.

Hello Bob, Mark and List,

Contrary to what is generally believed, a scientist has to be a
loony to find nothing in UFO reports.

We should never forget peer pressure - and there is a lot in the
scientific community - when it comes to express opinions on
UFOs. When I was a student (late 60s), there was this physics
teacher of mine who used to make fun of my curiosity for UFOs.
Of course, he knew better than I did.

I finally lost patience and brought him a copy of the Socorro
incident published if the Flying Saucer Review at the time (1968
if I remember correctly?).

I guess the guy had been reading too much of Menzel's. He really
needed some Gripple to swallow it down. Unfortunately for him,
the stuff was to reach the market 30 years later.

I must add that this teacher never joked about UFOs afterwards.
He never gave me an articulate opinion on the FSR report either.

A scientist by profession does not own a free ticket for a
_credible_ opinion on UFOs. He must first be aware of the UFO
data out there. I am not talking about Menzel, Klass, Adamski or
Corso, who all fit in the same wagon.

Most "scientists" who are outspoken about the un-reality of UFOs
rarely if ever have a basis for their position. One that comes
to mind is Carl Sagan who, if I remember correctly, never
consulted a UFO report. One will also note that the forte of
this breed of "scientist" is gospel, never data.

To pretend that UFOs are unreal because 95% or 99% of the
reported UFOs are IFOs would be like pretending that Elvis never
existed because of the amount of Elvis sightings, or that John
McEnroe does not exist because, out of 1000 people who report
seeing him, 990 are wrong.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:38:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:15:26 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Rutkowski - Stacy


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@Ms.UManitoba.CA>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:02:03 CST
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

<snip>

 >To put it bluntly, if there's anything that my 25+ years in the
 >UFO biz has shown me, it's that eyewitness testimony is
 >painfully unreliable. It would be so nice if it wasn't, but
 >that's the fact of the matter. If a person reports a _UFO_ that
 >is described as a fast-moving ball of fire, giving off sparks,
 >then it's probably a fireball, not the 5:15 from Zeta Reticuli.

<snip>

 >Chris Rutkowski

Chris,

A few years back, I had the honor of sharing the top of
Woodborough Hill in Wiltshire late one night with Dr. Greer and
groupies. As the late Ralph Noyes and I walked past a small
circle of sitters and watchers, one of them cried out to the
others, "There it is again!"

Naturally, we both looked up to see what "it" was. It was a
faintly glowing disk of substantive size, traveling pretty
rapidly, which then abrupty and silently disappeared as
dramatically as it had come. A short time later, here it came
again -- and again.

One of us had the temerity to point out that what was actually
being seen was a military searchlight beam striking the bottoms
of some low-lying clouds. We thought the fact that it was
repeating itself in a regular rhythm would convince the
onlookers, too, but not so. In fact, our solution was not at all
welcome. We moved apologetically on.

Some people probably are good observers and reporters. But it's
also obvious that a lot of people bring their preconceptions
with them when it comes to the perception of objective reality.

As it turned out, the Skywatch coincided with a large British
military exercise. Consequently, a few flares got mistaken for
UFOs that night, too.

The above may sound like a smarmy set up on my part, but that's
what happened.

And it's not just a one off, either. Several times I've been at
the Marfa Lights viewing area in west Texas just as a bus load
of tourists pulls up from the nearby Prude dude ranch. They ooh
and aah for 20-30 minutes, then get back in the bus and happily
drive off. They've seen the Lights!

And indeed they have -- the headlights of cars on Hwy 67 coming
into Marfa from Presidio. If you've read as many accounts of the
Lights as I have, you'd be amazed at the colors and behavior
these headlights sometimes undertake. Among other things they
float, flare, divide, multiply, change colors, and disappear.

Now, there may well be a real, underlying ghost light phenomenon
west of the Pecos -- but you gotta eliminate them car headlights
first. And that's sometimes hard to do -- particularly when you
weren't there when it happened.

For example, I've got several cases in my files where the Lights
were said to have behaved intelligently and/or interacted with
the observer. Someone's also selling a videotape of the
headlights.

FWIW

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 >
   Sep > Sep 7

             Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith

From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 14:36:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:16:48 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith



Compliments of the Duke:

 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:37:53 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Are you suggesting here that the view through the starlight
 >scope showed red?  Usually such devices produce a greenish
 >picture.

I think you're confusing the Starlite (a light intensifier) with
an infrared-sensitive "night vision device", as Halt & Co seem
to have done (or worse). I don't know how the former work, but
they don't work in the microwave region, just within the visible
spectrum with available light.

 >Whether or not Halt was familiar with a starlight scope can be
 >only speculation without asking him.

Reasonably informed speculation though. Halt and gang seemed to
think the brightness of the notches in the trees as seen through
the scope showed they were "radioactive". Not in the colloquial
sense of the word, they weren't.

Hope this helps.

best wishes
Powersteering D. Mercury
Leather Interior








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:42:11 +0200
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:24:28 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:08:28 -0400


 >No way! I've read the novel, and its alleged similarities with
 >the Linda case are a complete and total myth, promulgated by
 >George Hansen, Joseph Stefula, and Richard Butler in their
 >notorious "white paper" on the case.

(snip)

 >The other alleged similarities are just as dissimilar.

Sorry, Greg, I have also read the novel and I disagree. I kindly
refer you to my post last July that (curiously) nobody
commented on. I will quote the main point again:

The three main points in Linda Cortile's abduction (a) abductee
speaking alien tongue, b) abductee working with the aliens, c)
sexual bonding since childhood between pairs of abductees) were
written several months before the alleged abduction. This is, at
least, a clear evidence of a sociological influence or, in the
worst scenario, proof of a hoax.

Let me put it more clearly. The most amazing point made in
Hopkins' book, the cornerstone of Linda Cortile's case, was how
the aliens had orchestrated the lifes of two abductees in order
to reunite them one night in lower Manhattan for an apocalyptic
message. The main surprise of Nighteyes' plot (besides the
aliens being humans) is when two apparently independent
abductees met again, in order to become the founders of a future
race. How can anybody miss the paralelism?

Any comments?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 7

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 16:01:45 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:27:25 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Young


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:25:44 -0500

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:29 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I have a friend who has been a lifelong astronomy enthusiast who
 >>was a member of the airbase security unit at Loring AFB, Main,
 >>USA, at the time of the famous sightings there back in the 70s.
 >>He told me that other guards would report UFOs which were
 >>astronomical objects, and even auroral rays would be reported as
 >>UFOs behind the trees. He told me it was really wild, that
 >>other guys were reporting "everything" as UFOs. In his opinion,
 >and he was out there at night on patrol, was that nothing out of
 >>the ordinary (beyond aircraft and sky objects) happened.

Hi, Jerry:

 >And how did your friend know that the guards were reporting
 >"astronomical objects and even auroral rays" and mistaking them
 >for UFOs?

He was there and was familiar with these astronomical phenomena.
They were, after all, Venus, Jupiter and aurorae, which he has
seen many, many times before and since.

 >Could it be that their erroneous interpretations
 >notwithstanding, their eyewitness testimony was accurate
 >enough to enable him to a proper identification?

Yes, could be, since he saw them, too.

 >If so, you've got me confused. You self-described skeptics are
 >always telling us that eyewitness testimony is inherently
 >inaccurate and untrustworthy,

Uh, huh, go on ...

 >in common with anecdotal testimony (which is, I might
 >add, what you've just give us above).

Touche (slight slash on cheek, a drop of blood).

I was offering support for the view that even military security
guards might be untrained or inexperienced regarding the night
sky. Hey, they might just be like the rest of us.

With the advantage of the perches you and I occupy on our
armchairs 25 years after these incidents, (I have to be carefull
now that I don't tip the thing too far over backwards, I have a
sick kitty sleeping right behind the chair), I don't think that
it's unreasonable to bring in the testimony of somebody who was
actually there during the sightings, and who was knowledgeable
about astronomy.

 >Now, it turns out, eyewitness testimony is so on
 >target that even without further investigation we can
 >use it to explain bogus reports.

Huh? Without further investigation? The guy was there. Do you
think that Uncle Phil lied when he described conducting an
investigation on pp. 92-105 of UFOs The Public Decieved?

 >when people report daylight discs, humanoids, andthe like --
 >things that couldn't possibly be IFOs, if you credit the
 >testimony -- we can take the reportingaccuracy just as
 >seriously. Right?

Lumping "daylight discs" and "humanoids" together is about as
bizarre as taking everyone's word for it, but I'll take the
bait.

Yes, everyone is _sometimes_ wrong about what they think they
have just seen or experienced, and yes, everyone is _sometimes_
right about what they think they have experienced. This is the
human condition.

But, your average 21 year-old military guards aren't always the
world's most perfect observers of the night sky, while 21
year-old amateur astronomers who are military guards -
presumeably with the same imperfect military training, _might_
just be better.

Every investigator judges witness credibility. Unless, of couse,
all one is interested in doing is just retelling tales or maybe
participating in the vicarious thrill of the witness's story.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                    Australian UFO Conference March 2001

From: Diane Harrison Director AUFORN <tkbnetw@powerup.com.au>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:01:05 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:37:16 -0400
Subject: Australian UFO Conference March 2001

AUSTRALIAN
UFO CONFERENCE MARCH 2001

Tell all your friends.
Listen be shocked be told the truth

UFO Conference March 2001
Melbourne and Sydney

Exploring ways of responding to the extraordinary.

Australian and International acclaimed speaker discussing:

-: Abduction
-: Scientific Research
-: UFO Encounters
-: Phenomena Explained and much more.

Gain first hand knowledge of the latest experience that are
happening in the world today.

A Conference that is out of this World
WE ARE NOT ALONE

For more details contact
Cathy on  61.. 03 5985 8052 VIC
E-mail ...info@conf-run.com.au

The Australasian UFOlogist Magazine
61 07 38088567 QLD
ufologist@powerup.com.au
tkbnetw@powerup.com.au
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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:17:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:40:35 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 16:01:45 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:25:44 -0500
 >
 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:29 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Hi, Bob,

 >>>I have a friend who has been a lifelong astronomy enthusiast who
 >>>was a member of the airbase security unit at Loring AFB, Main,
 >>>USA, at the time of the famous sightings there back in the 70s.
 >>>He told me that other guards would report UFOs which were
 >>>astronomical objects, and even auroral rays would be reported as
 >>>UFOs behind the trees. He told me it was really wild, that
 >>>other guys were reporting "everything" as UFOs. In his opinion,
 >>and he was out there at night on patrol, was that nothing out of
 >>>the ordinary (beyond aircraft and sky objects) happened.

 >>And how did your friend know that the guards were reporting
 >>"astronomical objects and even auroral rays" and mistaking them
 >>for UFOs?

 >He was there and was familiar with these astronomical phenomena.
 >They were, after all, Venus, Jupiter and aurorae, which he has
 >seen many, many times before and since.

I think you've missed my point. I was not disputing your
friend's assessment of what these objects really were. I agree
that the sightings are unimpressive, and I'm inclined to think
your friend is correct. What I was saying was something else,
namely this:

Their erroneous interpretations of what they saw
notwithstanding, the witnesses' observations were accurate
enough so that your friend was able through them to get a pretty
good idea of what the true stimuli were. That means, then, that
eyewitness testimony is, often enough, close enough to the mark.
If that holds true for IFO-sighting, it surely as well holds
true for UFO-sighting. Unless, of course, one is trying to posit
some sort of unfalsifiable hypothesis in which IFO sighters
usually get things essentially right and UFO sighters always get
them essentially wrong.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden

From: Dave Bowden <grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 02:41:32 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:44:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld? - Bowden


 >From: Terry Rhodes <UtterMole@cs.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 19:26:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:11:30 +0100
 >>From: Dave Bowden >grafikfx@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Video Footage of Aliens Witheld?

 >>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.

 >But later in your post you stated the footage ONLY shows UFOs,
 >which does it show, an unidentified flying object or an alien craft?

As I said before, there's still some footage that remains an
unknown for the time being. So the answer to your question is
'an unidentified flying object'.

 >>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.

 >Is it your expert opinion that this military helicopter is also
 >responsible for the crop formation that was alleged to have been
 >created by the 'FT' that Chris Martin captured on video?

No, it was just a helicopter.

 >>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'.

 >A similar report still sits on the Lost Haven website that you
 >have admitted to being a contributor to. How credible are your
 >associates for portraying the facts about UFO sightings?

I have contributed some images and one .AVI file. As I also said
before, perhaps you should take it up with Roy, it is his
website after all.

 >>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.

 >How does Chris feel about his footage being promoted as showing
 >the alien visitors themselves?

If you go to one of the meetings you can ask Chris yourself.

 >>Cutting to the chase however, we have other stuff which just
 >>doesn't fit any category.
 >
 >Not even alien?

When you say 'alien' I take it you mean 'space alien'?

Maybe I should have said any 'known' category, apologies if you
misunderstood me.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                   CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Grenfell,

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:47:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:46:52 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Grenfell,



CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 7, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #1 - GRENFELL, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


Following is a ground report on the Grenfell, Saskatchewan
circle from Dennis Eklund, Saskatchewan director for CPR-Canada.
It should be noted that both the farmer and reporter who
initially reported the circle described a neat, radial lay
pattern, with the formation apparently suffering considerable
damage by the time Dennis was able to get to it on the 27th.
Ground shot photos from Dennis are now posted on the web site as
well:

http://www.geocities.com/grenfell00.html

Paul Anderson



GRENFELL REPORT

On August 27th while driving back to Saskatoon from the dumbbell
formation in Moosomin we had the opportunity to take a look at
the small formation on the farm of Lloyd Arthur located just
south of Grenfell, Saskatchewan.

Although Lloyd was not at home at the time, his son was kind
enough to show us the way to the formation. Located in the field
of wheat about 30 yards off the gravel road it was apparent that
it was not the classic type of formation we are all used to
seeing. Measuring approximately 10 feet in diameter it was plain
to see it was not a neat or perfect circle. Both the floor of
the formation still showing a slight radial effect and the outer
edges offered no uniformity giving the whole formation a very
disorganized and messy appearance. This could be partially due
to the damage caused to the formation after being recently
swathed and also the visitors it attracted since being
discovered August 9th.

The crop seemed to be pushed down from the centre and out in all
directions into the standing crop giving the formation an uneven
circumference. Although time restrictions did not allow us to do
any sampling, I did notice some swollen node abnormalities, even
the odd stem of crop bent completely at a right angle at the
node itself. Because the field was already swathed it was hard
to tell if there were any colour differences as previously
reported. We concluded our brief examination by taking the
following photos and also doing a compass and battery check
inside the formation. No abnormalities were discovered. Small
but interesting, it would of been nice to spend more time
examining.

Dennis Eklund
CPR-Canada
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
dbrentt@home.com

_____________________________


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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

              CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Hazlet, Saskatchewan

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:48:12 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:52:40 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Hazlet, Saskatchewan


CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 7, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #1 - HAZLET, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


An aerial photo has been added to the web site:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/hazlet00.html

� Ian Sletten

*Correction: the previous direct links for the last updates with
latest reports and images for the Moosomin and Grenfell
formations in Saskatchewan should be:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/moosomin00.html

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/grenfell00.html


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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                  Clark's Law [was: 'Linda' Case Footnote]

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:51:51 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:50:23 -0400
Subject: Clark's Law [was: 'Linda' Case Footnote]


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:12:55 -0500

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:44:45 -0500 (CDT)

 >Chris,

 >My remarks below are not directed at you. It's just that before
 >the usual UFO bashers rush to endorse your conclusions (as they
 >are certain to do), they'd better have a clearer idea of the
 >implications of those conclusions.

 >>When I look through Peter Davenport's data, it's easy to see
 >>that the 95% rule likely applies. Many cases are obviously of
 >>satellites, stars and whatnot, even from a cursory glance,
 >>without having any real case info available for follow-up.

 >So it's possible to judge, simply from what they say about what
 >they saw, that people are describing IFOs? Their testimony is so
 >accurate that for a proper identification all one needs is a
 >"cursory glance"? Fascinating.

 >In other words, are we to believe that eyewitness testimony
 >isn't so unreliable after all? Surely, then, it follows, of
 >course, that if we can use it to discern IFOs, we can also trust
 >it to tell us about UFOs, too -- you know, all those structured,
 >metallic craftlike objects, seen at close range by credible
 >people, that look nothing at all like Venus, satellites,
 >auroras, meteors, or airplanes?

 >Then again, I may be violating one of debunkerdom's most sacred
 >laws: that logical consistency isn't necessary if it gets in the
 >way of bashing UFO reports and reporters. After all, who needs
 >logic and consistency when you're battling a hated heresy?

 >Jerry Clark


Or, to offer a condensation which I'll humbly term:

   "Clark's Law of Debunking"

   UFO witness descriptions are inherently unreliable,
   unless they produce an IFO.


-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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

               Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:43:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 08:56:40 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:29 EDT
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
 >>From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza <DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>3. As an educated American you, I suspect, would be astonished
 >>at how little your compatriots seem to notice *or accept* when
 >>beyond the confines of their own great nation. There are various
 >>statements scattered throughout the mass of American testimony
 >>on this case that powerfully suggest that many airmen, including
 >>the security police, were remarkably -- to a British country
 >>gent -- unaware of the local sky at night.

 >Dear PB, Dave, Other Ranks:

 >I have a friend who has been a lifelong astronomy enthusiast who
 >was a member of the airbase security unit at Loring AFB, Main,
 >USA, at the time of the famous sightings there back in the 70s.
 >He told me that other guards would report UFOs which were
 >astronomical objects, and even auroral rays would be reported as
 >UFOs behind the trees. He told me it was really wild, that
 >other guys were reporting "everything" as UFOs. In his opinion,
 >and he was out there at night on patrol, was that nothing out of
t>he ordinary (beyond aircraft and sky objects) happened.>

 >Philip J. Klass proposed that astronomical objects (one light
 >and no radar contact, for example) and flights by a civilian
 >helicopter taking survey pictures provided good explanations.
 >See the details of his investigation in: 'UFOs: The Public
 >Deceived', Prometheus Books, 1983, pp. 89, 92-97,105.)>

 >Many of the kids in these airbase security units thought they
 >were going to be in the MPs and get training as policemen. They
 >are often disappointed to learn that they are just security
 >guards. Not to denegrate them, but I doubt that they get any
 >training regarding what's in the sky. When they stumble upon
 >the one spot in a wood where a lighthouse beam is visible, it's
 >wasn't surprising that they were puzzled.


The 1975 SAC base flyovers are not as simple as you portray.
Perhaps the Loring case was the "simplest." And even that
involved a helicopter chase of an object, I spoke to one of the
witnesses who described an orange glowing light hovering over
the weapons storage area. These objects were called
"helicopters" but obviously weren't. 'Clear Intent' by
Greenwood and Fawcett is based on the Loring and other base
incidents. The title comes right out of the Loring incident
report.

There is no doubt, unfortunately, that once people have been
alerted or "radicalized" into accepting the idea that there are
strang things flying around, then some of the people will
misidentify nomal things as UFOs simply because they don't know
what is normally in the sky. To reject _all_ sightings simply
because some of them are explainable is not acceptable.

Klass' suggested explanation is just that... a suggestion...
which is proposed as a blanket explanation. HOwever, it does not
fit all the reports. (Malmstrom AFB in particular where several
security guards reported a bright object hovering over a missil
field. Jets were scrambled. As soon as the jets the light turned
off. Came back on after the jets passed over, Eventually shot
straight upward. Was picked up on radar during its ascent. This
all comes from official NORAD documentation that became
available through the FOIA as a result of the leak of
information about the Loring incidents in Oct. 1975)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                   Bulletin of Anomalous Experience CD Rom

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:14:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:01:56 -0400
Subject: Bulletin of Anomalous Experience CD Rom


Hi,

Dr David Gotlib has asked me to forward this message as people
are using a wrong address to order his excellent CD Rom.

Can I also remind anyone who wants to try to win this as part of
the prize, that the UFOIN competition is still open to win a
package of abduction goodies. All we require by 30 September is
a 500 word (approx) e-mail submission setting out a plan for a
new investigation/research strategy into abduction cases.

Each entry is going onto the UFOIN web site (check out
www.ufoin.org.uk)

Everyone can vote on the winner during the first week of
October.

Entries should be sent tpo  nufon@currantbun.com

Dr Gotlib's message follows...

"Dr. David Gotlib, who is offering the five-year run (1990-1994)
of Bulletin of Anomalous Experience newsletter on abductions and
UFO research on CDROM, wishes to advise all that he has
relocated to Canada and can now be contacted at:

79 Hilton Avenue,
Toronto, Ontario,
M5R 3E8
Canada

or by email at:

dgotlib@sympatico.ca


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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:02:01 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:11:05 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:13:09 -0500

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman
 >>Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:58:56 -0300

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 10:13:54 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>>Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 13:54:01 -0300


 >Stan,

 >>>>1. 21.5% of 3201 sightings investigated by Battelle Memorial
 >>>>Institute under Contract to the USAF Project Blue Book were
 >>>>finally labelled as 'Unknowns' (all 4 of the evaluators had to
 >>>>agree before a sighting could be listed as 'Unknown') completely
 >>>>separate and distinct from the 9.3% listed as Insufficient
 >>>>Information. So overall only 70% were identified.

 >>>>2. According to the AIAA UFO Committee 30% of the 117 cases
 >>>>studied by the U. of Colorado (Condon Report) could _not_ be
 >>>>identified... again leaving only 70%.

 >>>According to a later study by J. Allen Hynek and Center for UFO
 >>>Studies workers the USAF figure of unexplained cases was
 >>>reduced to 5.8%.

 >>It is true that Hendry claims (p.245) that CUFOS reexamined all
 >>13,000 Blue Book case in the summer of 1976 and that only about
 >>5% are worthy of being considered genuine UFOs. He says nothing
 >>about who did it, what the standards were, or provide any good
 >>reasons for us to blindly accept this number. Compare this with
 >>BMI which had scientists and engineers spending full time for
 >>years. They published over 240 charts tables,graphs and maps.
 >>They did quality evaluations of all the cases. They did a
 >>statistical cross comparison between _unknowns_ and _knowns_ on
 >>the basis of six different characteristics. The probability
 >>that the _unknowns_ were just missed knowns was found to be less
 >>than 1%.

 >>Perhaps I should comment that I was not impressed with Hendry's
 >>approach. Maybe the difference between a scientist and an
 >>artist. I recall his publishing a totally wrong claim that Zeta
 >>l or Zeta 2 Reticuli was a double star based on a footnote to an
 >>article, but without checking with the source.

 >I think that in the larger argument, you're right. Allan Hendry
 >made many contributions, and he also jumped to conclusions which
 >later proved wrong. During his life in ufology, I knew him well,
 >and I liked and respected him, but as you would not know from
 >the uncritical skeptical citations here, he was not a god, and
 >he could be mistaken. The UFO Handbook is a very fine book, but
 >its conclusions deserve more critical scrutiny than all but a
 >few have been willing to give them. Its fundamental point --
 >that science cannot address the UFO phenomenon -- is, I believe,
 >extremely questionable.

 >Allan was a good investigator, but so was James McDonald, and
 >McDonald drew on a particularly relevant area of science --
 >atmospheric physics -- in which Hendry had no particular
 >expertise.. Ufology has seen other first-rate investigators, who
 >for some reason never get cited by skeptics and debunkers: J.
 >Allen Hynek (who probably conducted more field investigations
 >than anyone in the history of the subject), Walt Webb, Bill
 >Weitzel, Ted Bloecher, Jennie Zeidman, Ray Fowler, and others.

Full agreement from me here. I have for years been touting Jim
McDonald's 71 page congressional testimony about 41 cases as the
best single paper on UFO sightings of which I am aware. I worked
with Bill Weitzel in Pittsburgh. Really good. etc..

 >But in the interest of fairness, I must contest your dismissal
 >of Allan as a mere "artist." He was (and, I'm sure, still is)
 >scientifically literate, and not just from his own personal
 >reading and interest. His B.A. (from the University of Michigan,
 >no diploma mill) was in _both_ astronomy and art, and he did
 >further graduate work in astronomy. In fact, his interest in art
 >was linked directly with his interest in the cosmos. All of the
 >illustrations of his I saw were of scientific (and of course
 >ufological) subjects. When he moved to Arizona, leaving ufology
 >behind, he soon became involved with a public-radio station and
 >had a regular show dealing with astronomy education. Allan's
 >scientific credentials are beyond dispute.

 >Jerry Clark

I must admit I was surprised to learn from the U. of Michigan
that Allan's BA degree was listed as being in Astronomical
Illustration and was awarded by the school of literature,
Science and Arts. They also award BS degrees so presumably the
illustration took a little precedence over the astronomy. The
woman I spoke with was as surprised as I was... I must also
admit I found his book a better source of information about IFOs
than about UFOs.

There is another point that must be made here. A major
difficulty is that investigators and especially reporters want
witnesses to answer wrong (because unanswerable) questions. How
Big? How far? How high? How fast? When the witness says he
doesn't know, he gets pushed with "was it as big as a
Volkswagon? Was it a half mile away? Was it 500 feet up?. Even
when the witness says "maybe", the report that appears might say
'Witness Says Volkswagon Sized UFO Seen 500 Feet Up And 1/2 Mile
Away. The scientist scoffs.

Three times, when people called me on the West Coast about
sightings that sounded like a possible rocket launched from
Vandenberg (I had seen one), I had to keep them to observables
such as in what direction, at what time, at what angle above the
horizon, and in what direction it was moving, even though they
thought it was just over the next hill and fairly low. Their
observations were accurate. Their interpretations were wrong. I
called Vandenberg and there is no doubt they saw rockets moving
along the coast; at high altitude, of course.....


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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:57:35 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:57:35 -0400
Subject: 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch


Up-coming Guests:

September  9th - Stanton T. Friedman

September 16th - Jim Marrs

September 23rd - Kenny Young


The programs will continue to feature regular contributions from
Dave Furlotte, Steve Bassett, UFO*BC and Michel Deschamps.

CFRB now uses RealPlayer to broadcast live to the Web - with,
apparently, unlimited seating. You can connect at cfrb.com or
check out the program archive at:

http://members.xoom.com/strangedaysi/sdix.htm


Errol Bruce-Knapp









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:24:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:26:06 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:28:27 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >Just as side note. As a researcher/investigator I would have
 >thought that Budd would have jumped at an opportunity to get the
 >Federal Bureau of Investigation involved in a major abduction
 >case. It would have locked it up for him and verified the whole
 >case. Via the Feds he would have had proof that Richard and Dan
 >are real and who they worked for. The Feds would have gotten (or
 >tried to) access to any UN logs and such that would place
 >Richard, Dan, DeCuellar, et al under the Brooklyn Bridge at the
 >time of the abduction.

Assuming, that is, that the FBI did any investigating at all.
You've got the balls to go in and report something like this,
and I admire that. But not everyone would, especially when they
know they have to fudge the story. Investigators -- I mean law
enforcement types, not the UFO kind -- naturally ask very
probing questions, especially when someone claims to have been
kidnapped by federal agents. My feeling is they'd know (if I
were reporting something like that) that I was holding back part
of the story, and I doubt they'd be amused.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:33:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:27:30 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso


 >From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:42:11 +0200

 >Sorry, Greg, I have also read the novel and I disagree. I kindly
 >refer you to my post last July that (curiously) nobody
 >commented on. I will quote the main point again:

 >The three main points in Linda Cortile's abduction (a) abductee
 >speaking alien tongue, b) abductee working with the aliens, c)
 >sexual bonding since childhood between pairs of abductees) were
 >written several months before the alleged abduction. This is, at
 >least, a clear evidence of a sociological influence or, in the
 >worst scenario, proof of a hoax.

 >Let me put it more clearly. The most amazing point made in
 >Hopkins' book, the cornerstone of Linda Cortile's case, was how
 >the aliens had orchestrated the lifes of two abductees in order
 >to reunite them one night in lower Manhattan for an apocalyptic
 >message. The main surprise of Nighteyes' plot (besides the
 >aliens being humans) is when two apparently independent
 >abductees met again, in order to become the founders of a future
 >race. How can anybody miss the paralelism?

It's very easy to take one detail out of context and say,
"Voila! The two cases are parallel." To you, the aliens'
orchestrating the lives of abductees stands out as one of the
principal points of the book. To someone else, it might be the
abduction investigator working in league with the aliens, or the
human-alien gunfight on the roof, or the federal agent who hooks
up with a journalist to find out the whole truth, or any one of
dozens of other things in a book that's full of characters and
plot twists.

Likewise in the case. This detail stands out to you, but to
someone else something else would stand out.

In my view, you have to take all of both, and measure all of
each against the other.

But beyond that, there's a technique that I believe is sometimes
used in social science studies to measure similarities more
objectively. It's pretty pointless, from any serious point of
view, for you to say "They're similar" and me to say "They're
not!" What we'd need, to look at this more dispassionately, is a
panel of independent judges, who are completely new to the
situation, and who read "Witnessed" and "Nighteyes" and then
give a numerical ranking to their impression of the similarity.
These rankings are then averaged, and we have at least a stab at
an objective measure.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 13:29:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:28:41 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - BYoung


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:17:41 -0500

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 16:01:45 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I think you've missed my point. I was not disputing your
 >friend's assessment of what these objects really were. I agree
 >that the sightings are unimpressive, and I'm inclined to think
 >your friend is correct. What I was saying was something else,
 >namely this:

 >Their erroneous interpretations of what they saw
 >notwithstanding, the witnesses' observations were accurate
 >enough so that your friend was able through them to get a pretty
 >good idea of what the true stimuli were. That means, then, that
 >eyewitness testimony is, often enough, close enough to the mark.
 >If that holds true for IFO-sighting, it surely as well holds
 >true for UFO-sighting. Unless, of course, one is trying to posit
 >some sort of unfalsifiable hypothesis in which IFO sighters
 >usually get things essentially right and UFO sighters always get
 >them essentially wrong.

Jerry,

Yes, I'll go along with this.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>?
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 13:29:38 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:30:43 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:41:19 -0400

 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:17:30 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >Contrary to what is generally believed, a scientist has to be a
 >loony to find nothing in UFO reports.

All UFO reports, or just those that the scientist may have
investigated personally? The later situation was what I think
my subjects were referring to. After all, the largest category
of IFOs is usually astronomical objects. One could assume that
astronomers would be more likely to have knowledge of these.

 >We should never forget peer pressure - and there is a lot in
the >scientific community - when it comes to express opinions on
 >UFOs.

Sure. And this can cut both ways, too. Research jobs in
astronomy are very hard to come by. The best and the brightest
usually get to the top of any list. There is a lot of very
legitimate concern in the profession about the health of the
profession. I suppose that in many if not most astronomy
departments and questions that might come up on a committee
reviewing applications from young scientists or grad students
for their hoped for life's work might go something like this:

(First Faculty Committee Member to applicant) 50, or 100, or
300, very promising people have applied for this position, one
of only two research slots which will probably be available in
our Department in the next three years. What can you bring in
the next three years to advance astronomy research?

(Supplicant) Make up your own answer, sticking to astronomy.
After all, you're hoping to land the position at this
institution with its world-class observatory somewhere else in
the world.

(Senior Researcher, maybe the Department Head, a world-class
astronomer, well known in the field) I notice on your resume
that you published a paper on (clears throat) a UFO sighting.
Could you explain, in this tight period for support for the
profession, why research on this topic should be supported by
this institution.

(You) Think up an answer.

(Senior researcher's followup question) What astronomical
research projects you are interested in pursuing would be
candidates to be set aside to pursue this research? Can you
explain why this insitution should support this research?

(You) Think of something, else, fast.

(You are thanked, and then leave the room)

(Senior Astronomer, who will have to make a personal
presentation later in the week with the University President to
a very large potential donor or Legislative Committee ) Well,
who is next on the list who can make a better investment of our
resources for the science and the profession.

<snip>

 >Most "scientists" who are outspoken about the un-reality of UFOs
 >rarely if ever have a basis for their position. One that comes
 >to mind is Carl Sagan who, if I remember correctly, never
 >consulted a UFO report.

Read his next to last book, A Demon-Haunted World. He obviously
was far more privately involved in this subject that he ever
admitted.

 >To pretend that UFOs are unreal because 95% or 99% of the
 >reported UFOs are IFOs would be like pretending that Elvis never
 >existed because of the amount of Elvis sightings, or that John
 >McEnroe does not exist because, out of 1000 people who report
 >seeing him, 990 are wrong.

Elvis and Carl Sagan have left the building, now. As for John
McEnroe, can you name anyone who has seriously claimed that he
does not exist?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 8

                     Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 19:30:19 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 19:16:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Friedman


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>?
 >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 13:29:38 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - BYoung
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:41:19 -0400

 >>>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:46:51 -0400
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>Contrary to what is generally believed, a scientist has to be a
 >>loony to find nothing in UFO reports.

 >All UFO reports, or just those that the scientist may have
 >investigated personally? The later situation was what I think
 >my subjects were referring to. After all, the largest category
 >of IFOs is usually astronomical objects. One could assume that
 >astronomers would be more likely to have knowledge of these.

 >>We should never forget peer pressure - and there is a lot in
 >the scientific community - when it comes to express opinions on
 >>UFOs.

 >Sure. And this can cut both ways, too. Research jobs in
 >astronomy are very hard to come by. The best and the brightest
 >usually get to the top of any list. There is a lot of very
 >legitimate concern in the profession about the health of the
 >profession. I suppose that in many if not most astronomy
 >departments and questions that might come up on a committee
 >reviewing applications from young scientists or grad students
 >for their hoped for life's work might go something like this:

 >resources for the science and the profession.

 ><snip>

 >>Most "scientists" who are outspoken about the un-reality of UFOs
 >>rarely if ever have a basis for their position. One that comes
 >>to mind is Carl Sagan who, if I remember correctly, never
 >>consulted a UFO report.

 >Read his next to last book, A Demon-Haunted World. He obviously
 >was far more privately involved in this subject that he ever
 >admitted.

I would suggest reading my chapter in TOP SECRET/MAJIC about
Carl's many comments about UFOs in Demon Halted World. He
clearly, judging by those comments, was not involved. His most
frequently cited source about UFOs was 'Weekly World News'. He
didn't reference the UFO Debate book he edited and which was
published by Cornell U. Press. He didn't reference the
Congressional Hearings of 1968 though he was a contributor.No
support was given for his quite extraordinary claims. His
'Parade' article was a masterpiece of misrepresentation. He
certainly revealed no serious knowledge of UFOs when I met with
him at his home several years ago.

 >>To pretend that UFOs are unreal because 95% or 99% of the
 >>reported UFOs are IFOs would be like pretending that Elvis never
 >>existed because of the amount of Elvis sightings, or that John
 >>McEnroe does not exist because, out of 1000 people who report
 >>seeing him, 990 are wrong.

 >Elvis and Carl Sagan have left the building, now. As for John
 >McEnroe, can you name anyone who has seriously claimed that he
 >does not exist?


I have spoken to loads of professional groups including half a
dozen sections of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Los Alamos National Lab, Gulf Research Lab,
Wesitinghouse Lab, 5 different Lockheed Management clubs, the
Chrysler Management Club, etc etc.etc My best audiences...
besides over 600 colleges. No eggs, no tomatoes, only 11
hecklers two of whom were drunk.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 9

                      Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 21:25:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 09:25:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser


 >From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 19:30:19 -0300

<snip>

 >I have spoken to loads of professional groups including half a
 >dozen sections of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
 >Astronautics, Los Alamos National Lab, Gulf Research Lab,
 >Wesitinghouse Lab, 5 different Lockheed Management clubs, the
 >Chrysler Management Club, etc etc.etc My best audiences...
 >besides over 600 colleges. No eggs, no tomatoes, only 11
 >hecklers two of whom were drunk.

Proving, yet again, that alcohol, scientists, and UFOs don't
mix..... <g>

Steve








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 9

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso

From: Luis R. Gonzlez Manso <lrgm@arrakis.es>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 23:20:50 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 09:27:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Manso
 >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 12:33:12 -0400

<snip>

 >Likewise in the case. This detail stands out to you,
 >but to someone else something else would stand out

<snip>

 >What we'd need, to look at this more dispassionately, is a
 >panel of independent judges, who are completely new to the
 >situation, and who read "Witnessed" and "Nighteyes" and then
 >give a numerical ranking to their impression of the similarity.

I am not talking about similar details (that everybody can find
if he looks deep enough), but to the main "discoveries" made by
Budd Hopkins in Linda's case (as he himself pointed out) which
are suspiciously the same as the crucial points in the plot of
the previous novel.

Hopkins said they were surprising elements never before heard,
so we should not dismiss their importance for the case. The
question is if there are also as prominent in the novel. I argue
that they are, that without such elements the novel cannot be
such a thriller. We are not talking about details that could be
altered without affecting to the main plot, but precisely to the
main parts that conform it.

It is very easy to find a group of independent judges on this
matter: literary critics. Select a few of them and ask them if
those 3 points I mentioned are really critical in both stories.

To me, just the fact that _all_ the three main
"discoveries/novelties" that Hopkins proclaimed to have never
heard before (most specially the "bonding" between abductees
since childhood), do appear in a novel written few months before
the case, in any degree of importance you may give to them, it
is suspicious. But, of course, somebody can always say that the
author is a silent abductee in denial.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 9

                      Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch

From: Larry  <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 06:53:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 11:28:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 21:25:03 -0400

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 19:30:19 -0300

 ><snip>

 >>I have spoken to loads of professional groups including half a
 >>dozen sections of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
 >>Astronautics, Los Alamos National Lab, Gulf Research Lab,
 >>Wesitinghouse Lab, 5 different Lockheed Management clubs, the
 >>Chrysler Management Club, etc etc.etc My best audiences...
 >>besides over 600 colleges. No eggs, no tomatoes, only 11
 >>hecklers two of whom were drunk.

 >Proving, yet again, that alcohol, scientists, and UFOs don't
 >mix..... <g>

 >Steve


Dear Steve:

I resemble that remark, but don't worry.

I have a short memory.  [burp!]


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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

             CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Saskatoon Crop Circle

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 15:17:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:50:10 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Saskatoon 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

September 9, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #1 - SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


A ground photo of the Saskatoon formation has been posted on the
web site:

� Dennis Eklund, CPR-Canada (saskatoon00.jpg)

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/saskatoon00.html

The formation is approximately 43' in diametre, consisting of a
circle with surrounding ring, in oats. Discovered September 6 by
passing motorists on a nearby road, and shown on local CFUC TV
news in the morning.

Ground studies, including sampling for the BLT Research Team,
are being conducted by Dennis Eklund, Saskatchewan director for
CPR-Canada and a field report will follow later this weekend.
Again, some very unusual deformities have been found on the
plant stalks inside the formation, not the usual blown nodes and
also different from the deformities found in the Moosomin
formation of August 20. As with Moosomin, details are pending,
awaiting a full report to be issued by BLT.

The farmer, who is elderly, does not want any publicity. However
the neighbouring farmers, who maintain his fields and also work
for The Western Producer, as does Dennis, are very co-operative
and interested.

There are also areas in the same field of "randomly downed crop"
like grapeshot type patches. The deformities found in the ringed
circle are also present in the random patches, but even more
pronounced. The plant stalks in the random patches are bent over
several inches above the ground. There is also a large roughly
circular area of similar downed crop surrounding a nearby clumps
of trees. This is simlar to the second area found the same week
about a mile from this location (Saskatoon #2), in a wheat field
owned by the same farmers who maintain this field. It is also
similar in several aspects to a series of randomly downed areas
found in August at Beaumont, Alberta near Edmonton (preliminary
report to follow).

It is also worth noting that Dennis reports that his mechanical
camera would not work properly inside the circle and when he
tried placing a few test stalks of oats inside his microwave, he
found similar "damage" to the nodes as what was found out in the
field.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

              Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, #2 'Random' Crop

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 15:25:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:51:45 -0400
Subject: Re: CPR-Canada News: Saskatoon, #2 'Random' Crop

CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 9, 2000

_____________________________


SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN #2 "RANDOM" CROP FORMATION


Preliminary Report - September 9, 2000

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan #2
September 6, 2000


There is a report from Dennis Eklund in Saskatoon, of another
"event" of "randomly downed crop" about one mile from the first
ringed circle formation at Saskatoon, and found about the same
time. "Formation" consists of random patches of downed crop
(wheat in this case) along with "long straight lines" of downed
crop which run straight then make sharp turns in the field,
generally following along with the other patches. The plant
stalks, as with the random patches at the first location beside
the ringed circle, are bent a few inches above the ground.
Unfortunately, the field was already swathed by the farmer, but
ground photos were taken, and diagrams made beforehand (copies
pending). The farmers who own this field also work for The
Western Producer, as does Dennis.

This is similar again to the Beaumont, Alberta areas of randomly
downed crop reported August 20 (preliminary report to follow).

This is the eighth formation reported in Canada for 2000.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                       Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-9-00

From: "Rense E-News" <e-news@the-i.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:41:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:53:54 -0400
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News  9-9-00


----------------------------------------------------------------
                     Jeff Rense Weekly E-News
----------------------------------------------------------------

                         The Week Ahead
                      9-10-00 thru 9-16-00

             Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories
                          From rense.com
                 Jeff Rense E-News is distributed
                 exclusively by Free Subscription.

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                             NOW OPEN!
           The Rense.com Store � a unique collection!
            http://www.sightings.com/store/store.htm

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        * READER'S CORNER *

There have been so many quotes sent in we decided to do a special
section on them this week.  These are direct from you, the readers:


             "Power springs from the barrel of a gun."
                      Chairman Mao Zhedong
                      Sent in by Jon Morrow
                        ------------------

�EXPERIENCE IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU DIDN'T GET WHAT YOU WANTED.�
                             J. EARP
                    Sent in by Robert Boland
                        ------------------

                              ANYWAY

   People are unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered,
           LOVE THEM ANYWAY.
   If you do good, people will acuse you of selfish, ulterior
           motives,
           LOVE THEM ANYWAY.
   If you are successful you win false friends and true enemies,
           SUCCEED ANYWAY.
   The good you do will be forgotten tomorrow,
           DO GOOD ANYWAY.
   Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable,
           BE HONEST AND FRANK ANYWAY.
   What you spent years building may be destroyed overnight,
           BUILD ANYWAY.
   People really need help, but may attack you if you help them,
           HELP PEOPLE ANYWAY.
   Give the world the best you have and you'll get kicked in
           the teeth,
           GIVE THE WORLD THE BEST YOU HAVE ANYWAY.

         From a sign on the wall of the Shishu Bhavan,
               the children's home in Calcutta.
                  Sent in by Walter Pendragon
                        ------------------

             "Where wealth accumulates, men decay"
attrib to: Swami Nirmalananda, from Enlightened Anarchism;
excerpt lifted  from "Property" section of the book: The
Heretic's Handbook of Quotations"  Ed. by Charles Bufe,
copyright 1988-1995; Sharp Press, Tucson, AZ


       "Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one."
                     A.J. Liebling (ibid)

                     Sent in by M. Feeney
                       ------------------

        �Great spirits have always encountered violent
                opposition from mediocre minds.�
                       Albert Einstein
                       Sent in by Marna
                       ------------------

                     �FREE WILL IS A GIFT
                        LOVE IS A CHOICE
            BUT - HATE LEAVES YOU NO CHOICE AT ALL�
                           M. MINARD
                   Sent in by Michele Finley
                       ------------------

       "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation
        must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."
                       Benjamin Franklin

   "A barking dog is often more useful than a sleeping lion"
                       Washington Irving

                     Sent in by Laurence S.
                       ------------------

         "If it's not one thing, it's somebody else."
                       James Miklasevich
                       Sent in by James M.
                       ------------------

       "I didn't get nothing, I had to pay fifty dollars
                   and pick-up the garbage."
                        Arlo Gutherie
                       Sent in by Horace
                       ------------------

               "Reach up and the future is ours."
                         Nick Sandberg
                        Sent in by Joe S.
                       ------------------

                �And if you call me brother now,
                    forgive me if I inquire,
                 �Just according to whose plan?�
                  When it all comes down to dust
                    I will kill you if I must,
                    I will help you if I can.�
                          Leonard Cohen
                        in Song for Isaac

                         Sent in by Katz
                        ------------------

                 It's buried in the countryside
              It's exploding in the shells of night
                  It's everywhere a baby cries
                             Freedom
                             Freedom
                             Freedom
                             Freedom
                  Sheryl Crow in Redemption Day
                        ------------------

           Got a favorite quote?  Feel free to send it:
              mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=quote

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

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

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        Ferrar Fenton Bible

  This unique version contains the complete Scriptures of the
  Old and New Testaments, translated direct from the original
  Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek languages.
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index107.html

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        * TOP STORIES *

           Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
                       http://rense.com

   * To Alter And Abolish' - Secession Movements On The Move
   * Click-And-Sniff Computers Due Soon As Rivals Merge
   * German Daily Says Russian Missile Hit Kursk - Russia Denies It
   * Yowie Sighted And Filmed Near Canberra, Australia
   * The Heinous Crimes Of The United Nations
   * The Drugging Of America's Children
   * Bizarre Spanish Red Waterspout Gushes Nonstop
   * Strange Fossil Rock Formation
   * Chinese Shown Sensitive Data On US Joint War Fighting Strategy
   * Another Marvelous Crop Circle In Southern England
   * 20 Percent Of South Africa's Nurses Have AIDS
   * Another Asteroid In Cosmic Close Call With Earth
   * Star Trek Type 'Phasers' Now A Reality
   * PA Disc Flies Above Nuke Plant - Cylinder Over Tennessee
       - UFO Flies Out Of Pacific
   * Capt. Joyce Riley Reveals New V.A.-FBI Ploy To Grab
         Veterans' Guns
   * Debris Found Near Kurst Linked To British And US Subs
   * High Tech Feudalism For The New American Police State
   * 50,000 New Cell Phone Towers For America's Wilderness Areas
   * Thousands of Gulf Veterans Are Dying
   * Bioterrorism In Martha's Vineyard?
   * Mystery Objects In Chemtrails - Robotic Aerial Vehicles?
   * Gulf Council Demands 'Total' Palestinian Sovereignty Over
         East Jerusalem
   * Slouching Toward Armageddon - Israel Becomes Formal
        'Strategic Ally'
   * Giving Away Our Freedom - Is There a Point of No Return?
   * NATO Finally Admits Yugoslavs Carried Out No Mass Killings
        in Kosovo

        Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                           Cosmiverse!

   No time to research? Cosmiverse will deliver the latest Space,
   Science, and Technology news direct to you every morning. Need
   a homepage? Perhaps a planner or new address? Cosmiverse is
   perfectly tailored to fit your needs! Let Cosmiverse provide it
   for you--FREE at     http://www.cosmiverse.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
                      9-10-00 thru 9-15-00

              (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can
             change due to late breaking stories, etc).

SUN 9-10
   Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo:  Chupacabra Coverup In Nicaragua?
   John Carman:  US Customs Expose'

MON 9-11
   Jim Phelps:  Americans Poisoned By Nuclear Production
   Scott Portzline: Latest Nuclear 'Mishaps'

TUE 9-12
   Peter Davenport-NUFORC:  UFO Eyewitness Recordings
   Bufo Calvin:  UFO News

WED 9-13
   Carl Limbacher: NewsMax.com Inside Cover
   Paul LaViolette: Proof Of Interstellar Contact

THU 9-14
   Dave Oester/Sharon Gill:  EVP Ghost Voices And Photos

FRI 9-15
   Andy Blatt and Brad Steiger: Tribute To Jack Benny

Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                         Occult Theocrasy

Published Posthumously - occult, secret societies and sundry
other covert movements throughout the world. The most complete
work on this topic.  741 pp., Hardcover  Full table of contents
at:
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index37.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/
Rense.com Store:
         http://www.sightings.com/store/store.htm
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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

              Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 18:54:47 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:57:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow &


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Open Letter to Randle, Brookesmith, Sandow & You
 >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 22:49:34 -0400

 >Please refer to "Observation 1" below where it is demonstrated
 >that you didn't know about this 1995 paper in January 1999. You
 >_never_ _ever_ mentioned the works of Kenneth Pope in _any_ of
 >your posts since 1995.

I never said I'd read Kenneth Pope. I said I'd read other things
on the same topics, and was familiar with the points that he
raised.

 >I would like also to know, if it's not asking too much, when
 >exactly you got familiar with such work. Pardon my curiosity
 >since you addressed the subject of False Memory Syndrome in 1999
 >in those words:

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/1999/jan/m30-050.shtml
 >Re: Abduction - The Issue Of Reality

 ><snip>

 >>We need to use a little common sense when we talk about memory.
 >>Recovered memories are tricky, no doubt about it. But some of
 >>the writing from critics of recovered memory makes you wonder
 >>how any of us could ever trust our minds at all. That was one
 >>feeling I had after reading Elizabeth Loftus's book (she being
 >>the psychologist most cited in attacks on recovered memories).

 ><snip>

 >Strange that only Loftus is mentioned. Especially when others
 >like Crews, Dawes , Goldstein, Farmer, Ketcham, Ofshe, Watters,
 >Underwager, Wakefield and Wassil-Grimm are noted in the Kenneth
 >Pope review which you are sooooo familiar with.

I'm so sorry that I didn't supply scholarly footnotes to my
casual remark. I'm equally sorry -- gosh, appalled at myself,
absolutely dismayed -- that, in citing Elizabeth Loftus, I didn't
stop to name anyone else who's written about recovered memories.
I assumed people would understand that I was discussing a general
circumstance, and giving Loftus as one example of it. But I guess
I should have forseen -- silly me! -- that, a year later, Serge
would start policing me, and assume that because I only mentioned
Loftus I'd never even heard of anyone else.

 >But back to today...

 ><snip>

 >>That said, I'm grateful to Serge for recommending an impressive
 >>five year-old scientific paper on the important topic of False
 >>Memory Syndrome, especially one questioning whether such a
 >>condition even exists.

 ><snip>

 >If you knew the Kenneth Pope paper, you wouldn't say that.

Yeah, that occured to me, too. In fact -- if I may reveal a not
exactly intimate secret -- it was precisely because I hadn't
read the paper that I was happy to learn about it. There's
nothing radically new in it, but it was good to read.

 >Start quote

 >On one hand, it is crucial that we review all available
evidence
 >and consider the implications that the claims may be valid.

 >[...]

 >On the other hard it is equally crucial that we allow for the
 >possibility that the evidence and logic do not convincingly
 >establish the validity of some or perhaps any such claims.

 >End quote

Serge, have you read the Stuart Appelle paper I've mentioned a
lot here? The one I say is the best thing ever written about the
abduction evidence? These are exactly Appelle's points.

 >So, the FMS proponents may be wrong; they may also be right. I
 >know this must be a pain in the neck for abductologists.
 >Imagine: they could be playing with the minds of people, they
 >could be implanting false memories. Life sucks.

Everybody concerned with abductions, no matter what their
position, has to consider this possibility. Kind of obvious, but
then Serge seems to think I'm a convinced abduction believer who
can't accept evidence against my views. Must be why I like the
Appelle paper so much.

 >>>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

 >>This is patronizing nonsense. I'll leave myself out of any
 >>further comments I make, and say how offended I am for Kevin's
 >>and Peter's sake. I've disagreed with both of them, but I'd
 >>never insult them the way Serge has. Kevin has a PhD in
 >>psychology, and wrote an abduction book that describes at great
 >>length many of the psychological issues involved.

 ><snip>

 >I am sorry to bring this up again, but I suggest you read the
 >following posts.

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m26-027.shtml
 >Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m28-009.shtml
 >Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Salvaille

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m27-044.shtml
 >Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Randle

 >I am perfectly justified to ask Kevin Randle to read
 >http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

 >I am justified also to ask an owner of a PhD in psychology if he
 >knows about a fundamental paper in his domain, to ask for
 >enlightenment in order to heighten a discussion.

<snip>

You know, there's a difference between disagreeing with someone
and announcing that they're ignorant. Strangely enough, scholars
and scientists have the kind of disagreements with each other
that Serge has with Kevin and Peter, and manage to argue them,
often quite sharply, without accusing those who disagree with
them of ignorance.

Serge seems to think that if you haven't read Kenneth Pope's
paper, you haven't done your recovered memory homework. May I
ask him, just out of curiosity, what kind of homework he's done?
What has he read about false and recovered memories apart from
Pope's paper? From Pope, Serge quotes the names Crews, Dawes ,
Goldstein, Farmer, Ketcham, Ofshe, Watters,  Underwager,
Wakefield and Wassil-Grimm. Did he know these names before he
read Pope?

Or, for that matter, does he know names like Lenore Terr, Judith
Herman, and Jennifer J. Freyd, who've written on this subject
but whom he doesn't quote Pope mentioning? Or Pezdek, whose name
shows up in one of Serge's Pope quotes, and whose work is
powerfully suggestive. (Though not, as far as I  know,
replicated by anyone else. Further, the citation I found for it
mentioned that findings on recovered memory had been presented
in a paper at a conference, but not published in a peer-reviewed
journal. That may have changed, of course.)

Oh, I forgot. I haven't said anything about that devastating
contradiction Serge finds after spending what appears to be a
quite frightening amount of time tracking my writing..

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/jul/m29-013.shtml
 >Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

 >>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."

 >http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/aug/m01-024.shtml
 >Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

 >>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.

 >Contradiction:

 >The Abduction Conundrum - Greg Sandow
 >at http://www.idealist.com/memories/memory.shtml

 >Start quote

 >It's true, of course, that anyone who comes to him knows what he
 >believes, and that in his support groups it's taken for granted
 >that abductions are real. So clearly he's at least a little
 >ingenuous when he says he'll never tell anyone that they've
 >really been abducted. He might not say the words, but the very
 >fact of a relationship with him implies what isn't spoken.

 >End quote

Serge had trouble understanding this before, and it's hard for
me to understand why.

When people come to Budd, of course they know he believes in
abductions. They've seen him on TV or read his books. But when
they arrive at his home for their first discussions, _they_ --
regardless of what Budd thinks -- may not believe they've been
abducted.

It's easy to verify that. Just read their letters, or, even
better, talk to them. They think Budd _might_ be able to explain
experiences they say they've had, but the emphasis is on
"might." I've read letters from abductees in which they say "I
don't know if I've been abducted, but I'm willing to listen to
what Budd Hopkins says." I've heard abductees say that during
their first meetings with him. Abductees have told me they
thought that, months or years after they had their first meeting
with Budd. If I had a few dollars for every time I've heard or
read that, I could take Serge out for a really good dinner, even
in high-priced New York.

Of course, once people become part of Budd's circle, they're
obviously in an environment where it's more or less taken for
granted that abductions are real, and that the people who come
to support group meetings have been abducted. That stage,
however, comes a little further down the timeline from the
initial meeting with Budd, at which (have I said this enough?)
it's common for people to stress that they don't know if they've
been abducted.

And you know what? Even people who've had several sessions with
Budd and have gone to two or three support group meetings a year
for several years are likely to tell you they still aren't sure.
If I had a few dollars for every time I've heard _that_, I could
still take Serge out for a good dinner, though it would have to
be at one of our fine, cheap ethnic restaurants, and not in one
of the top spots in Manhattan.

With that, I end my part in this sad discussion.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                       A New Mailing List in French...

From: Richard D. Nolane raynaud@total.net
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:01:13 -0400
Subject: A New Mailing List in French...


Dear List members,

This message to announce that I'm now the moderator of
"Magonie", a new mailing list in french (please, note!) devoted
to the study of the UFO phenomenon in History before 1947.


To subscribe, send a message to : Magonie-subscribe@egroups.com

Thanks!

RDN






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                    Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 02:58:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:30:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 21:25:03 -0400

 >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 19:30:19 -0300

 ><snip>

 >>I have spoken to loads of professional groups including half a
 >>dozen sections of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
 >>Astronautics, Los Alamos National Lab, Gulf Research Lab,
 >>Wesitinghouse Lab, 5 different Lockheed Management clubs, the
 >>Chrysler Management Club, etc etc.etc My best audiences...
 >>besides over 600 colleges. No eggs, no tomatoes, only 11
 >>hecklers two of whom were drunk.

 >Proving, yet again, that alcohol, scientists, and UFOs don't
 >mix..... <g>

 >Steve

Steve, deep thoughts: Perhaps that's what caused the Roswell UFO
crash. i.e. The alien "driver" may have been over the limit.

Josh
Deutsche BundesUFOzentral










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                'UFOs And Abductions' - David Jacobs, Editor

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 21:53:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:33:45 -0400
Subject: 'UFOs And Abductions' - David Jacobs, Editor

List,

Just got my copy of UFOs and Abductions, David Jacobs editor,
from Amazon today. Urge everyone to do likewise.

University press edition with a real cloth cover. When's the last
time you saw one of those?

Bring down? I just hate it when book designers fob inch marks off
as quotation marks. Really burns my ass. Think people would
know better.

Otherwise, pretty damn good, if incestuous, piece of work. Hopkins
as an expert on hypnosis? Hey, why not? It's only the scientific
community we're trying to attract, after all, and who among us is
more qulified than the above?
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 21:53:12 -0500
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Clark's Law [was: 'Linda' Case Footnote]
:
:
:

List,

Just got my copy of UFOs and Abductions, David Jacobs editor,
from Amazon today. Urge everyone to do likewise.

University press edition with a real cloth cover. When's the
last time you saw one of those?

Bring down? I just hate it when book designers fob inch marks
off as quotation marks. Really burns my ass. Think people would
know better.

Otherwise, pretty damn good, if incestuous, piece of work.
Hopkins as an expert on hypnosis? Hey, why not? It's only the
scientific community we're trying to attract, after all, and who
among us is more qulified than the above?

Oops, I forget: I've criticized Hopkins re hynosis and that
automatically renders me obsessive on the subject.

More to follow.

Dennis Stacy



Oops, I forget: I've criticized Hopkins re hynosis and that automatically
renders me obsessive on the subject.

More to follow.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

               Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:49:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:49:17 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch


 >From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Strange Days... Indeed' - Day/Time Switch
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 15:12:23 -0700

 >Dear EBK:



 >I started listening the shows on archive. After listening to
 >one show the link (URL) no longer works to the archives?

Mike,


H'yup, you're right - seems the Xoom.com site is not currently
functioning. I found the following info which suggests that
time heals all:

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

Looking for www.Snap.com or www.XOOM.com?


Site Construction In Progress

To bring you better service, we are currently integrating
XOOM.com, Snap.com, and other NBCi properties into one new site,
NBCi.com.

As we roll out the beta version of the new NBCi site, you may
experience intermittent feature outages. Our engineers and
product managers are working around the clock to ensure that all
features are up and running as quickly as possible.

<snip>

If you have a web site on XOOM.com or are storing files in the
Sharehouse, this information will also be available with your
existing username and password. You will have access to all of
these personalized features in the area that is now called My
NBCi.

Thank you for your patience as we work to bring you a better
online service.

Note: If you need help finding any of your favorite features on
the new NBCi site, then you may find our Still Can't Find It
page helpful.

If you have additional questions about the transition to the new
NBCi site, please visit the Transition FAQs page:

http://home.nbci.com/LMOID/resource/1,566,-3254,00.html?rview=1


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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

              CPR-Canada News: New Directors - Saskatchewan and

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:58:02 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:50:58 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: New Directors - Saskatchewan and


CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 10, 2000

_____________________________


NEW DIRECTORS - SASKATCHEWAN AND QUEBEC


I am please to announce that CPR-Canada has two new provincial
directors.


SASKATCHEWAN - Dennis Eklund

Dennis has been a life-long resident of Saskatchewan, working in
the publishing industry as a graphic artist and now currently
working in the advertising department of The Western Producer
newspaper (http://www.producer.com), at the head office in
Saskatoon. With many contacts in the farming/agricultural
communities, he is a most needed addition to the team. He is
married with two children and currently resides in Saskatoon.


QUEBEC - Fred Williams

Fred has an extensive background in computer
consulting/programming, desktop publishing and engineering,
including Motorola, Canadian Astronautics Ltd., Magna
Technologies Ltd. and Space Research Corp. and has also been a
member of MENSA among other pursuits. His knowledge in
technology related fields also brings some new expertise to this
whole "field" of study! He currently resides in Bolton-Centre,
near Montreal.


Welcome to both. Contact information is on the web site, in
Offices and Contacts:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/offices.html

We also have a growing list of Field Research Assistants, for
CPR-Canada and the BLT Research Team (field research studies are
conducted jointly)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                  'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:55:20 -0400
Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron



Source: Cosmic Comentary - http://members.tripod.com/~CosmicRose/CCC.html


Roswell: Enough Already
by A-J Charron
September 7, 2000

How many times can we be served this cold dish? I say cold
because it's been reheated so many times that it won't reheat
anymore.

Conspiracy Theorists keep saying that a UFO crashed and the US
Air Force keep saying that a balloon crashed. Something crashed!
What was it?

The balloon story makes no sense. And it's not suppose to. The
US Air Force chose to say,in the official version, that it was a
balloon, because they knew nobody would believe it. So was it a
flying saucer from another planet? Well, who said it was a UFO?
Actually, the first person to say that it was a UFO was the
first military investigator who arrived at the crash site. In
other words, the Air Force said it was a flying saucer.
Therefore, it was not!

That the whole thing was a coverup is not very difficult to
figure out. But then again, like the balloon story, it's not
supposed to be. Then what was it?

Roswell is near the test sites of the first Atomic Bombs. Logic
dictates that a plane crashed. But, Theorists say, an
investigator would have figured that out right away. And so
would have the witnesses: Everybody know what a plane looks
like! Sure. But not many people know what a crashed plane looks
like. And that's the difference.

Crash investigators say that if you did not know upon arrival
that what you were looking at was a plane, you would never be
able to guess. The reason is quite simple, a plane is made of
aluminium and other fragile materials. It has to be or else it
would never leave the ground. Throw it on the ground at several
hundred miles per hour and what do you think will be left?

Not much. All the parts break up in little pieces making an
unrecognizable, tangled mass. Then why cover it up? Many simple
reasons. Mainly, what was in the plane. Or rather who. You've
seen the video "Alien Autopsy"? Odds are it's true. As one
doctor who viewed the video said, the corpse presented was that
of a human female presenting several rare birth defects.

So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
documented fact.

What did they do with them? Many of them were placed on the
sites of the A-Bomb tests. By exposing them to blast, fallout,
radiation, etc, the military could see the effects on human
beings. Probably many other horrible things were done to those
Children, but that is not the object of this essay.

By talking about UFOs, the military were planting an idea. By
denying it the next day and saying it was a weather balloon only
made people realize they were lying. But people thought they
were lying about the UFO bit which the military themselves had
planted. If they had said it was a plane crash, there might have
been a civilian investigation. This way they ensured there
wouldn't be. Everything went according to plan.

So, in essence, Roswell was a coverup. The military were
covering up their activities. The coverup job itself was a
beauty! Over fifty years later, it's still the subject of films,
documentaries, books and... essays. I hope whoever it was who
had the idea to begin with quit the military and went into
advertising. If so, he must be filthy rich!

--
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
~~ Sir Martin Rees (astronomer)
http://CosmicRose.tripod.com/CCC.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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                     Cydonian Imperative: Update 9-10-00

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:57:12 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative: Update 9-10-00


9-10-00

Cydonian Imperative

New page added.  Go to

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html

and select number eight from the "Journal" section.

In brief:

A second 'City'? Much talked-about images are presented for your
edification.

Mac Tonnies
macbot@yahoo.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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                     New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda

From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:12:48 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:02:40 -0400
Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda


 >From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>"@earthlink.net
 >Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference
 >Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:10:32 -0300

 >>Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 13:50:47 -0300
 >>From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
 >>Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Hi List:

 >>The subject conference,sponsored by THE UFO/ET WORLD TRAVELING
 >>MUSEUM & LIBRARY OF SCIENTIFIC ANOMALIES will hold the 11th
 >>UFO/ET CONGRESS on October 7 & 8, 2000 at the Days Inn in
 >>Bordentown, New Jersey, NJ Rt. 206 at exit 7 of the New Jersey
 >>Turnpike. For information write: Pat Marcattilio- DR UFO, 221
 >>joan Terrace, Hamilton, New Jersey 08629 or call(609)631-8955
 >>between 11am and 3 pm week days or Saturday/Sunday or e-mail Tom
 >>Benson at sparkle@earthlink.net. or write: Tom Benson, P.O. Box
 >>1174, Trenton, New Jersey 08606-1174.

 >>The group that sponsors the above conference, the Trenton UFO
 >>Study Group has held meetings once a month since the Fall of
 >>1984, one of the oldest in the country. The meetings are open to
 >>the public on the first Wednesday of the month at 7:30 pm at the
 >>Hamilton Township Library (609)581-4060.

 >>Tom

 >To List:

 >Addenda:

 >The Conference will cost $85 for both days, if sent by September
 >23, 2000. One day pass is $50, 1 lecture only $20,  workshop,
 >$20. Checks payable to Pat J. Marcattilio, 221 Joan Terrace,
 >Hamilton, N.J. 08629.

 >Speakers include:

 >Thomas J. Carey - UFO Crash at Roswell, New Eyewitness come
 >forth.  The lecture will focus on key issues surrounding the
 >case and what the future holds for its further investigations.
 >Emphasis will be placed upon new discoveries made during the
 >last two years and what further might be in the offering.
 >Thomas has worked with Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt for the
 >past ten years on the Roswell incident.

 >Michael Mannion - Project Mind Shift - Michael is author of this
 >book and he will tell us about the forces in the US Government
 >who have been conducting a 50 year campaign of re-education,
 >using the media, first to conceal, then slowly reveal to the
 >public the possibility of ET life.  He will also discuss his
 >work with experiencers whose encounters suggest that there is a
 >healing and transformational aspect to the ET-Human encounters.

 >Hans Holzer - Ghosts - Life Beyond Death & UFOnauts. Hans will
 >give two separate lectures on these topics.  He is author of
 >over 100 books including: Yankee Ghosts, Ghosts that walk in
 >Washington, D.C., Psychic Investigator, travel Guide to haunted
 >Houses.

 >Vicki Ecker - Editor in Chief of UFO magazine, based in |Los
 >Angeles, California.  Vicki will discuss In Search of the Secret
 >Knowledge Keepers, Who Really Controls American UFO Scene. Is it
 >MJ12 or some other clandestine group?  This presentation from
 >little known sources, outlines a strange secret cabal that may
 >or may not have "special access to the situation."

 >Don Ecker - Director of Research for UFO magazine. Don will The
 >Dark Side of the Moon.  His illustrated talk will show us the
 >Lunar Anomaly reports and photographs that show us that the Moon
 >is not just a dead body.  He will critically evaluate the Lunar
 >photographs and other research he has conducted for 8 years.

 >Jim Moseley - Editor-In- Chief of Saucer Smear and other
 >publications since 1954. Jim has spoken on various UFO topics to
 >100's of college and other audiences since the 60's. He held the
 >largest UFO Conference in New York City in 1967 that was
 >attended by 6000 people.  Jim is Permanent Chairman of the
 >Oraganizing Committee of the National UFO Conference which is
 >the oldest U.S. UFO organization continually holding annual
 >conferences since 1964. Jim will discuss Ufologist thoughts an
 >ideas of the times and other areas.

 >Pat Marcattilio, Conference host will also lecture on Origins of
 >Civilizations throughout history with a focus on ET or other
 >intelligence involvement with humans in their development.

 >Antonio Huneeus - MUFON International Coordinator, FATE
 >columnist and science journalist will discuss UFO Chronicles:
 >2000- From historical research to the latest UFO waves in South
 >America.  This veteran journalist from the international UFO
 >front lines, reviews the field with his intensive slide and
 >video collection. Military generals of Chile speak out on their
 >official UFO Investigations Committee.  Surprisingly, and clear
 >footage of UFOs by Russian Cosmonauts from the new DVD, Ultimate
 >UFO, is one of Antonio's latest projects shown.  Historical
 >insights  from one of the co-authors of the recently released
 >Dell paperback: "UFO Briefing Document", the acclaimed Lawrence
 >Rockefeller- funded report given to U.S. Congress and selected
 >VIP's worldwide.  Also discussed is the latest from the San
 >Marino (Conference in Europe, that he attended and lectured to.

 >Other speakers to be announced.

 >Tom Benson

Hi List:

An additional speaker for the above conference is Sam Sherman, a
longtime produucer of dramatic feature films and documentaries.
Sam will dicuss  his production of the audio documwntary The
Edwards Air Force Base Encounter concerning a UFO threat at the
military base on October 7, 1965.

Tom Benson



--- Tom Benson
--- sparkle@earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                      TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.11.00

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:50:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:12:25 -0400
Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.11.00


TMP NEWS
The E-News Service of The Millennium Project

http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews
http://persweb.direct.ca/psa

September 11, 2000

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports

9.11.00



IN SEARCH OF OTHER WORLDS

The search for other planets outside our solar system is now
yielding much fruit, showing that many such worlds are out
there, but also that they may not always be what we expect to
find...

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/40/story_4062_1.html


FALLEN GALILEO PROBE UNCOVERS SECRETS OF JUPITER'S HOT SPOTS

Now, planetary scientists have revived the quest to demystify
our solar system's largest planet with new discoveries
concerning Jupiter's hot spots - small dry regions in the
planet's upper layers. These discoveries, aided by the Galileo
probe that plunged into Jupiter's atmosphere in December 1995,
will ultimately help scientists understand the intricate
workings of Jupiter's tumultuous atmosphere...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/jupiter_hotspo
ts.html


HUBBLE WATCHES COSMIC 'BUTTERFLY' EMERGE

A newly released image from the Hubble Space Telescope reveals
unprecedented detail within a rare astronomical "butterfly." The
intriguing proto-planetary nebula CRL 618 is changing so rapidly
that astronomers have been able to make direct observations of
its cosmic evolution over the past 20 years, according to the
European Space Agency (ESA). The Hubble's sharp vision reveals a
previously unknown richness of detail, the ESA said...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/05/hubble.cocoon/index.html


RESEARCHERS DEVELOPING BRICKS TO BLOCK RADIATION ON MARS

Ryan McGlothlin takes a sugar-like powder, stirs in a substance
that resembles flour, pours the mix into a mold and bakes it.
The result is a small, shiny, black bar designed to shield
against radiation. The powder is polyethylene and the "flour" is
a gray topsoil...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/08/mars.bars.ap/index.html


NASA GIRDS FOR SURGE IN SHUTTLE MISSIONS

NASA has long yearned for the day when it could start sending
space shuttles up in quick succession to the International Space
Station. "One of these days," shuttle program manager Ron
Dittemore kept saying, "the dike is going to break, the dam is
going to burst." Well, that day is finally here...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/04/shuttle.surge.ap/index.html


MYSTERY OBJECTS IN TRAILS - FLYING ROBOTS AND UAVs?

Brenda Livingston provides an update on the new controversy
surrounding the reported documentation by photography and video
of unusual small "mystery objects" being seen in and around the
chemtrails (which are controversial enough themselves to begin
with)...

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/mysteryobjects.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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                      Southern Illinois A UFO Hot Spot?

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:14:18 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:17:19 -0400
Subject: Southern Illinois A UFO Hot Spot?


Source: alt.paranet.ufo

Stig

***

Subject: Multiple Sightings In Small Southern Illinois Area
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 01:16:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: A_living_proof@webtv.net (B N)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo

I am new to this group but I was wondering if any one else had
heard if there has been more activity around Southern Illinois?

I have been told by someone who works for dispatch at the
Sheriffs Department that UFO sightings here in my county have
went up from about 4/year to up to 25/month especially at the
south side of the county where I live... has this been happening
everywhere or just here?

Thanx in advance









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

               UN Builds Giant Radio Telescope To Look For ETs

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 10:05:19 GMT
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:20:47 -0400
Subject: UN Builds Giant Radio Telescope To Look For ETs


Source: The Sunday Times - London

http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/09/10/stifgnnws01001.html

Stig

***

September 10 2000 WORLD

Giant telescope to look for alien life

Jonathan Leake, Science Editor

The United Nations is drawing up plans for a giant radio
telescope that will scan more than a million stars for signs of
intelligent life. The �800m machine, called the Square Kilometre
Array (SKA), will be the most sensitive astronomical instrument
yet built.

An agreement to build the new telescope was signed last month at
a meeting of the International Astronomical Union in Manchester.
Scientists will spend the next few years designing the
technology, with completion due in about 2015.

Scientists hope to detect television and radio transmissions, or
signals broadcast by alien civilisations. "We will use it to
survey stars up to 1,000 light years away from us," said Jill
Tarter, a leading researcher at the Search for Extra-Terrestrial
Intelligence (Seti) institute in America. Seti's instruments are
only powerful enough to examine several hundred stars.

Impetus for the plan has grown in recent months, with
astronomers announcing the discovery of more than 40 planets in
distant solar systems. The planets are mostly very large and too
hot to support life as we know it, but their discovery suggests
many smaller, Earth-like planets may also exist.

Besides looking for intelligent extraterrestrials, the SKA will
seek the faint radiation emitted 10-12 billion years ago when
the first stars and galaxies formed after the big bang, the
explosion of dense matter that marked the universe's origin.

It will also allow astronomers to plot in detail the courses of
asteroids and comets that threaten to collide with the Earth.
Professor Peter Wilkinson, a senior astronomer at Jodrell Bank,
Britain's renowned radio telescope centre, said that the SKA
could enable humanity to protect itself from their impact.

Astronomers calculate that the telescope will need a collecting
area of a square kilometre, made up of hundreds of antennae or
dishes scattered across thousands of miles, linked by some of
the most sophisticated computers on Earth.

Scientists aim to create a "radio quiet park", where nobody will
be allowed to use mobile phones, TV, radio or walkie- talkies
for fear their emissions could be mistaken for signs of alien
life. The most likely site is in Australia.

Professor Ron Ekers, of the Australia National Telescope
Facility, who has been advising the UN, said the SKA would
provide "crucial new evidence on the formation and early history
of the first stars".

For Tarter, however, the biggest issue is how Earth will cope if
the SKA succeeds in detecting alien life. "Such a discovery will
change our perception of our role in the cosmos. This telescope
will be a great scientific instrument, but its effect on
humanity could be profound."

**

Copyright 2000 Times Newspapers Ltd.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                      Paranoia Mag Interviews Dan Smith

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:53:23 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:07:09 -0400
Subject: Paranoia Mag Interviews Dan Smith


Paranoia Magazine has an interview with our own guru of
eschatology (rhymes, appropriately, with scatology), Dan Smith,
aka Chicken Little at:

http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/DanSmith.htm

I was on staff at CompuServe during the episode he mentions when
he was banned for declaring Himself to be the proverbial Spirit
of Truth. While I found Dan to be very entertaining, some staff
members were afraid his SOT rantings could cause psychological
trauma for forum members.

BTW, the "Tom" in the article is none other than Ron Pandolfi
from the CIA "weird desk". It is said that Ron has gotten in
trouble for leading Dan down the yellow brick road. See:

http://www.ufomind.com/people/p/pandolfi/

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 >
   Sep > Sep 11

                Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked

From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:26:07 -0400
Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked


from The Irish Times
http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

By Dr William Reville

Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
examination.

Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
Earth. Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
secrecy.

On June 14th, 1947, a rancher, William Brazel, spotted a large
area of wreckage about 70 miles north of Roswell, New Mexico.
The debris included neoprene strips, metal foil, cardboard, tape
and sticks. Brazel paid little attention at the time, but
several weeks later he heard reports of flying saucers and
wondered if the wreckage might be related. He reported his
suspicions to a local sheriff who informed the army base at
Roswell.

An army intelligence officer, Major Marcel, investigated the
site and concluded that the debris was the remains of a radar
target or a weather balloon. He loaded all the debris into the
boot of his car.

The army information office issued a statement to the effect
that the army had "gained possession of a flying disc through
the co-operation of a local rancher and the sheriff's office".
Park says this was a garbled message which the army quickly
corrected, this time describing the debris as a standard radar
target. The original press release lit the fire of suspicion
and, with the passage of years, the subsequent correction has
increasingly been seen as a Government cover-up.

As the years passed, the Roswell story grew into a fantastically
detailed saga. The debris that Major Marcel reported had fitted
into the boot of his car grew into the wreckage of an entire
alien spacecraft that was secretly moved by the military to an
air force base in Ohio.

Alien bodies were said to have been found in the spacecraft. The
aliens were described as small, with large heads and suction
cups on their fingers. One alien was reported to have been alive
when found but was kept hidden by the Government.

Park explains the emergence of the Roswell saga as the product
of over-active imaginations stitching together bits and pieces
of reports of unrelated plane crashes, parachute experiments
involving roughly life-like dummies, and so on, even though some
of these events occurred many miles from Roswell and years
later. The story grew into a full-scale myth of an encounter
with extra-terrestrials, the details of which the Government
found too frightening to share with the people and consequently
they, it was believed, covered up the whole thing.

As it turns out, there was a government cover-up, but not of an
alien spacecraft. It involved a secret government programme from
the 1940s, Project Mogul. By summer 1947 the Russians had not
yet exploded their first atomic bomb, but it was clear this test
was imminent. It was most important for America to know when the
test took place.

Project Mogul was an attempt to listen for the explosion by
launching low-frequency microphones to high altitude where sound
waves can propagate around the globe. Microphones, radar
tracking reflectors and other devices were sent aloft on long
trains of weather balloons to listen for the atomic explosion.

These balloon trains were launched in New Mexico from a point
about 100 miles west of Roswell. Flight 4 was launched on June
4th, 1947 and was tracked to within 17 miles of where Brazel
found the wreckage, when contact was lost. The debris found at
Roswell matches the materials used in the balloon trains. Park
believes the crash of Flight 4 was the birth of what has become
known as the Roswell Incident.

PROJECT MOGUL remained secret until 1994, when Steven Schiff, a
Congressman from New Mexico, insisted on an all-out search for
records and witnesses to reassure the public there was no
government cover-up of Roswell. Had the truth been revealed
about Project Mogul in 1947, it would almost certainly have
killed off speculation about the Roswell debris, but the truth
emerged 50 years too late. For many UFO-enthusiasts, the
government secrecy over Project Mogul simply reinforced their
conviction that the government also covered up the far more
sensitive matter of contact with extraterrestrials.

The Russians carried out their first atomic test in August,
1949, which quickly became common knowledge. At that stage what
possible advantage was there for the government to hide Project
Mogul, especially when revealing some details would prevent the
growth of a potentially dangerous myth? Any reasonable person
would allow government the freedom to maintain a certain level
of secrecy in some areas, particularly at times of war or threat
of war. Unfortunately this concession to government is wide open
to abuse and leads to a culture of secrecy.

Keeping secrets inevitably leads to lies and inevitably some of
these lies are found out. This destroys trust. Polls in the US
now show a growing number of people think the government is
covering up information about UFOs. When the public loses trust
in government experts, there is a ripple effect outwards of
diminished trust in all expert scientific opinion. As the tide
of trust recedes it is smoothly replaced by receptivity to all
sorts of pseudo-science and even outright superstition - and
this apparently is the unfortunate legacy of the crash of a
weather balloon at Roswell in 1947.

William Reville is a senior lecturer in biochemistry and
director of microscopy at UCC

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

posted by:
Ignatius Graffeo
http://www.ufoseek.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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:32:22 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:22:14 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron


 >From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron


 >Source: Cosmic Comentary - http://members.tripod.com/~CosmicRose/CCC.html

 >Roswell: Enough Already
 >by A-J Charron
 >September 7, 2000

 >How many times can we be served this cold dish? I say cold
 >because it's been reheated so many times that it won't reheat
 >anymore.

 >Conspiracy Theorists keep saying that a UFO crashed and the US
 >Air Force keep saying that a balloon crashed. Something crashed!
 >What was it?

 >The balloon story makes no sense. And it's not suppose to. The
 >US Air Force chose to say,in the official version, that it was a
 >balloon, because they knew nobody would believe it. So was it a
 >flying saucer from another planet? Well, who said it was a UFO?
 >Actually, the first person to say that it was a UFO was the
 >first military investigator who arrived at the crash site. In
 >other words, the Air Force said it was a flying saucer.
 >Therefore, it was not!

 >That the whole thing was a coverup is not very difficult to
 >figure out. But then again, like the balloon story, it's not
 >supposed to be. Then what was it?

 >Roswell is near the test sites of the first Atomic Bombs. Logic
 >dictates that a plane crashed.

Somebody needs to study a map. The only above ground nuclear
test conducted in New Mexico was at the Trinity site on White
Sands Missile Range on July 16, 1945. It was exploded on a
tower. Not dropped from an airplane This is over 100 miles and
over a mountain range from the Brazel ranch.

Since the 509th was the most elite military group in the world
in 1947 and flew loads of B-29s and other airplanes from Roswell
Army Air Field, and since there were a number of plane crashes
in the area, this explanation is ridiculous. Marcel and others
were also familiar with plane crashes from their service time in
the Pacific during WW 2.

 >But, Theorists say, an
 >investigator would have figured that out right away. And so
 >would have the witnesses: Everybody know what a plane looks
 >like! Sure. But not many people know what a crashed plane looks
 >like. And that's the difference.

 >Crash investigators say that if you did not know upon arrival
 >that what you were looking at was a plane, you would never be
 >able to guess. The reason is quite simple, a plane is made of
 >aluminium and other fragile materials. It has to be or else it
 >would never leave the ground. Throw it on the ground at several
 >hundred miles per hour and what do you think will be left?

 >Not much. All the parts break up in little pieces making an
 >unrecognizable, tangled mass. Then why cover it up? Many simple
 >reasons. Mainly, what was in the plane. Or rather who. You've
 >seen the video "Alien Autopsy"? Odds are it's true. As one
 >doctor who viewed the video said, the corpse presented was that
 >of a human female presenting several rare birth defects.

 >So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >documented fact.

What in the world does this have to do with Roswell even if it
were true?? Documented where??

 >What did they do with them? Many of them were placed on the
 >sites of the A-Bomb tests. By exposing them to blast, fallout,
 >radiation, etc, the military could see the effects on human
 >beings. Probably many other horrible things were done to those
 >Children, but that is not the object of this essay.

 >By talking about UFOs, the military were planting an idea. By
 >denying it the next day and saying it was a weather balloon only
 >made people realize they were lying. But people thought they
 >were lying about the UFO bit which the military themselves had
 >planted. If they had said it was a plane crash, there might have
 >been a civilian investigation. This way they ensured there
 >wouldn't be. Everything went according to plan.

Why would there be a civilian investigation of a military plane
crash??

 >So, in essence, Roswell was a coverup. The military were
 >covering up their activities. The coverup job itself was a
 >beauty! Over fifty years later, it's still the subject of films,
 >documentaries, books and... essays. I hope whoever it was who
 >had the idea to begin with quit the military and went into
 >advertising. If so, he must be filthy rich!

Some success... essentially nothing about Roswell from mid-July
1947 until I spoke with Lydia Sleppy in the early 1970s and with
Jesse Marcel in 1978... A number of us have spent enormous amounts
of time on Roswell and the government lies. People and certainly
the media bought the Balloon Explanation... no mention of bodies,
in a day or so. This is conspiracy theorism at its worst. No
facts no data, wrong info etc..

Stan Friedman

Does anybody have the source citation for the Rees quote below?

 >"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
 >~~ Sir Martin Rees (astronomer)
 >http://CosmicRose.tripod.com/CCC.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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:27:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:26:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >from The Irish Times
 >http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 >Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >By Dr William Reville

 >Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >examination.

 >Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
 >sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
 >to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
 >Earth. Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
 >the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
 >told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
 >Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
 >incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
 >secrecy.

<snip>

Ah, yes, Robert Park, author of "Voodoo Science" which slashes
everything from Cold Fusion to UFOs.  Unfortunately, Bob was
jogging last week when a tree fell on him. He was in critical
condition at last report. See:

http://www.aps.org/WN/

It was described as a bizarre accident.  Could be his Karma
caught up with him.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                          Roswell - Beyond Schiff?

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:59:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:30:16 -0400
Subject: Roswell - Beyond Schiff?


Hello to all List members

A French journalist has asked me if, since de death of
Congressman Steven Schiff, have any other Congressman, or
important personality in politics or any other field, undertaken
action or research regarding UFOS and made a public statement
about it.

Thank you in advance for any advice on this matter.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:54:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:43:15 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron


 >From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

Just a few questions if you don't mind.....

 >Roswell is near the test sites of the first Atomic Bombs. Logic
 >dictates that a plane crashed. But, Theorists say, an
 >investigator would have figured that out right away. And so
 >would have the witnesses: Everybody know what a plane looks
 >like! Sure. But not many people know what a crashed plane looks
 >like. And that's the difference.

Correct, in 1947 not a lot of people would know what a crashed
airplane looked like, however I kinda _hope_ that a Major in the
Air Force _might_ have an inkling as to what a crashed plane
looked like. Especially a Major that was involved in Military
Intelligence.

 >Crash investigators say that if you did not know upon arrival
 >that what you were looking at was a plane, you would never be
 >able to guess. The reason is quite simple, a plane is made of
 >aluminium and other fragile materials. It has to be or else it
 >would never leave the ground. Throw it on the ground at several
 >hundred miles per hour and what do you think will be left?

Probably the same kind of stuff that would be left behind by a
crashed "Flying Saucer"

 >Not much. All the parts break up in little pieces making an
 >unrecognizable, tangled mass. Then why cover it up? Many simple
 >reasons. Mainly, what was in the plane. Or rather who. You've
 >seen the video "Alien Autopsy"? Odds are it's true. As one
 >doctor who viewed the video said, the corpse presented was that
 >of a human female presenting several rare birth defects.

Err, just a little moot point. That's pre-supposing that the AA
Film was showing a _Bona_Fide_ autopsy? Most people have kinda
agreed that the AA Film is merely a hoax.

 >So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >documented fact.

Whoa! Sorry, but where is any _evidence_ of the CIA going around
the countryside abducting children? Don't look now but that
sound you hear in the background is some _very_ angry CIA types
and it might be A-J Charron that is abducted shortly.

 >What did they do with them? Many of them were placed on the
 >sites of the A-Bomb tests. By exposing them to blast, fallout,
 >radiation, etc, the military could see the effects on human
 >beings. Probably many other horrible things were done to those
 >Children, but that is not the object of this essay.

Ahem. So, Charron is saying that not only did the CIA expose
children to Radiation, they also wanted to do _other_ things to
them as well? I _could_ be wrong here but I don't think making
the CIA your enemy would work in your best interests. Something
tells me that the CIA agents who are _also_ parents are gonna
want to talk to you.

 >By talking about UFOs, the military were planting an idea. By
 >denying it the next day and saying it was a weather balloon only
 >made people realize they were lying. But people thought they
 >were lying about the UFO bit which the military themselves had
 >planted. If they had said it was a plane crash, there might have
 >been a civilian investigation. This way they ensured there
 >wouldn't be. Everything went according to plan.

Just for fun, Charron is saying that the Military were helping
the CIA by issuing an easily debunked lie so they could look
stupid? Yeah, uh huh, I can see them wanting to do this.
Sure.....

 >So, in essence, Roswell was a coverup. The military were
 >covering up their activities. The coverup job itself was a
 >beauty! Over fifty years later, it's still the subject of
 >films, documentaries, books and... essays. I hope whoever it
 >was who had the idea to begin with quit the military and went
 >into advertising. If so, he must be filthy rich!

Okay Charron got me really confused. The military were covering
up their activities? I thought Charron said the military were
covering up the CIA activities?

 >--
 >"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
 >~~ Sir Martin Rees (astronomer)
 >http://CosmicRose.tripod.com/CCC.html

Absence is absence, evidence is evidence, where's yours?

Dave (Furry)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:35:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:46:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >from The Irish Times
 >http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 >Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >By Dr William Reville

 >Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >examination.

<snip>

However well written and interesting this whole article is, I am
sorry to say that for Roswell to be "debunked" would require
just a little more than simply a long diatribe that amounts to
nothing more than theoretical supposition.

But that's just MY take on it.<grin>
Dave (Furry)






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:50:40 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 21:54:13 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 13:01:49 -0400

 >>>From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:25:54 -0700
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>>I have spent many lonely days in NYC and the one thing that New
 >>>Yorkers absolutely do not do is 'look up'. Anyone in Manhattan
 >>>who walks around looking up is a tourista.

 >>Very true!

 >>When I was writing about the Linda case, I talked to truck
 >>drivers at the NY Post plant near Linda's apartment building.
 >>They, conceivably, could have seen the UFO. But they don't look
 >>up. Why would they?

 >Terry, Greg,

 >This rather misses the point. The alleged eyewitnesses on the
 >elevated Brooklyn Bridge would hardly had to have looked "up" at
 >all. In theory, the glowing UFO pulling Linda out of her
 >apartment would have been roughly eye-level. And these people
 >also reportedly had their cars stalled. And don't forget:
 >Dan/Richard wasn't looking up, either; he first saw the UFO as a
 >reflection in a gum wrapper! You might as well argue that, of
 >all New Yorkers, only those employed to guard the Sec. Gen. of
 >the UN at 3am in the morning, parked underneath an underpass
 >near Linda's apartment while on his way to a closed heliport,
 >chew gum. (Btw, does anyone know if he was even headed in the
 >right direction?)

Were we talking about people on the bridge seeing the UFO? We
were talking about people in New York generally. I was foolish
enough to mention the NY Post workers, whom I'd actually talked
to. Then... pow! In rushes Dennis, to gnaw at all-too-familiar
-- even the debate is familar -- details of the case.

As I said at the start, I'm not interested in redebating the
truth or non-truth of the case itself.

 >And I say that not as a claimed expert about anything. I just
 >get a warm and fuzzy feeling whenever Greg agrees with an
 >observational NYC "expert" who isn't me.

Dennis, I just agree with people who make sense. If you're going
to hold forth about subjects you don't know about, I reserve the
right to tease your claims to expertise. (I'm still thinking
about your notion that anyone at a big-city daily newspaper
listens to police radio all day long. When I worked at a daily
newspaper in Los Angeles, the late Herald-Examiner, that
certainly wasn't the case. I can't speak for dailies in NY,
because I've never looked into this point, but I wonder. Dennis,
do you know this for a fact, or did you see it in a movie?)


 >>And once I was listening to a NYC radio talk show about UFOs. A
 >>skeptic called up to defend one pro-UFO point -- that many
 >>people wouldn't see a UFO if it passed overhead. She said she'd
 >>seen a low-flying weather balloon one day, and no one on the
 >>street looked up.

 >>Me, I've seen one astounding aerial sight -- a commercial jet
 >>(I'm not making this up) fly south over 5th Avenue, so low that
 >>when it went further south and passed it World Trade Center
 >>towers, it was lower than they were. Not a soul on the street
 >>looked up to watch it.

 >>Greg Sandow

 >But _you_ did. So did the woman who saw the weather balloon
 >earlier. "Not a soul...?" Surely neither of you actually meant
 >to speak for the entire rest of the city. Or maybe you do?

First this, then Serge. Allow me to rephrase my sentence, whose
meaning must have been clear to most of us; "Not a soul looked
up, except me and my friend." In a city with eight million
people, some, obviously, do look up. But most don't, which means
that unusual aerial activity of all sorts could go on here
without as many people noticing as non-New Yorkers might think.

Even people who live here don't know we have fabulous sunsets!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                          Filer's Files #36 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:04:56 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:06:58 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #36 -- 2000


Filer's Files #36 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
September 11, 2000, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, C. Warren
Webmaster site http://www.filersfiles.com. - Majorstar@aol.com.

UFO ACTIVITY SEEMS TO BE PICKING UP SINCE LABOR DAY
WITH NUMEROUS SIGHTINGS IN NEW JERSEY, PENNSYLVANIA,
MICHIGAN, COLORADO, WASHINGTON AND CANADA

ASTRONAUT COOPER CLAIMS GOVERNMENT WITHHOLDS UFO DATA

Air Force Colonel Leroy Gordon "Gordo" Cooper who was one of the
original Mercury astronauts claims that the government has
withheld information that alien spacecraft have visited Earth.
Cooper claims the government has "swept under the rug" the truth
about unidentified flying objects. "Each administration has
probably tried to figure out how, with the least embarrassment,
they could confess to this whole thing," he said. His new book
"Leap of Faith: An Astronaut's Journey in the Unknown"
(HarperCollins Publishers, $25) reveals new information about
his own encounters with UFOs. Cooper says "They need to clean
the slate about what has been going on or has not been going
on," Sitting on top of an Atlas missile he flew into space in
1963.

NEW JERSEY CIRCLE OF LIGHTS

BERLIN -- My name is Carol, and last night September 10, 2000,
my family was sitting out side and we all saw strange lights in
the sky. They were flying in a circle coming together flying
around again. If I could draw it on the computer it would look
like a wheel. We watched for about twenty minutes. I wanted to
call someone about it, but didn't know who to contact. When my
husband got home from work he told me other people had also seen
it in the sky and reported it. It was called in to some radio
stations as unidentified. I have seen things over the years. I
am 52 and it all started back in the 50s when I was around 12
years old. Thanks to Carol Alian10094

PENNSYLVANIA VIDEO OF UFOs

PITTSTON TOWNSHIP -- Chuck and a female witness noticed several
strange flying objects in the sky on August 20, 2000, at 7:45
PM. He happened to have his Sharp Video camera with him and
started to video tape shooting towards the sunset. A strange
white disc shaped object was hovering in the sky. The object had
a white and black exhaust or contrail beneath it. At first Chuck
thought the object might be a rocket, but rockets do not hover
in the sky for an extended period. The UFO started to climb
higher in the sky and the exhaust or contrail disappeared. The
disc was about the width of his thumb at arm's length with the
exhaust about the length of his hand. The UFO did not appear to
move laterally but climbed quickly out of sight almost straight
up. Several other balls of light or UFOs are apparent on the
film in the distance. The film shows a road scene, a restaurant,
telephone pole and the objects in the distance. Chuck then zooms
64 times to a close up of the object that appears as a white
spinning disc. The video is several minutes long and allows the
viewer to see the UFO for an extended time. Further analysis of
the film continues. Thanks to Chuck in Scranton.

NORTH CAROLINA DISC SHAPED UFO

ROCKY MOUNT TAR RIVER RESERVOIR -- Martin Richer writes, "I had
a sighting of some sort in early September last year shortly
after Hurricane Floyd came through this area and brought
catastrophic floods. Many deaths occurred in this vicinity and
rescue helicopters blanketed our area. My back door sits just
280 feet from the river's edge but luckily, my home sits high
enough that we avoided major damage. Three days after the worst
flooding, I took my boat out to explore the damage and as I
returned to my home I waded towards shore when I stepped in a
hole. I stumbled, dunking myself in the brackish flood fouled
water. I rose up sputtering, gasping, and cursing, and tried not
to lose my temper. I looked up and 500 yards across the
reservoir was a craft of some sort.

It was about 25 feet across, and somewhat boxy in shape,
although all edges were smoothed out and rounded. It appeared
to be completely white in color, and had no visible windows,
doors or, antennae. There were no apparent lights or seams.
The sun had just set and was near the craft, but below the tree
line. It made no detectable noise, and was at a distance no
more than 100 yards past where I can easily hear a small
motorboat engine. It just hovered there about 300 yards above
the trees. It slowly moved away from me towards the north,
rising slowly to 1000 feet. In a smooth motion, it accelerated
rapidly and was lost to sight behind the tree line within a
second or two. From the time I first noticed the craft or
whatever sitting stationary till it began to move back and to my
right took about 12-15 seconds. It took perhaps another 12-15
seconds to move out of sight. This thing didn't exhibit any
flight characteristics unknown to conventional craft, only it's
appearance and lack of sound was odd. Thanks to Martin Richer

GEORGIA FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF UFO BOOM

COLUMBUS -- Researcher John C. Thompson writes, "A major break
has developed in the February 5, 2000, central Georgia 'mystery
boom' that was widely reported by Columbus news-media" Jim Steen
of MUFON in Columbus alerted me to new witnesses in Mauk,
Georgia. The Marion County couple were at home when at 5:20 PM
they heard, like tens of thousands of others, a loud explosion
that knocked items off their living room shelves. They ran
outside and saw a high flying "tiny white speck" with contrail
behind it almost directly overhead. Simultaneously, another
object emerged at a 75 degrees from the contrail of what they
thought was a fighter jet flying to the southeast. The 41 year
old husband described the UFO as a "shiny metallic spear" that
contracted and elongated as it moved at a dazzling speed away
from the fighter.

The UFO looked exactly like a metal cigar canister that moved
many times faster than the jet. At its greatest length, the UFO
was "eight times" longer than the jet which could be compared
near it. At its shortest, it was half that size. It "oscillated"
in size as it flew away silently to the southwest. The wife said
the UFO was many times bigger than the jet and was a metallic
disc that was rapidly spinning as it sped away in excess of 2000
mph. A soft whoosh from the engines of the overhead jet could be
heard. The large blimp size UFO--the husband said "was much
bigger than any Fuji film blimp. It made no sound and covered a
third of the horizon in only "4 seconds." It disappeared behind
a stand of short pines. The visibility was excellent, ceiling
unlimited, 65 degrees F, with little wind. The jet, whose swept
back wings and fuselage could clearly be seen, meanwhile, was
still in sight nearly two minutes later at a 140 degrees
azimuth. Both craft appeared to be at the same altitude. It can
be estimated, based on the fighter's small apparent size, that
they were flying above 20,000 feet. Within 18 hours 10 to 15
military jets were seen to be flying a "tic-tac-toe pattern"
over Marion and adjacent Taylor County. This abnormal military
air activity went on for ten days. Tree-hugging Blackhawk
helicopters were seen within four days following the blast doing
search patterns. The dark Blackhawks had absolutely no markings.
Some were seen with side refueling probes and with forward
"bulbs." Such helicopters, "Pave-Hawks," with refueling probes
and forward infrared internal sensors, are stationed at Hurlburt
Field near Eglin AFB in northwest Florida. Many thanks to Jim
Steen and John C. Thompson, copyright 2000. All rights reserved.
Editors Note: The 347th Wing at MoodyAFB, GA. has F-16s fighters
whose length is 49 feet 5 inches long. Estimated size is 8 x 50
= 400 feet in length for the UFO. Eglin AFB has F-15s that are
64 feet in length.

MICHIGAN HORSESHOE SHAPED UFO

ANN ARBOR -- Daniel C. Hoppin writes that on Saturday, September
9, 2000, my brother and girlfriend were walking down a crowded
main street around 9:30 at night. I saw a family pointing up at
the sky and overheard the little girl ask her dad "What is
that?" to which the father responded, "I don't know, we've never
seen anything like it." I looked up and saw an object moving
north, high overhead. At first I thought it was some kind of odd
shaped balloon, but as I watched, it turned. The object was a
red/ochre color, and shaped like a horseshoe, with the open end
facing the back. At this point I drew my comrades attention to
the object, and they watched it as well. The night was hazy, and
the object wasn't lit, so it was not obvious unless you were
looking right at it. My brother thought that the reddish color
was actually a reflection of the downtown lights. We watched the
object slowly move north straight above the street, until it
faded away in the haze. A plane traveling a similar flight path
flew over at what seemed the same altitude. We estimate the UFO
was half a football field or 150 feet in length. We heard no
noise. There are several blimps that fly out of Ann Arbor, but
what we saw wasn't a blimp, airplane, helicopter, or flock of
geese, it was solid, and like the little girls daddy said, "I've
never seen anything like it." Thanks to Daniel Hoppin
danchoppin@earthlink.net (Daniel c Hoppin)

OHIO AIR PASSENGER SPOTS A UFO HOVERING

CLEVELAND -- On Saturday, August 19, 2000, at 2:00 PM, Floyd
Juillard was a passenger aboard an America West jetliner making
its final approach into Cleveland International Airport. Just
then, he heard the pilot's voice on the intercom, "Ladies and
gentlemen, Cleveland Center has just cleared us to descend to
12,000 feet. Please return your seats and trays to the upright
position." As the jetliner entered the inbound air traffic over
Olmstead Falls, Ohio, Floyd peered out his window, looking north
towards downtown Cleveland, and spotted a rectangular UFO. It
was "silent and fast, heading west at (bearing) 260 degrees
true. I was looking north at first, but I followed it west with
my gaze." He described the UFO as "four lights spread in a
rectangular shape and first moving slightly up and down and
slightly east and west, close to the terrain. At times it moved
to the west and traveling at great acceleration until it was
almost immediately out of sight." He added, that the four
lights, "Resembled Fourth of July handheld fireworks. Thanks to
UFO Roundup Volume 5, # 36 9/7/00 Editor: Joseph Trainor

DAYTON -- Ginny Burgess writes, "Thanks for accepting my call
concerning the article "Ridicule of UFO Reports Started with the
Robertson Panel." I wanted to let you know prior to sending the
reports we documented of numerous kinds of aerial activity
happening here in Ohio. We made this known to various UFO groups
and government agencies in an effort to try to figure out what
was going on here. We not only got treated with disbelief but
with ridicule. Many of the reports I have of what has been
happening locally here, for about six years now, are ones that I
have had to document much of myself because sightings were
happening so frequently starting in the fall of 1996. There was
so much activity happening here that you may find the numerous
reports by local people hard to comprehend as having occurred.
Thanks to: Ginny Burgessburgess@voyager.net

COLORADO DISC

LOVELAND -- On the night of August 25, 2000, my 14 year old son
and I were returning home from football practice. As we were
headed in a northerly direction at approximately 21:30 MT, my
son exclaimed, "Hey Dad, what the heck kind of aircraft is
that?" As I looked out the driver side window, I saw exactly
what he was puzzled over. About 1000 feet up, directly over the
city was what appeared to be a saucer or disk-shaped craft. This
craft had, what I can best describe as a white, strobe-like
light on top. Around it's entire circumference was a rotating
orange band which seemed to revolve in a clockwise motion around
the object. What was even more interesting was that this object
then turned off the strobe effect and it's rotating orange
light. At this point in time the craft was roughly 300 yards
away from our car and we had been viewing it for about 1 minute.
It then appeared to assume the conventional aviation lights of a
small plane! As we turned west to continue the drive home, my
son said "Look, that thing is following us!" It seemed to be
keeping a parallel course with the route we were taking. As we
pulled into our driveway, it remained on it's current course and
we quickly lost site of view. The total viewing time of this
incident was between 2 and 3 minutes. I am a computer specialist
by trade and my son is a bright, mature, and fairly average
teenage kid who dislikes being the center of attention. The only
reason I'm reporting this incident is because we felt it so
bizarre and it needed to be archived somewhere.

WASHINGTON CIGAR SHAPED OBJECT

SEATTLE -- I awoke at 4:00 AM to use the bathroom on September
2, 2000. I heard a sound coming from outside that caught my
attention because it was coming from the sky, but didn't have
the focused, directional sound of a jet engine. When I looked
out my bathroom window facing north, I saw a cigar shaped object
with several bluish white lights on the side (roughly 1/3 to 1/2
way between the front and back). The object was flying fairly
low in the sky in a singular, easterly direction and from it's
size, it appeared to be fairly near. I viewed the object for 3
seconds before it flew out of the view of my window. The sound
was still audible for a few seconds after I lost visibility.
Slightly stunned, I returned to bed but was unable to sleep. I
got up again 1 or 2 minutes later but did not sight the object
again. (NUFORC Note: We spoke with this witness, and we found
her to be exceptionally convincing in her description of her
alleged sighting.) Thanks to Peter Davenport www.ufocenter.com.

CALIFORNIA F-117 STEALTH NEAR MISS WITH COMMERCIAL JET

LOS ANGELES (AP) - An F-117 stealth fighter flew close enough to
a United Airlines jet to set off the passenger plane's onboard
radar September 7, the airline and the military said. The
incident occurred shortly after United flight 174 left Los
Angeles International Airport for Boston about 8:30 a.m., said
Chris Nardella, a spokeswoman for United, which is based in the
Chicago suburb of Elk Grove Village. The Boeing 757 was flying
at about 10,800 feet when its onboard radar equipment detected
an approaching aircraft. Nardella said the crew kept the plane
at that altitude until the Air Force jet passed overhead.
Preliminary reports showed the United plane and an F-117
Nighthawk stealth fighter came within 500 feet vertically and
six-tenths of a mile horizontally of each other, FAA spokesman
Jerry Snyder said Thursday night. According to Visual Flight
Rules, which the Nighthawk flies by, "this 500 feet separation
was within safe perimeters for all passing aircraft's," Snyder
said. The stealth jet, which is able to evade radar, was
broadcasting its position publicly when the near-miss occurred.
"The F-117, on a training flight, was not in stealth
configuration and was flying according to FAA rules," the Air
Force said in a statement. Under such conditions the plane uses
a standard transponder to alert other aircraft to its position,
the Air Force said. The F-117 flies out of an Air Force facility
in Palmdale, about 60 miles from Los Angeles, and the squadron
is based at Edwards Air Force Base. The United flight carried
166 passengers and seven crew. Thanks to Kenny Young- UFO
Research http://home.fuse.net/ufo/  Editor's Note: The article
notes that the Stealth appeared on the jetliner's transponder
and onboard radar. Some airliners carry a biostatic radar that
can pick up Stealth aircraft. These radar's do not send out a
signal in the normal sense but pickup aircraft in the general
area. The Chinese Embassy in Kosovo used these Biostatic radar's
to track Stealth Fighters during the recent war in Yugoslavia.
After this information was passed to enemy forces the Biostatic
radar's on the Chinese Embassy were destroyed.

PEAK SUNSPOT ACTIVITY AND UFOs

Since the first of the year the sun has been near the peak of
its eleven year activity cycle. There are more sunspots, solar
flares and UV rays from the Sun than at any time since 1989. The
sun is in the maximum phase of the solar cycle now, and it will
probably persist for another year. This years activity is it's
definitely bigger than average. Fortunately, our atmosphere
shields you from most harmful radiation. There has been an
apparent correlation between a lower number of UFO sightings and
high sunspot activity. Last fall reports were averaging 400
reports per month but with the sunspot activity reports dropped
sharply to around 200 a month. Larry Hatch has been conducting a
massive study of the best UFO reports over many years had
decided to compare high sunspot activity with his database of
more than 10,000 highly reliable UFO reports. At first his raw
data seemed to show there was no apparent difference between low
and high sunspot activity.

He writes, "It took over 15 years to dig through all of this and
catalogue some 17,660 sightings." I compared 239 months of Low
sunspot (SS) activity with 193 months of high activity, so
naturally one would expect more UFO sightings during the low
months if you just take a raw count. Much more telling is the
number of sightings per month, i.e., For LOW SS months I divided
6214 events by 239 months to get 26.0 events per month. For HIGH
SS months I divide 4708 events by 193 months to get 24.4 events
per month. Granted this is still higher for low SS months, but
not much higher. I don't call myself a statistician, but would
wager that they would not consider the small difference highly
significant."

The *U* Database Attributes deals with apparent or presumes
activities of UFOs or their occupants. The majority of listings
here fall into one or another category below. Here's the
breakdown for Row #5, split between low and high sunspots months
as described earlier:

ROW #5           Low SS (6179)    High SS (4743)
                  Count Percent    Count Percent
Observation       1669  27.01%    1230  25.93%
Beams & Rays       458  7.412%     356  7.505%
Samples taken?     162  2.622%      75  1.581%
Missing Time?       88  1.424%      57  1.202%
Abduction?         111  1.796%      65  1.370%
Medical Ops?        39  0.583%      14  0.295%
Signaling?         145  2.347%     120  2.530%
Communication?     101  1.635%      61  1.286%
----------------------------------------------
All records  ---- 6179  100.0%    4743  100.0%

In all categories except one (Beams and Rays) the activities
reported during low sunspot months exceed rates for those in
high sunspot months. The biggest discrepancy is in "signaling",
a loose grab of apparent behaviors indicating some sort of
information transmitted to or from a UFO via lights, beams,
radio, etc., etc. A classic example might be a pair of disks
firing thin laser-like beams back and forth. This is nearly
twice as likely during low-SS months. "Communication" means any
transmission of information between a UFO "entity" and a human
observer, often in the context of an abduction. Again this is
much more likely in low SS months. "Medical Ops" are entirely or
almost entirely within the abduction framework. Your classical
nasal implant, if listed at all, goes here. With every caution
against statistics of small samples, note the nearly two to one
ratio favoring low-SS months. The 6th row specifies what is
acted upon, or often merely "observed" or apparently studied by
the UFO. Missing Time and Abduction reports alike are roughly
19% more common in the same low SS months. I find "sampling
behavior" very interesting. Plants, animals, rocks, dirt,
(humans?) Here the odds nearly double during low SS months.
Whether simply observing or taking samples, something or
somebody is acted upon. Row 6 of the indicates the apparent
"objects of attention":

Row 6      Low SS (6179)    High SS (4743)
               Count Percent  Count Percent
Nuclear Fclty    104  1.683%    70  1.476%
Dirt, Soil..     371  6.004%   228  4.807%
Plants and Veg.  302  4.888%   198  4.175%
Animals          220  3.560%   134  2.825%
Humans           453  7.331%   303  6.388%
Vehicles         907  14.68%   695  14.65%
Structures       464  7.509%   331  6.974%
UFO Landings    1281  20.73%   756  15.94%
______________________________________________
All records  ----6179  100.0%  4743  100.0%

In every category, low SS months show a higher incidence. Only
Vehicle cases, (usually cases of vehicle interference) are in
nearly equal ratios. Soil and animal samples, traces and effects
show the greatest discrepancies.  Nuclear Facilities are
military and civilian and do not necessarily show "clear
intent," often it was mere proximity. UFO Landings include cases
where the craft stopped within say 2 meters of the ground, close
enough to drop a ladder. Again, the non-SS months predominate by
a nearly 4:3 ratio. Dirt and soil include trace cases (presumed
landings) and soil sampling. The data accumulated so far, seems
to indicate a smallish but consistent bias toward periods of low
sunspot activity. The categories above, which generally indicate
relatively close encounters, seem to bear this out more clearly
than the raw numbers for sightings of all types posted earlier.
As for quality of the data, please by all means check my list of
*U* Database Sources:
http://www.jps.net/larryhat/USOURCE.html A Special Thanks to
Larry Hatch for his work. larryhat@jps.net


CANADA BRITISH COLUMBIA SIGHTINGS

LAKE COWICHAN --On August 3, 2000, between 11:00 PM and 1:00 AM
three persons witnessed reoccurring UFO sightings. The witness
reports, "At first there was only one that we all saw and it
moved in a triangular pattern for about half of an hour moving
fast then slow, but always in the same triangle shape." The
object was dim and then bright all of the sudden and repeated
this the entire time. We saw along the horizon just above the
tops of the trees about a dozen UFOs. It was hard to count
because they moved so fast, almost dancing with each other.
During this time there were numerous shooting stars with a huge
bright flashes that flew in the exact direction to the spot
where we observed the UFOs. The UFO's were red, green, blue and
orange. Most had like a blue/green tracer that followed it.
These must have been UFOs since I have never seen anything move
in such sporadic directions as these did. They could move across
our entire field of vision in a split second and then be right
back were we first spotted them."

PITT LAKE -- The witness and two companions were occupying a
cabin on August 4, 2000, when they spotted a bright white light
that suddenly "appeared" without warning at 10:55 PM. Larger
than any star or satellite they had ever seen previously. The
light appeared in the Southwest and traveled slowly and
erratically to the Northwest before fading from sight.

VANCOUVER ISLAND -- A woman was on her sundeck on August 7,
2000, looking westward when she observed a shiny ball-like
object that seemed to be reflecting sunlight at 4:30 PM. It was
flying towards Powell River at normal speed for a commercial
aircraft. She watched it for several minutes as it flew above
Harwood Island. She could see it fairly clearly and was sure it
was not a normal aircraft. She called for her son to come out
and have a look. That was when it stopped, appeared to reverse
its course, climbed at an incredible speed and disappeared in a
matter of 3 to 5 seconds.

PROCTOR FERRY-- On August 17, 2000, the witnesses two dogs woke
up and wanted to go out at 11:30 PM, when she saw an object with
red, blue and green flickering lights around the top. Calling
her partner out they watched the object move up, down, left and
right without any noise. The dogs normally stay asleep all
night. After twenty minutes it headed off and landed on the
nearby mountain top. Its lights went out, came back on and then
went out again. The witness stated there have been lots of
sightings in Proctor and over Kootenay Lake.

SURREY -- The witness was driving her truck along 96th Avenue on
August-21, 2000 in, heading west towards Scott Road at 10:50 PM,
when she suddenly saw a bright light "appear" on her left,
traveling quickly at 500 to 1000 feet. She thought at first it
was a plane about to crash. It was heading north and had red and
green lights on it. She had it in view for no longer than 20
seconds before it disappeared from view behind some trees.

SHAWNIGAN LAKE -- On August-21, 2000, we saw a spectacular
fireball come down over the south island. The fireball was some
distance to the west, over the hills, fairly close to the
horizon at 10:52 PM. The center of the fireball was green, and
it left a bright, glowing yellow tail. At one point it flared
brightly as if it had partly exploded, and then several pieces
glowed yellow as they fell.

WHITE ROCK -- The witness looked out of her window around
midnight and saw a bright white diamond-shaped light traveling
south to north on August-21, 2000. She was looking west. As soon
as she saw it a car alarm went off across the street! She turned
away from the window and next she knew it was 1:00, it seems
that she had somehow lost an hour. Thanks to: UFO*BC
http://www.ufobc.org and Gavin McLeod

THE 11TH GREAT UFO CONGRESS will be held at the Days Inn in
Bordentown, NJ on October 7 and *, 2000. Scheduled speakers are
Tom Carey -Roswell Crash, Hans Holzer, Life After Death, Antonio
Huneeus UFO Briefing Document, Don Ecker The Dark side of the
Moon, Vicki Ecker - In search f the Secret Keepers, Mike Mannion
Project Mind Shift, Pat Marcattilio -The Origeins of
Civilizations, James Mosely - A Skeptical Ufologist Sam Sherman
- Edwards AFB Encounter

MUFON BY LAWS VOTE?

I am contacting all of you to ask for your assistance in urging
MUFON members to vote on the new MUFON By Laws; either for or
against acceptance. This is the first time in many years that
the membership has had an opportunity to vote on a revision to
the Bylaws. The divided Bylaw committee worked very hard to
arrive at a modern set of Bylaws for your consideration. It is
up to the membership to determine whether or not we proceed to
work under the new or old Bylaws. Thanks to John Schuessler
MUFON International Director

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:34:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:13:20 -0400
Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak


 >From: Peter Brookesmith The Duke of Mendoza >DarkSecretPB@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:10:31 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:19:45 -0400
 >Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Brookesmith

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:55:39 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: The Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>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?

 >Or rather more miles, I think. But: because it's not masked from
 >every inland point on God's Earth, that's why.

So now it's only selectively masked -- how convenient for
debunking purposes! Perhaps you can provide us with a photo of
the lighthouse showing us the window in the rear wall of the
lighthouse that makes this possible?

 >Here is something
 >or two from a private exchange I had a few days ago (before 29
 >August anyway) with Ian Ridpath:

 >[1] IR: It's true that the Orford Ness lighthouse is blanked to
 >prevent it from shining into the town of Orford but the cut-off
 >isn't as sharp as some people might think and the beam can
 >indeed be seen directly from the supposed landing site. The BBC
 >got it on video back in 1983 and I saw it again for myself on a
 >visit as recently as October 1998. I think even the lighthouse
 >keeper (or whatever they call them these days) was surprised to
 >learn that the beam could be seen that far inland, but he's
 >never been to look for himself, either.

As Bruce Maccabee is fond of saying, "Draw a map."

So permit me to draw a crude map which may be of help here to
everyone, based on Neil Morris' posted map plus the one in Jenny
Randle's "Out of the Blue." (Use a nonproportional font like
Courier to view properly.)

                           N
                       W--|--E
                          S
|<----------------------------- ~6 miles  ----------->|

                   Rendlesham Forest
                     ...........              Orford       |
              .       .                 oo       |  NORTH SEA
____________     .        .            oo       |
Woodbridge__|       .      X landing site              x | Orfordness
   Base  |X East gate  .          .                  / lighthouse
--------                .        .                  /
                           .......               /
                                            /           NORTH SEA
                                       /

The Orfordness lighthouse lies at the bend in the North Sea
coastline. North of the lighthouse, the coast is practically due
north. South of the lighthouse, the coast slopes to the SE

Presumably, if this is a proper lighthouse, the lighthouse beam
will extend at least as far as the coastline in addition to
shining out to sea.

Now you claim that the lighthouse is "masked to the landward
side", in particular "the Orford Ness lighthouse is blanked to
prevent it from shining into the town of Orford but the cut-off
isn't as sharp as some people might think."

But Orford is only slightly north of the line between the
so-called landing site and the lighthouse. This has to be the
lousiest job of "blanking" I've ever seen. In essence, your
claim is that the main beam is directly visible for almost 360
degrees, except for maybe a narrow sector in the direction of
Orford.

This also does not square with the picture of the lighthouse you
linked to in a previous post, which seems to indicate
considerably more of the lighthouse being "masked" in the back:

http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/locator/42.jpg

This photo (apparently taken just south of the lighthouse) also
nicely shows one of the colored navigation light windows about
halfway about the lighthouse, which plays more into the
discussion below

Here's another view from further away and more to the southeast,
showing more of the backside being blocked:

http://www.debenweb.co.uk/img/suff/orfd/orf10.jpg


 >[2]
 >PB: >"I hadn't realized that the light shone directly
 >into the 'forest'"<
 >
 >IR: Nor do many others, of course.

OK guys, please explain to us once again how the light can shine
_directly_ into the forest when the beam is obviously being
blocked in that direction? Look at the photos for crying out
loud! Is the rear of the lighthouse made of window glass?

 >PB: >"This would have been obvious if I'd actually
 >checked the bearings of the light against a map, I
 >spose..."<

 >IR: Not necessarily - a map can't give you the effect of the
 >intervening land. In fact, it wasn't until I went back to the
 >forest a couple of years ago that I realized the lighthouse was
 >visible only through that gap on the far tree line. Also,
 >nothing can quite prepare you for the surprise of having a
 >lighthouse beam shine into your eyes while standing in a forest.

 >I hope this helps. This does not:

Nor does your little anecdotal chat with Ridpath, which explains
nothing. I, and I suspect a few other people, want to know how
it is possible for what seems to be a physically blocked
lighthouse beam to be shining _directly_ into your eyes standing
in the forest.

At best, all that should be seen is a slight glowing from the
beam pointing out to sea as the light is weakly scattered off of
particles in the air. That's the point I was making in my
previous post. > > >>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. > >1. "Barely visible": If you've been there you
wouldn't say >that.

It would indeed be "barely visible" if the lighthouse beam was
truly "masked to the landward side", as you described it in a
previous post, and which the photos of the lighthouse seem to
_prove_.

Remember, it was you who originally insisted that it was so
masked. Now when it becomes obvious how devestating a true
blocking of the light would be to using the lighthouse to debunk
the Rendlesham incident, you do an about face. Yes, the
lighthouse beam is both blocked and not blocked at the same
time.  Or it's a real leaky mask, or narrow mask or something
like that. I guess you expect us to accept that at face value
without some proof to back it up.

But I look at the pictures of the lighthouse, and the main beam
does in fact look like it is completely blocked by a wall at the
back of the lighthouse in the direction of land.

 >2. The loom of a lighthouse lamp, as I've explained before, is
 >not as dim as you seem to think. I wonder if you have ever seen
 >one. I've seen loads, including this one.

I've seen plenty of lighthouse beams. But you aren't answering
the question. If it's blocked or masked by an intervening wall,
how can it be directly visible, and therefore very bright?

 >3. As an educated American you, I suspect, would be astonished
 >at how little your compatriots seem to notice *or accept* when
 >beyond the confines of their own great nation. There are various
 >statements scattered throughout the mass of American testimony
 >on this case that powerfully suggest that many airmen, including
 >the security police, were remarkably -- to a British country
 >gent -- unaware of the local sky at night.

The question at the moment isn't whether the airmen were jerks
or familiar with the local sky, but whether the lighthouse could
possibly appear as bright as you and the other debunkers claim
when the beam is seemingly being blocked by a solid wall?

 >>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

 >Don't know offhand. Don't care.

You should care, because it seems that the tip of the lighthouse
is visible from only one small area in the forest, or as Ridpath
says above "the lighthouse was visible _only_ through that gap
on the far tree line." If Col. Halt and his merry men were
making their observations only slightly removed from this
location, then the lighthouse, blocked beam or not, would
completely disappear behind the treeline and intervening hills.

 >I thought, following Jenny
 >Randles' suggestion, we were talking about Night One, not Night
 >Two. In any case the more elaborate of Halt's own descriptions
 >were inspired by what he saw through a Starlite scope

It isn't possible for him to be describing _multiple_ colors
through an infrared scope, no matter what color of imaging
phosphor you assume it has.

The scopes I'm familiar with all use green phosphor. I've never
hear of one that used a red phosphor that could account for the
bright red, "sun-like" object he described, though I suppose
such a device might exist.

 >whose use
 >and effects he didn't seem to understand (and why should he:
 >Halt isn't an infantryman).

No, just the Deputy C/O -- obviously an inexperienced idiot.

 >Which accounts for the "red sun-like
 >light... seen through the trees" that "moved about and pulsed"
 >that you mention.

 >>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

 >You may find this hard to credit, sunbeam, but having absorbed
 >Bruce's comments on my original speculations (and information) I
 >was thinking perhaps they didn't after all. Not having been out
 >there in the woods at the time, and not knowing what mists were
 >about nor where, I would now regard reflections, refractions or
 >whatever of the red and green lights on the tower as iffy at
 >very best.

"Iffy" is right! They are halfway down the lighthouse (as shown
in your own Web link to a photo and in your lighthouse stats),
making them completely blocked by trees and hills, even at
"Ridpath gap." They shine only out to sea, according to the
azimuth figures you yourself provided (but if you can magically
unblock the main beam, I suppose with further handwaving you
could even unblock the red/green navigation lights.) And
finally, they don't blink.

 >Even including this comment from Halt's own mouth
 >about the events of Night One:

 >"Eventually, a group headed out to the forest. They reported
 >strange noises - animals, movement, like we heard two nights
 >later. As they approached the clearing, they reported seeing a
 >large yellowish-white light with a blinking red light on the
 >upper center portion and a steady blue light emanating from
 >underneath. The tower again reported nothing on radar." ["Inside
 >the Military UFO Underground A.J.S. Rayl - Omni]

Notice the following in that description that is completely
inconsistent with your debunkery:

1. A multi-color description, meaning that Halt was describing
what he saw with the naked eye, not through some
light-intensifying night-scope.

2. The red light was _on top_ of the main yellowish-white light.
The Orford Ness lighhouse red/green navigation lights are well
_below_ the main beam. Furtherrmore, note Halt's description of
the red light _blinking_. The red/green navigation lights are
_steady_ lights, not blinking ones.

3. Need I point out again that red/green navigation lights shone
in completely the wrong direction (i.e., strictly out to sea),
and being only halfway up the lighthouse would be completely
hidden behind any treeline or hills from any point in Rendlesham
forest.

 >Nonetheless, Col Halt speaks of "a steady blue light emanating
 >from underneath", and you will have noted my earlier comment
 >about the confusibility of blue and green light or pigment.

I don't think distinguishing between blue and green light is
where the confusion lies here, since the lighhouse green light
was completely invisible from any vantage point in Rendlesham
forest -- much too low and pointed in the wrong direction --
Sheesh!

 >>>And look at me all in a lather over his analysis.

 >>No wonder.

 >Your humor bypass is well-known, Dave, and I'm sorry to tell you
 >what you best friends won't -- the scars show! -- but I didn't
 >know you'd had an ironectomy as well.

On the contrary, I was well aware of the sarcasm in your reply.
I guess you missed mine in return. So I supposed you also had
something medically removed, even though your best friends don't
like to talk about.

 >Before you rattle on about
 >British aristocratic buffonery again,

If you prefer, I'll rattle on about British pelican poopery
instead.

 >do reflect on what
 >"wonder" it is you find yourself in receipt of it, and take a
 >short course in irony (any edition of Fowler makes a good
 >start).

 >Let me spell this out slowly. I was *not*, and am *not*, in a
 >lather about Bruce's analysis.

You really seem to believe I wasn't aware of that.

 >I am grateful for his remarks. I
 >don't, and you don't, and he doesn't, know enough about the
 >actual weather conditions to be sure about what may or may not
 >have veen visible from anywhere the airmen were that night.

The weather conditions don't change the facts that the colored
lights shine only out to sea, are unblinking, and are too low
down to be seen from anywhere in question.

 >So I
 >put my speculations -- and they were never more than that --
 >about the additional colored lights seen on Night One into a
 >pending file. Despite Halt's comments quoted above, upon which a
 >true Klass Klown would probably have leapt like a tramp on a
 >kipper.

 >>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.

 >I think you exaggerate the potential jeopardy. Indeed mitake it
 >for something else. The evidence (please go look at James
 >Easton's website!) would suggest that in fact Halt was covering
 >his ass -- trying to get his career *out* of jeopardy -- with
 >that memo. Not least because he & half his men had been
 >racketing around in the woods on Night Two, where they had no
 >jurisdiction, and by then UFO gossip was rampant on the base and
 >likely to leak (as indeed it did).

As I understand it, the base commander urged Halt to write the
memo. If Halt was truly trying to "cover his ass", the memo
could easily have been written in a far more toned down manner
leaving out much of the more sensational details.

"Some of the guards thought they saw strange lights moving about
in the woods. In order to squash rumors floating around the
base, I personally investigated and found nothing to
substantiate the guards' claims. -- Yours truly, Col. Halt,
Friend of the Empire, Loyal subject of the Queen, blah, blah,
blah"

Now THAT'S a CYA memo!

 >Curious point of UK law, with which Halt must have either been
 >fully aware or incompetent at his job if he wasn't: were Soviet
 >Spesnaz, even, to have landed en masse & without warning to
 >secure a USAF base, the protocol for the base commander is to
 >contact the local Mr Plod, as we call the police. Who then
 >requests aid from the commander of the local military district.
 >Under whose command SP or other INF-trained US units would then
 >be placed. In a real unexpected hot war this process would very
 >likely happen retrospectively, and no one would mind, but that
 >was hardly the case here. By letting his lads (and himself) nose
 >around all over the woods Halt was two stages away from doing
 >what we British aristocrats call "doing the right thing". Or
 >more likely we'd say what he *did* do was "not on". He surely
 >had some explaining to do to the MoD.

See CYA memo contents above, which blames it on some
know-nothing underlings and takes himself and his C/O off the
hook, because he personally investigated it and found nothing.
That's all the explanation he needed to provide the MoD.

 >But, yes, Halt did witness something that to *him* was highly
 >unusual. I'm reminded of Hynek's comment on unidentified flying
 >objects: "Unidentified to whom?". Halt didn't know what he was
 >looking at, or with what. Very unusual indeed. But that does not
 >an alien visitation make.

 >best wishes
 >Pampered D. Macaroni
 >Mind The Riding Crop

Just explain to us how lights obviously blocked from view could
possibly explain the Rendlesham events. More hand-waving and
obfuscation by talking all around the points are not allowed.

Best wishes

David Rudiak

Irony and Humor Circuits All Shorted to Ground. I Want Straight
Answers, Damnit!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:18:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'


SKEPTIC FACTOID 1: COL. HALT et al. CHASED LIGHTHOUSE FOR 2
MILES

Unbeknownst to most people on this list there has been a
parallel thread on James Easton's list that has uncannily
matched some of the excellent points raised here by Dave Rudiak
and Bruce Maccabee and provided surprising confirmations. I was
not aware of this until Friday when I read the posts on UFO
UpDates for the first time. New developments on Easton's list
have exploded the long-standing claim that there were 2-mile
chases through forest and field of what supposedly turned out to
be the distant Orfordness lighthouse beacon the entire time.
After a local UFO skeptic discovered recently that the
lighthouse beacon is only visible for the first 226 meters or so
of the approximately 3,226 meter (2.0 miles) trek and then for
another 400 meters afterward, Easton graciously conceded that
the First Night military party lost "sight of the lights and
eventually saw a distant beacon which was presumed to be
related" however he has not withdrawn the "2-mile lighthouse
chase" myth.!

Other skeptic factoids are falling by the wayside in what
appears to be a reversal of Easton's "Rendlesham Unravelled" --
call it the Re-Ravelling of Rendlesham. This has been very
disconcerting to me as I have accepted for the past two years
that the skeptic investigations have seemingly explained the
Rendlesham case, and that the skeptics (notably Ian Ridpath and
James Easton) had seemed to have done their homework. I regret
that I was mistaken in this reliance. I still hope that the case
might be resolved but it is looking more and more unlikely.
Investigations by Jenny Randles and Easton have brought out many
new undisclosed facts about the case. A book by Col Halt was
supposed to be published at some point. Richard Hall's UFO
Evidence II should add much from interviews with Col Halt.
Hopefully a much more complete and accurate picture of this case
will now emerge.

A UFO skeptic who is a local resident of the Rendlesham area,
Robert McLean, has been investigating the sighting locations
on-site. He has recently identified the landing site and the
route through the woods and fields of both the First Night and
Second Night groups east of the East Gate of RAF Woodbridge. The
First Night group includes security policemen Burroughs,
Cabansag and Penniston, on Dec 26, 1980. The Second Night group
was led by deputy base commander Col Charles Halt on Dec 28.

While McLean still seems to believe in the Orfordness lighthouse
theory he has discovered that it was physically "impossible" to
see the lighthouse beacon on almost all of the eastward 2 mile
journeys due to terrain elevation obstruction.

Here is Rudiak's classic statement dispatched on Aug 29 and
posted the next day on UFO UpDates:

 >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.

Here is what skeptic Robert McLean reported on his on-site
observations of the Orfordness lighthouse beacon's visibility.
 From McLean's Aug 26 posting on Easton's list:

 >I have this summer measured late at night the area of
the field where this [the Orfordness lighthouse beacon]
 >can be seen, again by pacing off distances. It is a
 >roughly rectangular area that extends in the field
 >east-west only about 126 m (because of the sharp drop
 >off in elevation as you walk east), and north-south
 >only about 64 m. ... In 1980, the lighthouse would
 >have been visible well into the forest as the ground
 >slopes gradually up towards the west. But it only
 >would have been visible along a relatively narrow 64 m
 >width. In fact, I know of nowhere else where the
 >lighthouse is visible in the forest in the summertime.

<snip>

 >At the position of Ian Ridpath's photo, the lighthouse
 >beacon is at the left hand side of a small notch in the
 >skyline just to the right of the farmer's
 >house. If you go a couple of feet north (i.e. to the
 >left as seen in the photo) of this location, the
 >lighthouse beacon disappears, even at night.

On Aug 28, McLean posted:

 >Because it is only possible to walk about 126 m into
 >the field immediately to the east of the accepted
 >landing site before the lighthouse beam disapears
 >behind the ridge 4 km to the east, the lighthouse beam
 >could never be seen in proximity with Butley Abbey.
<SNIP>

 >It's difficult to see how the ... lighthouse beacon
 >could be seen at the accepted landing site. The
 >difficulty is that the lighthouse beacon is visible
 >only in a 64 m wide, 126 m deep stretch of field. Even
 >allowing a further 50 m to 100 m further depth inside
 >the forest, it is difficult to see what the lighhouse
 >can line up with (at least when leaves are still on
 >the trees).

McLean further posted on Sept 4:

 >Along the East bank of the Butley River is a ridge of
 >land that rises to between 15 m and 20 m high. It is
 >this ridge of land that completely blocks the
 >Orfordness lighthouse beam when you have walked no
 >more than about 136 m [sic; 126?] into the farmer's
 >field immediately in front of the accepted landing
 >site.

McLean posted on Sept 5:

 >What seems clear, is that Col Halt and men then
 >went the very short distance, say 100 m, to the edge
 >of the forest to find out what the pulsating red light
 >was, and then out into the open farmer's field. The
 >elevation of the field drops away quite quickly as you
 >walk towards the light, and at night, the lighthouse
 >beacon soon disappears behind the ridge 4 km away
 >south-west of Orford. In the summer, the lighthouse
 >beacon is visisble only in a very small rectangular
 >portion of this field. I have measured this at night
 >by pacing off the distance and the area is about 64 m
 >north-south and about 126 m east-west. It is possible
 >this area might be wider in the winter, as trees on
 >the ridge 4 km away which in summer block out the
 >lighthouse might let some light through. But the
 >distance of 126 m into the field will be the same,
 >because it is the ridge itself which blocks the beam
 >as your elevation drops while you walk towards the
 >farmhouse.

 >After the direct view of the beacon disappears, it is
 >a further 200 m before you reach the farmhouse.

<snip>

 >Adding up these distances, following this path from
 >the accepted landing site to the "second farmer's
 >field" gives a distance of 3326 m (or 2.07 miles
 >[sic]), during which the lighthouse beacon was
 >directly visisble for only the first 226 m.

 >One of the few things I am sure of is the location of
 >the "second farmer's field". So how did parties on two
 >nights starting out near the accepted landing site
 >find this only vantage point west of the Butley River
 >from which you have a clear view of the lighthouse?

On Sept 10 McLean posted:

 >If you start off at the "accepted" landing site and
 >walk towards the "accepted" farmer's house, you have a
 >direct view of the Orfordness beacon up until about
 >126 m into the field, and then it disappears behind
 >the ridge 4 km away, and you don't see it again until
 >the end of the two mile trek to the "vantage point" or
 >"second farmer's field" I have identified at OS grid
 >ref TM386477.

It is amazing that here is Dave Rudiak in California who has
evidently never been to the site in East England and yet he has
carefully analyzed the data and photos and come up with an
analysis of the lighthouse visibility pattern that sounds
startlingly like the on-site eyewitness description given by
Robert McLean -- each of whom was unaware of the other
apparently! On the scene, McLean has found the "one small area
in all of Rendlesham forest where the lighthouse is barely
visible" (Rudiak's words), where just moving to the left "a
couple of feet" (McLean) or "a few steps" (Rudiak), or a short
distance to the right and "the lighthouse beacon disappears,
even at night" (McLean). Walking more than about 126 meters east
into the field near the UFO landing site and a distant ridge of
land along a river stream "completely blocks the Orfordness
lighthouse beam" (McLean). Nowhere else along the 2-mile route
can the lighthouse beam be seen until at the end, just beyond
the 2-mile! point, in the "second farmer's field."

According to McLean it is terrain that blocks the view of the
Orfordness lighthouse light. The trees only add to the
obstruction. Because of tree felling in Jan 1981 and a
devastating hurricane in Oct 1987 that wiped out nearly 95% of
the trees in Rendlesham Forest (figure according to Easton), the
view was even more obstructed by trees during the UFO events of
Dec 1980 than they are today.

Some of the Jan 1981 witness statements by the First Night party
suggest that they had followed a lighthouse beacon for 2 miles.
But we are not bound by the witnesses' _opinions_, but by the
facts. This is where we must invoke Hynek's rule that a UFO case
is determined to be unexplained by the technically competent
investigation, not by the UFO witness. A witness may even report
what he thinks is an IFO and can be wrong -- does anyone
seriously contend that is not possible? This may be one of those
unusual cases where the witnesses have misidentified a UFO as an
IFO (Identified Flashing Object) instead of the reverse. They
did apparently see both the Orfordness lighthouse and the
UFO(s), and some witnesses insisted that they were able to tell
the difference between the two. Due to wide variations in the
observational abilities and interpretive powers of witnesses, it
is to be expected that some witnesses could tell the difference
between lighthouse and UFO and some could! not.


SKEPTIC FACTOID 2: UFO & LIGHTHOUSE EXACTLY SAME DIRECTION

An important skeptic factoid that has been drummed in again and
again is the false claim that the Orfordness lighthouse was
exactly "due east" of the East Gate of RAF Woodbridge, and that
both the Burroughs-Cabansag-Penniston group and Col Halt's party
coincidentally followed this exact "due east" path straight
towards Orfordness lighthouse, therefore the light or UFO must
have been one and the same as the lighthouse. In fact, as best I
can determine from the rather inadequate maps posted, the
Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degrees true azimuth from
East Gate (the East Gate road is also oriented at this 85 true
azimuth), which is somewhat North of due East, whereas due east
is 90 degs. More importantly Halt headed towards the UFO at
110-120 degrees magnetic which is 105-115 degrees true.

(Contrary to erroneous skeptic information the magnetic
declination or correction from magnetic to true bearings was
-5.2 degs, not -10 degs, according to the NOAA Geomagnetic
Synthesis program and Historical Declination database for Dec
28, 1980, at 52-05 N, 1-30 E, zero elevation. With these two
5-degree errors by skeptics -- in the bearing to Orfordness and
in converting Halt's compass readings from magnetic to true --
skeptics have conveniently improved their case by a total of 10
degrees.)

In other words, the path Halt and the others followed was _not_
in the direction of Orfordness lighthouse but about 20-30
degrees to the right or South of it. McLean noted that the path
he followed to retrace Col Halt's route was "South of East," not
due East. McLean's Ordnance Survey grid map references indicate
the direction from the landing site to the end point in the
second farmer's field was at about 122 degs true azimuth, or
about ESE. The compass directions on Halt's trip were repeatedly
measured and reported on Halt's real-time tape recording (see
Transcript on Easton's website at
http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/halttape.htm):

HALT: The light is gone now. It was approximately 120 degrees
from the site...

<snip>

HALT: ... The light's still there and all the barnyard animals
have gone quiet now. We're heading about 110, 120 degrees from
site out through to the clearing now, still getting a reading on
the [AN/APR-27 Radiation Survey] meter, about two clicks.

HALT: Needle's jumped, three to four clicks, getting stronger.

VOICE: Now it's stopped... Now it's coming up... Hold on. There
we go... about approximately four foot off the ground, at a
compass heading of 110 degrees.

HALT: He's turned the meter off. Better say that again. About
four feet off the ground, about 110 degrees, getting a reading
of about four clicks?

<snip>

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.

Here is what McLean posted on Easton's list on Sept 4:

 >If you look at the OS map to locate possible high
 >points of land roughly East of the accepted landing
 >site and roughly 2 miles away, the first thing that
 >is apparent is that there is no point in heading a bit
 >North of East as you still have that ridge of land in
 >the way, much of which is forested by Gedgrave Broom.
 >But if you head a bit South of East, then there are
 >two possibilities. The first is Burrow Hill, which
 >rises to 15 m. However, there is still part of the
 >ridge at above 15 m in the way, and I have failed to
 >see any view of the Orfordness lighthouse beam from
 >Burrow Hill at night.

 >The second possibility is the rise in the land 1 km
 >South-West of Burrow Hill between Dock Farm and
 >Banters Barn Farm near grid ref TM385477 - and the
 >field at this location is Col Halt's "second farmer's
 >field".

McLean does not seem to realize that the end point of the 2 mile
trek that supposedly followed the Orfordness lighthouse instead
of a UFO, was in a different direction than Orfordness. He has
the end point at grid ref TM385477 and the beginning point at
TM364490. The azimuth heading is therefore arctan (13/21) = 32
degs south of due east, or azimuth 122 degs. Whereas the
Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degs azimuth, just north
of due east. (385-364 = 21 east, 490-477 = 13 south)

(The so-called Shipwash lightship about 20 miles S and 2 miles E
of Orfordness lighthouse would have been at about 160 degs true
azimuth, or about 35-55 degs to the right of Halt's path to the
UFO -- in almost exact agreement with Halt's memory 17 years
later of where "a lighthouse" beacon was seen that night, about
35-40 degs to the right of the UFO, though he may have
mistakenly confused its identity with Orfordness.)


SKEPTIC FACTOID 3: NO MENTION ON HALT TAPE OF PIECES FALLING OFF UFO

Another skeptic factoid is that purportedly there is no mention
in Halt's tape to substantiate Halt's report years later in
interviews of seeing pieces of the UFO falling like they were
melted. It is even claimed that this "never happened." In
fact, the Halt tape reports it happened _twice_ sometime after
1:48 AM on Dec 28, 1980:

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. [<--NOTE] There is no doubt
about it. This is weird!

<snip>

HALT: Pieces are falling off it again.


SKEPTIC FACTOID 4: NO UFO & LIGHTHOUSE SEEN AT SAME TIME

Another skeptic factoid is that supposedly the UFO and the
Orfordness lighthouse beacon were never reported seen at the
same time by anyone on the First and Second Night parties. If
witnesses _had_ reported seing both it would help substantiate
their claims that they were familiar with Orfordness and could
distinguish it from the UFO. Col. Halt was adamant that he saw
both the lighthouse and the UFO and knew the difference between
the two. And the members of the First Night group also did see
both UFO(s) and lighthouse at the same time:

CABANSAG: "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."

Obviously, the Yellow Light was the Orfordness Lighthouse
Beacon. The Blue - Red - White Lights were from the UFO(s).
Both were seen at or about the same time. Initially, the Yellow
Light could not be identified, but later "turned out" to be the
lighthouse. This is all quite reasonable and helps strengthen
the case for the UFO.

PENNISTON (via M/Sgt 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."

In real time, during the sighting, Penniston reported by radio
to Chandler, who was in Central Security Control, that the
"beacon light" was not the same as the UFO light(s).

PENNISTON (via Fred Buran): "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. I asked him, through SSgt
Coffey, if he could have been mistaken, to which SSgt Penniston
replied that had I seen the other lights I would know the
difference. SSgt Penniston seemed agitated at this point."

Obviously, the "marker beacon" (singular) was not the same as
"the other lights" (plural).

BURROUGHS: "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."

Again, the UFO lights were not the same as the "beacon."


CONCLUSION

I posted on Sept 5 the following response to McLean:

 >Robert,

 >Certainly you have exploded the whole notion that
 >anyone followed the Orfordness lighthouse beacon
 >through the Rendlesham forest for 2 miles. I was
 >prepared to believe that the Orfordness lighthouse
 >resolved the bulk of the sightings and that the
 >remainder could eventually be resolved. Now you throw
 >this all into doubt and now I have to reconsider
 >whether the laser-like "beams" hitting the ground 10
 >feet from Col Halt can be frivolously explained away
 >as star light scintillations. I've striven to try to
 >fit the remote horizon lights as stars but given
 >Halt's claim that one came overhead, this now seems
 >more doubtful. Thank for you undertaking these on-
 >site investigations.


Brad Sparks







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                            60's Space Speech JFK

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 05:28:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:20:55 -0400
Subject: 60's Space Speech JFK


Hi All,

Just a short note for anyone who collects historic speeches, and
for finer detail about the 60's U.S. Space Program, I have the
following on vinyl.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy - The Presidential Years
1960 -1963 Original Speeches.

Side 1:

Pre Election - November 6 - 1960

Election Eve - November 8 - 1960

Oath Of Office -  January 20 - 1961

Inaugural - January 20 - 1961

State Of The Union Message - Jan 31- 1961

Peace Corps - March 2 - 1961

U.N. Address - September 26 - 1961

Berlin Wall - June 26 - 1961

Nuclear Test - July 15 - 1963


SIDE TWO:

Alliance For Progress - August 6 - 1961

On Cuba - October 23 - 1962

On Labour - September 3 - 1962

Birmingham Segregation - May 13 - 1963

U.S. Steel - April 12 - 1962

Houston - November 21 - 1963

Dallas - November 22 - 1963

For further detail please use the above address for contact.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 21:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:27:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 1: COL. HALT et al. CHASED LIGHTHOUSE FOR 2
 >MILES

 >Unbeknownst to most people on this list there has been a
 >parallel thread on James Easton's list that has uncannily
 >matched some of the excellent points raised here by Dave Rudiak
 >and Bruce Maccabee and provided surprising confirmations. I was
 >not aware of this until Friday when I read the posts on UFO
 >UpDates for the first time. New developments on Easton's list
 >have exploded the long-standing claim that there were 2-mile
 >chases through forest and field of what supposedly turned out to
 >be the distant Orfordness lighthouse beacon the entire time.
 >After a local UFO skeptic discovered recently that the
 >lighthouse beacon is only visible for the first 226 meters or so
 >of the approximately 3,226 meter (2.0 miles) trek and then for
 >another 400 meters afterward, Easton graciously conceded that
 >the First Night military party lost "sight of the lights and
 >eventually saw a distant beacon which was presumed to be
 >related" however he has not withdrawn the "2-mile lighthouse
 >chase" myth.!

<snip>

Brad,

I sent Easton the entire file that Greenwood had compiled on
this case - at least 5 linear inches. After less than a day,
Jamie-boy had the answer. Not likely.

Halt said he identified the lighthouse right off in his
presentation in Maryland, something that Easton ignored... after
all, that fact got in the way of the great "answer".

At some point moving around in the woods, yes, maybe, they did
see the lighthouse and become temporarily confused, but there
was something else there. Ever go trundling around in the woods
on a dark night? Amazing what happens to you.

As is typical for Easton, he throws in everything including the
kitchen sink. How about the model airplane carrying a glow stick
that was about two miles away. Did Easton every go on a terrain
walk? Has he ever experimented with light sticks to see how far
away you can see them?

Also, included was a lot of sniping at Halt and innuendoes about
who is assigned as deputy base commanders and what defense
lawyers think about the the chain of command - defense lawyers
are adversaries.

I think Rendlesham was caused by pelicans or seagulls, after all
there is one at every turn... I know you may rather like Klass'
nap of the earth meteors that maneuver in front of mountains.

Regards,

Jan









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:55:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:43:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >from The Irish Times
 >http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >Monday, September 11, 2000 BST>>>

 >Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked>

 >By Dr William Reville

 >Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
i>n unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >examination.

 >Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
 >sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
 >to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
 >Earth. Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
 >the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
 >told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
 >Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
 >incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
 >secrecy.

 >On June 14th, 1947, a rancher, William Brazel, spotted a large
 >area of wreckage about 70 miles north of Roswell, New Mexico.
 >The debris included neoprene strips, metal foil, cardboard, tape
 >and sticks. Brazel paid little attention at the time, but
 >several weeks later he heard reports of flying saucers and
 >wondered if the wreckage might be related. He reported his
 >suspicions to a local sheriff who informed the army base at
 >Roswell.

<snip>

Hahahahahahaha. Sad!

Remaining "voodoo science" snipped in keeping with the Decency
in UFO Reporting Act. :)


The antidote for the sickness represented here is my article,
New York Academy Of Voodoo Science?

On my web site: 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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 02:42:04 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:49:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:26:07 -0400
 >Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked

 >from The Irish Times
 >http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 >Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked

 >By Dr William Reville

 >Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >examination.

Don't know if the good Dr.'s claim is true here. What do polls
tell us about the level of belief that "aliens are here" in
America vs. Europe?

 >Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
 >sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
 >to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
 >Earth.

Depends on one's definition of "hard evidence." It is more than
just sightings. There are, e.g., many photos, movies, videos,
radar tracks, physical trace cases, electro-magnetic
interferencecases, not to mention physiological aftereffects
from close encounters (.e.g. the Cash-Landrum or Stephen
Michalak cases). All this constitutes physical evidence over
and above testimonial evidence.

 >Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
 >the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
 >told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
 >Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
 >incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
 >secrecy.

So Dr. Reville reads one debunking article by Robert Park, and
that's all he needs to know, as if that's all there was to it.
Then he promulgates some of the misinformation in that one
article.

 >On June 14th, 1947, a rancher, William Brazel, spotted a large
 >area of wreckage about 70 miles north of Roswell, New Mexico.

Northwest of Roswell to be nitpicky about it.

 >The debris included neoprene strips, metal foil, cardboard, tape
 >and sticks.

That was the story, partly told by Brazel _after_ the Air Force
through Gen. Ramey had already debunked the whole thing as a
weather balloon.

Here are some important points left out of the discussion. At
least 10 witnesses place Brazel is some sort of military
custody, including when he gave his statements to the press.
Two reporters who were there confirm this, and another (Frank
Joyce) said that the military dragged Brazel over to his radio
station afterwards where Brazel recanted the story he told Joyce
a few days before. According to Joyce, Brazel said the military
had forced him to change his story, and Joyce would be wise to
go along with it.

Brazel's son, Bill Brazel Jr., said they held his father at the
base for a week afterwards. Various friends and neighbors
remember Brazel Sr. complaining bitterly about his treatment by
the military, saying they "threw him in jail," and even the base
Provost Marshall, William Easely, admitted to Kevin Randle that
they held Brazel at the base.

Obviously, these extreme measures were necessary because Brazel
found highly secretive "neoprene strips, metal foil, cardboard,
tape and sticks."

 > Brazel paid little attention at the time, but
 >several weeks later he heard reports of flying saucers and
 >wondered if the wreckage might be related. He reported his
 >suspicions to a local sheriff who informed the army base at
 >Roswell.

Actually, according to family members and even the Roswell base
press release (plus other sources), he had found the debris only
a few days before reporting it.

 >An army intelligence officer, Major Marcel, investigated the
 >site and concluded that the debris was the remains of a radar
 >target or a weather balloon. He loaded all the debris into the
 >boot of his car.

That was the official story back in 1947. But we here know that
Marcel 30 years later told a very different story of the debris
having highly unusual physical properties that were "not of this
Earth." Perhaps Reville and Parks are completely ignorant of how
Marcel has been pilloried by debunkers for daring to make such
statements.

If Marcel were the only one describing such properties, then
Roswell would have been dismissed a long time ago by UFO
researchers as the story of one man. But Marcel wasn't alone in
these claims. A number of other people, military and civilian,
backed him up. Notable support witnesses were Louis Rickett, a
counter-intelligence officer in Marcel's office, Loretta Proctor
(neighbor of Brazel's), Bill Brazel Jr. (told virtually the
identical story as Marcel and completely independently),
Marcel's son, and Gen. Arthur Exon.

Gen. Exon, though not a first-hand witness, was C/O of
Wright-Patterson AFB in the mid to late 1960's, stated flat out
to Kevin Randle (it's on tape) that Roswell was the crash of an
alien spacecraft, the material had highly unusual physical
properties, and that he heard bodies were also recovered.

 >The army information office issued a statement to the effect
 >that the army had "gained possession of a flying disc through
 >the co-operation of a local rancher and the sheriff's office".

And where did the PIO get such information, if not from higher
up? The PIO is Walter Haut, and he insists to this day that the
press release came from Col. Blanchard's (the base C/O) office
in one form or another.

I might add something from the "Ramey memo", the message held in
Gen. Ramey's hand at the moment he was debunking the crash as a
weather balloon. The last lines of the memo outline how they
were going to cover the thing up, and first mentions a
counter-intelligence team ("CIC-team") that was responsible for
sending out the original message (poor Walter Haut had nothing
to do with it). This was to be followed by the story of "weather
balloons", and then followed up by debunking weather balloon
demonstrations to firm up the story.

And of course, above all this is the phrase "the victims of the
wreck you forwarded to... Fort Worth...", meaning that there
WERE bodies recovered.

 >Park says this was a garbled message which the army quickly
 >corrected, this time describing the debris as a standard radar
 >target. The original press release lit the fire of suspicion

Although we can debate endlessly the purpose of the original
"garbled message", the Ramey memo makes it pretty clear to my
mind that this was a deliberate act of disinformation by
counterintelligence.

 >and, with the passage of years, the subsequent correction has
 >increasingly been seen as a Government cover-up.

Hmmm, I wonder why?

 >As the years passed, the Roswell story grew into a fantastically
 >detailed saga. The debris that Major Marcel reported had fitted
 >into the boot of his car

Marcel reported no such thing. In fact, he later stated that
there was vastly more debris than he could carry back in the
"boot of his car." Marcel described a large debris field (it was
actually reported as a "square mile" in 1947), which was
corroborated indepently by Bill Brazel Jr. and some others.

Louis Rickett, the CICman in Marcel's office, said he was there
the next day and there were dozens of men still picking up
debris, one piece of which he handled. There are other witnesses
to a fairly large recovery effort that certainly did not end
when Marcel returned to Roswell.

 >grew into the wreckage of an entire
 >alien spacecraft that was secretly moved by the military to an
 >air force base in Ohio.

More on the Ramey memo: Additional lines in the memo, I
currently believe, indicate a fairly major ongoing recovery
effort. The "victims" mentioned near the top of the memo seem to
have been discovered after further reconnaissance near an
ongoing "operation." Another short sentence I suspect speaks
about verification of a "flyover at Roswell."

 >Alien bodies were said to have been found in the spacecraft.

Not only is there some witness testimony to this (however
dubious in some cases), but I believe the Ramey memo also says
it. The first line, second paragraph, of the Ramey memo speaks
about something "in the 'disk'" being shipped.

It _definitely_ reads "in the disk." Something worthy of
shipment can't be "in the disk" if "the disk" is supposedly
nothing but a tiny weather balloon and radar target busted up
into a bunch of tiny pieces and then displayed on Gen. Ramey's
office floor.

It then goes on to say (at least I think this is what it says)
that whatever was "in the disk" was to be shipped by B29 or C47.
Obviously whatever was "in the disk" was bigger than a bread
box. If it was nothing more than "tape, tin foil, etc, etc." it
could have been shipped by piper cub instead of a large
transport plane.

So what was "in the disk" to be shipped? Unfortunately the word
in front of "in the disk" is not exactly clear, partly covered
by Ramey's thumb and partly in shadow. Nonetheless, six letters
are visible, though most are distorted and indistinct. The last
letter is almost certainly an "S", however, suggesting a plural
something to be shipped.

I have searched through at least a thousand possible words that
could conceivably fit using various possible letter
combinations, and I an find only two so far that come remotely
close to making linguistic sense and forming some sort of decent
match to the visible letters and suspected word length. The
possible words, interestingly enough, are "VICTIMS" once again,
and "CORPSES." Yes, these indeed would be bigger than a bread
box and might require special transport. It is also completely
consistent with the mention of "victims" in little bit higher in
the message.

So I believe the line is about "VICTIMS" or "CORPSES" "in the
disk" to be shipped by B29 or C47.

Do we have any information about such a possible shipment?
Indeed we do, from two, and maybe three crew members on this
flight. One was Sgt. Robert Slusher, who has gone public,
another who goes by the name of "Tim," and possibly a third who
has recently come to light. All have told basically the same
story.

On the afternoon of July 9, one day after this memo, the Roswell
press release, and Gen. Ramey's debunking as a weather balloon,
there was a highly unusual B29 flight from Roswell to Fort
Worth. The date of this flight was confirmed by "Tim's" old
personal flight diary, which he still had. A large wooden crate
was loaded into the bomb bay of the B29 and an armed guard of 4
- 6 MPs was posted around the crate. The flight was at only
8000-9000 feet, instead of the usual 25,000-30,000. When they
arrived in Fort Worth, the crew members say they were greeted by
high brass at the base and a mortician. How did they know the
guy was a mortician? Because another crew member, the
bombardier, Felix Martucci, had gone to school with the man and
knew he had become a mortician. (Martucci when contacted,
refused to talk.)

Martucci then told everyone that they had just made history. As
soon as they dropped off their cargo, they turned around and
flew back to Roswell, with Jesse Marcel on the flight back. When
they returned to Roswell, they were debriefed and told they had
just transported the General's furniture.

Of course, why would the General's furniture require an armed
guard and need to be greeted by a mortician and the base brass?

 >The
 >aliens were described as small, with large heads and suction
 >cups on their fingers. One alien was reported to have been alive
 >when found but was kept hidden by the Government.

 >Park explains the emergence of the Roswell saga as the product
 >of over-active imaginations stitching together bits and pieces
 >of reports of unrelated plane crashes, parachute experiments
 >involving roughly life-like dummies, and so on, even though some
 >of these events occurred many miles from Roswell and years
 >later.

Indeed, many miles and years later. But the Ramey memo wasn't
"years later" and it clearly speaks about "victims." Must have
been those crash dummies caught in a space-time vortex.

 >The story grew into a full-scale myth of an encounter
 >with extra-terrestrials, the details of which the Government
 >found too frightening to share with the people and consequently
 >they, it was believed, covered up the whole thing.

 >As it turns out, there was a government cover-up, but not of an
 >alien spacecraft. It involved a secret government programme from
 >the 1940s, Project Mogul.

And yada, yada, yada ... the standard debunking line put out by
the Air Force -- first Project Mogul, and then the ridiculous
crash dummies story.

 >By summer 1947 the Russians had not
 >yet exploded their first atomic bomb, but it was clear this test
 >was imminent. It was most important for America to know when the
 >test took place.

 >Project Mogul was an attempt to listen for the explosion by
 >launching low-frequency microphones to high altitude where sound
 >waves can propagate around the globe. Microphones, radar
 >tracking reflectors and other devices were sent aloft on long
 >trains of weather balloons to listen for the atomic explosion.

 >These balloon trains were launched in New Mexico from a point
 >about 100 miles west of Roswell. Flight 4 was launched on June
 >4th, 1947 and was tracked to within 17 miles of where Brazel
 >found the wreckage, when contact was lost.

There is no documentation, none at all, that this flight was
tracked to "within 17 miles of where Brazel found his wreckage."
This is all supposition based on the memory of only one man,
Mogul engineer Charles Moore.

Most of the flights of Mogul have excellent records as to their
track and/or where they were recovered. But not Flight #4, which
makes it a convenient scapegoat. There is no documentation on
Flight #4, so it can do anything and be anything you want it to
be.

If you look carefully at the _documented_ flights, you will find
that flights passing near the Brazel place are actually
exceptionally rare. I looked at 52 Mogul flights documented in
the 1995 Air Force Roswell Report, and only 2 or 3 went anywhere
near Brazel's ranch.  And by "near", I mean within 20 or 30
miles. From probability arguments alone, therefore, the chances
that Flight #4 ended up there are quite low, down around 5%.

 >The debris found at
 >Roswell matches the materials used in the balloon trains.

Only if you ignore extensive testimony to the contrary or that
Brazel's public description was done under obvious coercion.

 >Park
 >Park believes the crash of Flight 4 was the birth of what has become
 >known as the Roswell Incident.

Again, Park is simply reiterating the 1994-95 Air Force
counterintelligence team debunking line. And we all know how
objective, thorough, and balanced that was.

 >PROJECT MOGUL remained secret until 1994, when Steven Schiff, a
 >Congressman from New Mexico,

No, it was declassified in 1992, before Schiff ever became
involved. Both Robert Todd and Karl Pflock quickly jumped on it
as the explanation for the Roswell incident.

But it was also discussed clear back in 1980 as a possibility,
though not by name, in the book "The Roswell Incident", which
included an interview with Charles Moore.

 >insisted on an all-out search for
 >records and witnesses to reassure the public there was no
 >government cover-up of Roswell.

Does Park or Reville mention that Schiff only insisted on the
Govt. Accounting Office investigating this after the Air Force
gave him a complete run-around on what he considered to be a
routine inquiry?

And according to columnist Jack Anderson of the Washington Post,
the GAO told him that the Air Force was uncooperative and
consistently tried to mislead them. And this is two years
_after_ Mogul had been fully declassified and with the GAO
supposedly having carte blanche to look at whatever they wanted.

 >Had the truth been revealed
 >about Project Mogul in 1947, it would almost certainly have
 >killed off speculation about the Roswell debris, but the truth
 >emerged 50 years too late.

This is more nonsense. As a matter of historical fact, one of
the debunking weather balloon demonstrations mentioned on the
last line of the Ramey memo took place the next day at
Alamogordo where the Moguls were launched. A team of non-Mogul
personnel (one is definitely known to have intelligence
affiliations) carried out a phony Mogul demonstration with radar
targets. They admitted launching balloons at Alamogordo, so this
was no secret. In fact, it was impossible to keep secret because
the launchings of these large balloons took place right out in
the open. Then they said that this was undoubtably what people
were mistaking for the flying saucers and was probably what the
rancher had found.

Mogul was so "secret" that a year later, a detailed description
of the balloons and some of their flight results was published
in the J. of Meteorology. Charles Moore was one of the
co-authors. Ironically, this "secret" scientific journal article
was reprinted in the 1995 A.F. Roswell report.

In reality, the only thing "secret" about Project Mogul was its
name and purpose (and some of the later listening devices). The
equipment was mostly off-the-shelf, completely unclassified
meteorological equipment. If this was all Brazel found, nothing
of its purpose could be made of it. Mogul personnel interviewed
by the A.F. admitted as much, and said they weren't particularly
concerned about unrecovered balloons because of the
innocuousness of the debris. Other ranchers routinely found
Moguls, and nobody ever went ballistic. One such rancher find
was Flight #5, only one day after Flight #4.

Nor was Alamogordo the only military flying saucer/Roswell
military weather balloon debunking demonstration. Another was
carried out at Fort Worth itself, even though FWAAF supposedly
had no such radar targets. Others were in Ohio near Wright
Field, in Seattle, two in Atlanta, one in Kansas City, and one
or two in New Jersey by the Brooklyn radar target manufacturer.
There may have been others.

The common thread in all these "spontaneous" demonstrations were
statements by the personnel that the weather balloons and radar
targets probably or definitely explained the flood of flying
saucer reports. Some also mentioned the events in Roswell as
obviously being explained by the radar targets.

If anyone continues to doubt that there was a coordinated
debunking campaign going on, the very first sentence in the
United Press Roswell story on July 9 stated that the Army and
Navy were carrying on a "concentrated campaign" to "stop all the
rumors."

 > For many UFO-enthusiasts, the
 >government secrecy over Project Mogul simply reinforced their
 >conviction that the government also covered up the far more
 >sensitive matter of contact with extraterrestrials.

Obviously such extreme measures were deemed necessary, because
all that was found was "neoprene strips, metal foil, cardboard,
tape and sticks" that fit into the boot of Marcel's car.

 >The Russians carried out their first atomic test in August,
 >1949, which quickly became common knowledge.

Ironically, Marcel was the chief briefing officer at the time
for the Air Force group collating intelligence, including
Project Mogul, about possible Soviet tests. Marcel's job
description says he was to notify upper brass of any changes in
intelligence and to write special reports on it for them.
(Marcel claimed he wrote the report eventually used by Truman to
announce the Soviet test.)

So by 1949, Marcel definitely knew of the existence of Project Mogul.

In 1946 Marcel was also the chief briefing officer for the 8th
Air Force at the Bikini A-bomb tests, for which he was commended
by Gen. Ramey. They were testing precursor balloons to the Mogul
Project there and Marcel handled and collated the intelligence
reports. So he may have known about such balloon flights back
then as well.

 >At that stage what
 >possible advantage was there for the government to hide Project
 >Mogul, especially when revealing some details would prevent the
 >growth of a potentially dangerous myth? Any reasonable person
 >would allow government the freedom to maintain a certain level
 >of secrecy in some areas, particularly at times of war or threat
 >of war. Unfortunately this concession to government is wide open
 >to abuse and leads to a culture of secrecy.

The question isn't whether the government should have kept Mogul
secret for such a length of time, but whether Mogul really
explains what happened at Roswell. The military's reaction to
events seems far too extreme for Mogul to be responsible.

And, of course, there is the Ramey memo with its mention of
"victims" and shipment of something ("victims"?) "in the disk."
Project Mogul -- I think not.

 >Keeping secrets inevitably leads to lies and inevitably some of
 >these lies are found out. This destroys trust. Polls in the US
 >now show a growing number of people think the government is
 >covering up information about UFOs. When the public loses trust
 >in government experts, there is a ripple effect outwards of
 >diminished trust in all expert scientific opinion. As the tide
 >of trust recedes it is smoothly replaced by receptivity to all
 >sorts of pseudo-science and even outright superstition - and
 >this apparently is the unfortunate legacy of the crash of a
 >weather balloon at Roswell in 1947.

 >William Reville is a senior lecturer in biochemistry and
 >director of microscopy at UCC

I'm sure Dr. Reville is a very fine lecturer in biochemestry and
fine microscopist, but he really doesn't know much about the
Roswell case.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 07:05:16 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:51:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: David Furlotte <furry@nobelmed.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:35:09 -0400

 >>From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >>Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >>from The Irish Times
 >>http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >>Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 >>Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >>By Dr William Reville

 >>Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >>in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >>belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >>Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >>by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >>examination.

 ><snip>

 >However well written and interesting this whole article is, I am
 >sorry to say that for Roswell to be "debunked" would require
 >just a little more than simply a long diatribe that amounts to
 >nothing more than theoretical supposition.

 >But that's just MY take on it. <grin>

 >Dave (Furry)

Considering that, as already pointed out by Dr. Bruce Maccabee,
just about everything stated by Park about Roswell is false, one
can only marvel at those who accept his false claims.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                    Re: Roswell - Beyond Schiff? - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 06:37:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:54:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Roswell - Beyond Schiff? - Kaeser


 >From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:59:10 EDT
 >Subject: Roswell - Beyond Schiff?

 >Hello to all List members

 >A French journalist has asked me if, since de death of
 >Congressman Steven Schiff, have any other Congressman, or
 >important personality in politics or any other field, undertaken
 >action or research regarding UFOS and made a public statement
 >about it.

 >Thank you in advance for any advice on this matter.


Gildas-

Congressman Schiff was a New Mexico Congressman who found that
it was a political advantage to raise the issue of Roswell. What
most people don't realize is that he didn't actually represent
the area of Rowell, but another Congressional district in the
State.

The Congressman for the Roswell region wanted nothing to do with
the issue, and ignored all correspondence related to the alleged
crash, and his constituents quickly found a friend in Cong.
Steven Schiff.

Schiff was not a "true believer" in any sense of the word, but
felt that the story given by the military simply didn't add up.
He was willing to do what he could (within reason) to have the
matter looked into, but he had taken that quest about as far as
he could politically go.

There are others in Congress that have expressed concern about
government secrecy and the military's cover-up of past actions,
but none have focused on the Roswell event, per se.

The other side of that coin is that there would be interest in
any information related to Roswell, such as might be provided by
a retired military witness. Of course, any witness will have to
pass a rigorous background check and also the be prepared to
prove the provenance of the information they are sharing, which
would then lend itself to further investigation.

So far, most information related to Roswell has been very
anecdotal in nature.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:57:44 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400

<snip>

 >Dennis, I just agree with people who make sense. If you're
 >going to hold forth about subjects you don't know about, I
 >reserve the right to tease your claims to expertise. (I'm still
 >thinking about your notion that anyone at a big-city daily
 >newspaper listens to police radio all day long. When I worked
 >at a daily newspaper in Los Angeles, the late Herald-Examiner,
 >that certainly wasn't the case. I can't speak for dailies in
 >NY, because I've never looked into this point, but I wonder.
 >Dennis, do you know this for a fact, or did you see it in a
 >movie?)

Greg, and List

Having worked in radio news in a small market, I can say that a
police scanner is often used to keep tabs on what the
authorities are up to. I believe that some on the local
newspaper staff also listened to police radios, but more often
than not they were working on stories that already had their
attention. Newspaper photographers OTOH, who have to proptly
arrive on the scene of major events to get a picture, are
probably more likely to monitor the airwaves for hints as to
what is going on.

But New York City (and any other major metropolitan area) is far
too large for a police scanner to be of much use. Unless you
could focus your interest to a single precinct, which is not
likely from the perspective of a city-wide newspaper, you would
find the communication to be far too disjointed as the radio
scans from one conversation to the next.

In the Washington Metro area I have to limit any scanning to a
handful of frequencies or one gets lost in the jumble of
incidents that are always going on throughout the City. As a
result, I would doubt that many newspaper reporters (even those
on the police beat) in NYC would spend much time trying to
decipher the chatter on a police scanner.

A few thoughts.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

               Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:27:27 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:16:06 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -


 >From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

<snip>

 >So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >documented fact.

Dear Steve Wilson, anybody else:

Citations, please, for a "documented fact" like this.
Or, is this actually sick humor and I'm just humorless?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:36:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:24:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:27:24 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked


 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >>Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >>from The Irish Times
 >>http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >>Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 >>Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >>By Dr William Reville

 >>Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >>in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >>belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >>Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >>by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >>examination.

 >>Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
 >>sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
 >>to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
 >>Earth. Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
 >>the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
 >>told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
 >>Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
 >>incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
 >>secrecy.

<snip>

 >Ah, yes, Robert Park, author of "Voodoo Science" which slashes
 >everything from Cold Fusion to UFOs.  Unfortunately, Bob was
 >jogging last week when a tree fell on him. He was in critical
 >condition at last report. See:

 >http://www.aps.org/WN/

 >It was described as a bizarre accident. Could be his Karma
 >caught up with him.

It was _not_ my fault. I _did_not_ drop a twig on my voodoo doll
of Doctor Park! Perhaps it was someone in Cold Fusion!

(Go to brumac.8k.com and scroll down to New York Academy of
Voodoo Science?)

I am sorry to learn of the acident and I do hope he recovers.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:53:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:26:31 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Sandow


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400

 >Having worked in radio news in a small market, I can say that a
 >police scanner is often used to keep tabs on what the
 >authorities are up to. I believe that some on the local
 >newspaper staff also listened to police radios, but more often
 >than not they were working on stories that already had their
 >attention. Newspaper photographers OTOH, who have to proptly
 >arrive on the scene of major events to get a picture, are
 >probably more likely to monitor the airwaves for hints as to
 >what is going on.

 >But New York City (and any other major metropolitan area) is far
 >too large for a police scanner to be of much use. Unless you
 >could focus your interest to a single precinct, which is not
 >likely from the perspective of a city-wide newspaper, you would
 >find the communication to be far too disjointed as the radio
 >scans from one conversation to the next.

 >In the Washington Metro area I have to limit any scanning to a
 >handful of frequencies or one gets lost in the jumble of
 >incidents that are always going on throughout the City. As a
 >result, I would doubt that many newspaper reporters (even those
 >on the police beat) in NYC would spend much time trying to
 >decipher the chatter on a police scanner.

Thanks very much, Steve! That filled in big gaps in my own
knowledge, and I hope it was useful to anyone else interested in
all this.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:13:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:00:25 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400

 >Were we talking about people on the bridge seeing the UFO? We
 >were talking about people in New York generally. I was foolish
 >enough to mention the NY Post workers, whom I'd actually talked
 >to. Then... pow! In rushes Dennis, to gnaw at all-too-familiar
 >-- even the debate is familar -- details of the case.


Greg,

I thought the people on the bridge were mainly New Yorkers in
New York. Excuse me for bringing them up, but it seems
reasonable to wonder why none of them reported such a
spectacular encounter.

If you want to say New Yorkers in general don't look up much,
fine. My point was simply that those on the bridge wouldn't have
had to look up.

<snip>

 >Dennis, I just agree with people who make sense. If you're going
 >to hold forth about subjects you don't know about, I reserve the
 >right to tease your claims to expertise. (I'm still thinking
 >about your notion that anyone at a big-city daily newspaper
 >listens to police radio all day long. When I worked at a daily
 >newspaper in Los Angeles, the late Herald-Examiner, that
 >certainly wasn't the case. I can't speak for dailies in NY,
 >because I've never looked into this point, but I wonder. Dennis,
 >do you know this for a fact, or did you see it in a movie?)

I don't think I said somene was specifically salaried to do
nothing but listen to a police scanner all day long. (But if you
go back and read about the famous NY crime scene photographer --
I think he was called Weejee -- I believe that's how he got many
of his best pictures and scooped the competition.)

Point is, a police scanner represents a good source for fast
breaking news. Some media sources certainly avail themselves of
same. Why do you think you see video clips on the nightly news
with police car lights still flashing at the scene? Do you think
the police call the TV stations and newspapers and say, "Hey,
come on down! We've got a multiple shooting at 38th & Broadway"?

I'd be surprised if they don't avail themselves of this channel
of information, but I'd be equally surprised to learn that most
NY print reporters get their news leads by telepathy, instead.

BTW, how do they get their news leads?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

               Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:51:41 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:03:03 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:27:27 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >>Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

Bob, Steve, and listfolk:

 >>So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >>In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >>Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >>birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >>documented fact.

 >Citations, please, for a "documented fact" like this.
 >Or, is this actually sick humor and I'm just humorless?

I'm with Bob. This sounds to me like another one of those
"documented facts" beloved of conspiracy theorists but only
loosely tied (and that's being generous) to consensus reality.
If true, the charge above would have been on the front pages --
more to the point, in the headlines -- of every paper in the
country and the subject of intensely covered Congressional
hearings. Frankly, this "documented fact" sounds more like a
dumb nonfact to me.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:09:23 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:41:49 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400


Steve,

Thanks for your informative input, as always.

I guess my question still remains, How do the media _typically_
learn of fast-breaking news?

An example: a tanker truck turns over on a downtown freeway and
either catches fire or spills hazardous material. _In the main_,
how do the media first hear about it?

Is there, by any chance, a wireless 911 frequency that you can
listen to, for calls made via cell phones?

Still curious.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:28:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 12:43:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


Ten Reasons Why Newspapers Don't Need Police Scanners, Anyway


1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the
country.

2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the
country.

3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they ought to
run the country.

4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the
country but don't understand the Washington Post.

5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind
running the country, if they could spare the time.

6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run
the country.

7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure
who's running the country.

8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's
running the country, as long as they do something scandalous.

9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure
there is a country, or that anyone is running it.

10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are ru

Errol,

Sorry no Canadian papers were mentioned!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:49:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:54:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni


Hi Jan

 >I sent Easton the entire file that Greenwood had compiled on
 >this case - at least 5 linear inches. After less than a day,
 >Jamie-boy had the answer. Not likely.

I've been watching Easton try to discredit this case ever since
he received those statements and I knew you had sent them to
him.

However, he was not the only person to receive them. I have them
too. Mine came from the original Cause files. The difference is
that one of us took the time and trouble to really investigate
them - and it took a year (not a day).

For anyone who wants the full story on these interesting
statements, Halt's memorandum, the tape recording, the
lighthouse theory - and the rest of the Rendlesham Forest case,
please read my forthcoming book "You Can't Tell The People"
(publishing date Nov 10)

The skeptics are in for a great many surprises!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:31:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:00:32 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Velez


 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:13:06 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400

 >>Were we talking about people on the bridge seeing the UFO? We
 >>were talking about people in New York generally. I was foolish
 >>enough to mention the NY Post workers, whom I'd actually talked
 >>to. Then... pow! In rushes Dennis, to gnaw at all-too-familiar
 >>-- even the debate is familar -- details of the case.


Hi Dennis, Greg, All,

Sasquatch from Tejas writes:

 >Greg,
 >
 >I thought the people on the bridge were mainly New Yorkers in
 >New York. Excuse me for bringing them up, but it seems
 >reasonable to wonder why none of them reported such a
 >spectacular encounter.

 >If you want to say New Yorkers in general don't look up much,
 >fine. My point was simply that those on the bridge wouldn't have
 >had to look up.

<snip>

Let me share an incident with you that might help to answer
your question as to why it may have not been reported Dennis.

In 1989 I was working at a lithographers shop that is located at
the foot of Canal Street on the West side. (250 Hudson Street)
The building was the tallest by many stories between Hudson
Street and the Hudson river. Our shop was on the 11th floor and
the windows afforded a clear view of New Jersey on the far
shore, and on a clear day along the horizon (as far as the eye
can see) you can even make out the faint blue ridges of the
mountains in the distance that overlap the borders of both New
Jersey and Pennsylvania.

A clear unobstructed view to the West.

Myself, one of the cameramen, and one of the senior
vice-presidents of the company were sitting and chatting in the
VP's office while waiting for the arrival of an overtime job one
August day (approx: 4:30 pm.) Myself and the cameraman were
seated facing the bank of windows that ran the whole length of
the wall in the VP's office. The veep had his back to the
windows as he sat behind his desk. The cameraman (Larry) spotted
'it' first. In the middle of a sentence he blurts out. "What the
Hell is that thing?"

He was pointing out of the window at the sky at a perfectly
circular disc shaped object (metallic silver on top, giving off
a misty, cloudy

something on the bottom) that was easily three hundred yards
across. The object was at least three football fields across. We
all just sat there stunned for a moment trying to figure out
what this 'thing' was/ could be. The veep (Jimmy) whipped a pair
of binoculars out of his desk and after he was able to train
them on the object he reported, "That thing is made of some kind
of metal." Larry was standing to my right. He never uttered a
work throughout the whole 15 minute sighting. He just stood
there transfixed with his jaw slack and all the blood drained
from his face. If his eyes had been closed he would have looked
like a dead man. We watched this _huge_ disc shaped object
slowly drift across the river as it moved away from us in a
westerly direction. When the object was out over New Jersey it
started to spin and turn up on its edge rolling away from us
like a coin. As it began to spin and 'roll away' it changed
color to a bright yellow/orange that looked like flames coming
off of the trailing edge of the disc.

Three sober men on a fairly clear summers day witness the
passing of a "UFO" that would cover many city blocks (like
Independence Day!) if it were sitting on the ground, and as soon
as it was over we went right back to talking about the job we
were expecting. Looking back on it I always wonder at the oddity
of our response. Why we we did not become agitated/excited about
what we had witnessed. Why we didn't chatter away about it for
weeks afterwards. Why we didn't think to pick up the phone and
call someone. But there it is. We watched it, we discussed it in
relatively calm tones as it passed overhead, and then got right
back to business as usual.

Nothing further was said about the incident until three days
after the 'sighting.' The cameraman approached me in the middle
of a workday and whispered in my ear, "John, what the Hell was
that thing we saw?" I looked up at him and asked him, "What do
_you_ think we saw Larry?" Again the blood drained out of his
face, (this guy turned chalk white right before my eyes) and he
silently walked away. We not only didn't report the sighting, we
never thought to report it. Who would have believed it? Who
could we have reported it too? At the time I had absolutely
nothing to do with ufology and none of us knew anything about
the subject. Much less who to report the sighting to.

Jaded New Yorkers? I don't think so. It was a combination of
several factors that resulted in our silence. First, it was
_frightening_ to see something like that (that big) in the sky.
It was obviously not one of ours. None of us knew beans about
ufology or who to report to or that we should report the
sighting at all. I can't speak for Larry or Jimmy, but I
wouldn't have thought to pick up the phone and call the cops to
tell them we were watching a flying saucer the size of Yankee
Stadium slowly flying across the Hudson river. If the cops
responded at all it would have been to get me over to Bellvue
Hospital for some medication! I have a feeling that many folks
would opt to keep their mouths shut about having seen something
so unbelievable rather than risk the chance of being carted away
and labelled a nutjob.

There was not one word in the news about this huge thing that
flew right over one of the most densely populated pieces of real
estate on the planet. I'm not surprised that any folks who may
have been on the bridge the night of Linda's 'incident' (and who
witnessed it) would choose to keep their mouths shut. None of
them probably knew anything about UFO reporting centers, or even
that such things should be reported etc. etc. The one lady from
upstate that contacted Budd only found him because his books
were among the few that were available to her locally in the
town where she lived. She figured she'd look up a 'UFO guy' by
tracking down an author of a UFO book and happened to pick up
one of Budds books. I think she's an exception to the rule when
it comes to such dramatic sightings. I'm willing to bet the farm
that as much as 99.9% of all "major/dramatic" sightings are
never reported at all.

Because you are so familiar with ufology you assume that
everyone else is too. Not so Sasquatch. Most ordinary folks have
no idea that reporting centers even exist. Much less feel
compelled to report. I know I didn't. The farthest thing from my
mind, the last thing I would have done at the time would be to
tell anybody about what I had seen. No one would have believed
it so why bother. I believed that. I'm sure the 'average Joe'
would react the same way.

This "keep yer yap shut" response to such events is probably the
most common reaction. You find it puzzling why something like
Linda's abduction wasn't reported, and I wonder at the courage
and rarity of that lady on the bridge and others who have
equally disturbing sightings, to report them at all. Most folks
would be left completely confused and half scared to death to
report to anyone. The ones who do report such things are the
'rare' ones.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                     Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:20:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:26:01 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Kaeser


 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:09:23 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400


 >Steve,

 >Thanks for your informative input, as always.

 >I guess my question still remains, How do the media _typically_
 >learn of fast-breaking news?

 >An example: a tanker truck turns over on a downtown freeway and
 >either catches fire or spills hazardous material. _In the main_,
 >how do the media first hear about it?

 >Is there, by any chance, a wireless 911 frequency that you can
 >listen to, for calls made via cell phones?

 >Still curious.

 >Dennis Stacy

Dennis-

I hope this information is of interest to our other
listeners..... <g>

Major "hard" news events come in a variety of forms. A major
building fire (such as a factory or warehouse) could become a
major story in a big city, but it would have limited impact on
traffic flow and wouldn't garner much immediate interest on the
part of the public (unless they had a direct connection to the
affected building).

On the other hand, your example of a truck overturning, which
could in turn block traffic, would be of immediate interest to
those caught in the traffic jam, as well as those who are headed
into that area on the highway. Local media pick up on major
traffic problems using a number of sources, which may not be
available in all areas. In the Washington Metro market there are
cameras installed on the Washington Beltway and surrounding
Interstate highways. Local cable television systems have set
aside a channel that shows images from those cameras in
rotation, and I believe there is a way to access the camera
images via the Internet. If there is a major incident on the
highway those cameras are usually able to locate it and the
media can begin the process of warning approaching motorists. Of
course, most people don't have televisions in their car, so
local all-news radio stations monitor the cameras and try to
keep on top of traffic flow. Local all-news stations have also
established cell phone numbers that can be called at no charge
to report a traffic problem. There are also services available
to radio stations that will provide traffic reports during rush
hours, and those services also monitor the cameras and keep in
touch with local police.

In an extreme case, such as a hazardous waste spill that
completely closes a major highway, the police will actually call
the regional media for help in getting word out to the public.
But, I suspect that in most cases the media will contact the
authorities first.

And, of course, we can't forget the general public, who will
often call the radio station to find out why their caught in
traffic. With the introduction of the cell phone, the public has
been given a tool that can be used to stay in touch and spread
the word. After the first couple of calls a newsroom will
realize that something is up and begin to check into it.

But how this all relates to an incident that occured in 1989 is
somewhat questionable. Tools used by the media today are
different than those used a decade ago, with highway cameras and
the broad use of cell phones becoming more recent introductions
in the mix. The expectations of drivers in the big city have
also changed over the years, in that traffic congestion is more
of a given than it once had been. Nearly every day I come to a
complete stop on the Beltway around Washington for no apparent
reason. Sometimes I come up on an accident or stalled car, which
can be blamed for the slowdown, but usually the traffic just
loosens up and begins to move again for no apparent reason.

Now if all our cars and trucks were to stop running for no
reason I'll probably reach for my disposable (mechanical) camera
and begin scanning the sky for something unusual. . . . . <g>

Steve









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:20:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:50:15 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400

 ><snip>

 >Dennis, I just agree with people who make sense. If you're
 >going to hold forth about subjects you don't know about, I
 >reserve the right to tease your claims to expertise. (I'm still
 >thinking about your notion that anyone at a big-city daily
 >newspaper listens to police radio all day long. When I worked
 >at a daily newspaper in Los Angeles, the late Herald-Examiner,
 >that certainly wasn't the case. I can't speak for dailies in
 >NY, because I've never looked into this point, but I wonder.
 >Dennis, do you know this for a fact, or did you see it in a
 >movie?)

Greg, Steve, and List:

Earlier today I e-mailed Keay Davidson, the science columnist
for the SF Examiner, the following:

"Sorry to bother you about such trivia, but I'm in the middle of
a debate over on the UFO Updates thread.

"The question is this: how do the news media (newspapers in
particular) typically learn of fast-breaking news? Are police
scanners an integral part of the armory?  Or is there a wireless
911 frequency that people can listen into?

"For example, a tanker truck turns over on the Interstate and
either catches fire or spills hazardous material. How will the
media _typically_ learn of the event?"

FWIW, here's the response I received (published with permission):

______

Dennis,

I'm always glad to help out one of the few truly conscientious
figures in the UFO field. <Blush!>

The answer is: It depends on the situation. If it's a cop story,
and the newspaper is a large urban daily, then it likely has
staffers who regularly phone the cops (e.g. every few hours) or
who visit police HQ to check daily reports (which are usually
scrawled by cops with bad handwriting and a meager sense of
grammar). All of us in this biz started out on the cop beat (I
hated it -- terribly grim stuff, and the cops are often wary).
"Cop calls" typically involve going down a long list of police
phone numbers and phoning every one of them and asking,
"Anything going on?" Typically the cop responds, "Naw, quiet as
a mouse" or the like. Awfully dull. But now and then he or she
will grunt something like, "Call the morgue, ask for Dan, he's
got a body," which means to call the coroner, who in turn may
provide a good story about the latest unidentified corpse to
wash ashore.

Although I've done little cop reporting in my career, my
impression is that the best tips come from police scanners. I
was a reporter at the LA Times bureau in San Diego in the
mid-80s when, if I recall correctly, someone on the copy desk
heard a wild crackling on the scanner -- a lot of hubbub. It
turned out some wacko had walked into a McDonald's and mowed
down some two dozen people.

In smaller towns, cops and reporters tend to have much closer
personal contacts. Often they'll be huddled over a bar and the
cop will grumble to the reporter, "Boy, you won't believe what
we found in the lake today" or something like that. I began my
career writing for a bureau of the Orlando Sentinel located in
Sanford, Fla., a small community north of Disneyworld, and I got
a number of good stories that way -- via personal chit-chat with
the cops (although usually in cafes, not bars).

By contrast, big cities are more impersonal, and the newspapers
tend to be more concerned with exposing police departments'
mismanagement and mistreatment of minorities, etc.; hence
big-city cops are often suspicious of reporters, especially
those they don't know personally (and they usually don't, given
the huge size of most staffs at large urban dailies).

But if they know you personally, they'll not only answer all
your questions but will call YOU with a tip (with the
understanding that they won't be identified by name). Case
example: Our white-haired, veteran crime reporter Malcolm Glover
has covered cops since the 1940s, when Old Man Hearst was still
around (the great yellow journalist). All the cops love and
respect Malcolm, and they'll tell him anything.

But when I call them (occasionally I work holidays and I'm
assigned "cop duty"), they're terse and unfriendly because they
don't know who I am and know they probably won't ever have to
deal with me again. Once both Malcolm and I were assigned to
cover a story together -- a sinkhole had opened up somewhere in
the Sunset district -- and all the cops hovered around Malcolm,
and ignored me totally. Can't say I blame them.

Sorry to ramble on like this -- I hope it's of some non-trivial
value. Best, Keay

_____

Again, FWIW. At least people on this list can't say they aren't
getting an education about all sorts of arcane arcana!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:08:16 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:52:38 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Hatch


 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:09:23 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400

 >Steve,

 >Thanks for your informative input, as always.

 >I guess my question still remains, How do the media _typically_
 >learn of fast-breaking news?

 >An example: a tanker truck turns over on a downtown freeway and
 >either catches fire or spills hazardous material. _In the main_,
 >how do the media first hear about it?

 >Is there, by any chance, a wireless 911 frequency that you can
 >listen to, for calls made via cell phones?

 >Still curious.

 >Dennis Stacy


Hello Dennis:

In San Francisco, news-radio KCBS has what they call a "phone
force", just regular listeners with cell-phones. They simply
dial Star-KCBS or the like which puts them straight through.
This is mainly for accidents or traffic jams.

Otherwise, I presume they man a police scanner, and that public
agencies will contact radio stations directly in major
emergencies.

Otherwise, the newspapers check radio/TV, and vice versa... so
it seems from the reports here.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

              Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - GT

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:44:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:56:09 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron - GT


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:51:41 -0500

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:27:27 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >>>Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

 >Bob, Steve, and listfolk:

 >>>So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >>>In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >>>Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >>>birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >>>documented fact.

 >>Citations, please, for a "documented fact" like this.
 >>Or, is this actually sick humor and I'm just humorless?

Well, if the people who did use a human female Hydro-encephalic
corpse as an alien-had to have done the deed later than 1947 and
if it was done it had to been done recently (last, oh 20
years-probably the last 10, really),

I've held that the film is a fake, a good one but a fake. and
done recently. I can't say with certainty that the "Alien " was
entirely a fake, because there are certain aspects that are
difficult to reproduce-particularly the skin.

However a corpse donated for scientific pourposes to, say a med
school or science department, and say a, little paperwork
shuffle here a body change there and ; whamo crapo! an Alien!
Talk about Documentation, if one wanted to carfully search for
such donations, and say if a body came up missing?

As far as deformed children being used by the CIA , we had
plenty of irradied civilans in Japan , Military personnell here
and the occasional scientist who dropped a beaker of plutonium
et al.-Prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, prove that we used
deformed children for nuke testing.

 >I'm with Bob. This sounds to me like another one of those
 >"documented facts" beloved of conspiracy theorists but only
 >loosely tied (and that's being generous) to consensus reality.
 >If true, the charge above would have been on the front pages --
 >more to the point, in the headlines -- of every paper in the
 >country and the subject of intensely covered Congressional
 >hearings. Frankly, this "documented fact" sounds more like a
 >dumb nonfact to me.

 >Jerry Clark

Count me in too, I know enough people in the nuclear biz, that
any type of that kind of experiment was going on, with the
recent congressional hearings-there would be Hell to pay.

Also if I had a daughter that gave her body to science and then
have it and her condition shown all over the globe, let's there
wouldn't be any place in this Solar system that would be safe
for the perpitrators of this desicration.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:14:35 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:45:36 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein


 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:28:12 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >Ten Reasons Why Newspapers Don't Need Police Scanners, Anyway

 >1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the
 >country.

 >2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the
 >country.

 >3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they ought to
 >run the country.

 >4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the
 >country but don't understand the Washington Post.

 >5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind
 >running the country, if they could spare the time.

 >6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run
 >the country.

 >7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure
 >who's running the country.

 >8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's
 >running the country, as long as they do something scandalous.

 >9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure
 >there is a country, or that anyone is running it.

 >10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are ru

<snip>

11. All newspapers have ace reporters and photographers
stationed at police headquarters ready to run right out on the
call.

12. Larger newspapers have reporter and photographer teams
constantly driving around looking for trouble.

13. The newspaper the police call first is the one that makes
the largest donation to the police vacation fund.

14. Tabloids don't need scanners or tips. They make up the
stories without ever leaving their desks.

15. The reporters get tips from ambulance chasing lawyers.

16. Now you know why Superman worked for a newspaper. He could
tip off Lois Lane with superpowers better than a scanner. He
sure could make Lois's siren wail and Jimmy would get jealous.

17. News desks at papers are always on upper floors. That is so
they can hear what direction the sirens are coming from.

18. Because reporters never listened to scanners they never knew
that the CIA was abducting children and shipping them out to the
Nevada test site. The children who had been subject to radiation
were mistaken for aliens at Area S4. The saucers with child size
seats did not fly but were just containment vessels for
irradiated children.

For years I was a MUFON field investigator. Why did I not think
to station myself at Police HQ so as to be "on the call" for
sightings? That requirement should be in the new MUFON bylaws
for all to heed. The investigator and the reporter can keep each
other company in the police office. The investigator should
respond to any unlawful intrusion calls as they may be
abductions in action. I volunteer Bruce Maccabee as my
photographer.

Just joshin' you,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:49:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:47:08 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:31:16 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

<snip>

John,

Then I guess it's a blooming wonder that any UFO ever gets
reported at all, isn't it?

A Big Grin and take care, my friend.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 12

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:01:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:48:43 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Stacy


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:20:30 -0400

<snip>

Steve,

You've taken my example of an overturned tank truck way too
literally.

Let's substitute it with the example of a shooting at 327
Maplewood.

How do the media generally find out about same?

Forget the specific example altogether.

How do the media _generally_ learn about fast-breaking news, of
whatever nature or specifics?

But you're probably right: at this point, who cares?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

               Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 00:43:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:07:35 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron -


 >From: Steven L. Wilson Sr <Ndunlks@aol.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 21:06:57 EDT
 >Subject: 'Roswell: Enough Already' by A-J Charron

 >Source: Cosmic Comentary - http://members.tripod.com/~CosmicRose/CCC.html

 >Roswell: Enough Already
 >by A-J Charron
 >September 7, 2000

<snip>

 >The balloon story makes no sense. And it's not suppose to. The
 >US Air Force chose to say,in the official version, that it was a
 >balloon, because they knew nobody would believe it. So was it a
 >flying saucer from another planet? Well, who said it was a UFO?
 >Actually, the first person to say that it was a UFO was the
 >first military investigator who arrived at the crash site. In
 >other words, the Air Force said it was a flying saucer.
 >Therefore, it was not!

Several problems. The so called "first person" (Marcel) to the
crash site did not break his silence until 1978. The official AF
story was it was a weather balloon, and that story "stuck" say
about 40-47 years. When it was obviously weather balloon story
was deflating, we trot out the Mogel story, i.e. a top secret
balloon project. Then in order to deal with the "bodies"
question we trot out various tales and storys of how people have
mixed up 20 years of airplane crashes and dummy tests to explain
away the bodies. Bottom line is various cover storys are still
being maintained.

 >That the whole thing was a coverup is not very difficult to
 >figure out. But then again, like the balloon story, it's not
 >supposed to be. Then what was it?

 >Roswell is near the test sites of the first Atomic Bombs. Logic
 >dictates that a plane crashed. But, Theorists say, an
 >investigator would have figured that out right away. And so
 >would have the witnesses: Everybody know what a plane looks
 >like! Sure. But not many people know what a crashed plane looks
 >like. And that's the difference.

 >Crash investigators say that if you did not know upon arrival
 >that what you were looking at was a plane, you would never be
 >able to guess. The reason is quite simple, a plane is made of
 >aluminium and other fragile materials. It has to be or else it
 >would never leave the ground. Throw it on the ground at several
 >hundred miles per hour and what do you think will be left?

I have been to quite a number of plane crashes in my time and it
is obvious that what hit the ground and or mountain was an
airplane, aluminium pieces and all. In many instances you are
able to find bigger chunks such as landing gear, the actual
engine, etc etc.

 >Not much. All the parts break up in little pieces making an
 >unrecognizable, tangled mass. Then why cover it up? Many simple
 >reasons. Mainly, what was in the plane. Or rather who. You've
 >seen the video "Alien Autopsy"? Odds are it's true. As one
 >doctor who viewed the video said, the corpse presented was that
 >of a human female presenting several rare birth defects.

 >So it just adds up when you think again of the A-Bomb testings.
 >In the fourties, the CIA abducted dozens of abandoned children.
 >Children who had been abandoned because they presented many
 >birth defects. Children who would not be "normal". This is a
 >documented fact.

Sources and citation for this wild tale

 >What did they do with them? Many of them were placed on the
 >sites of the A-Bomb tests. By exposing them to blast, fallout,
 >radiation, etc, the military could see the effects on human
 >beings. Probably many other horrible things were done to those
 >Children, but that is not the object of this essay.

Again, sources and citation for this wild one. While their is
recorded evidence in the 1979 radiation hearings that so called
adult volenteers were put close to ground zero and were close
to blasts their has never been any evidence of children being
placed at the sites.

 >By talking about UFOs, the military were planting an idea. By
 >denying it the next day and saying it was a weather balloon only
 >made people realize they were lying. But people thought they
 >were lying about the UFO bit which the military themselves had
 >planted. If they had said it was a plane crash, there might have
 >been a civilian investigation. This way they ensured there
 >wouldn't be. Everything went according to plan.

<snip>

The so called military wasn't talking about a "UFO." The local
base people unloaded the press release, then once the whole
thing got kicked to higher ups, the cover up began and the
weather balloon story was floated.



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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

                  Nick Pope'S Weird World - September 2000

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 14:09:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:17:56 -0400
Subject: Nick Pope'S Weird World - September 2000


NICK POPE�S WEIRD WORLD
Hot Gossip UK
www.hotgossip.co.uk

September is here, and as Summer passes into Autumn, I pass
comment on anything that�s grabbed my attention from the weird
and wonderful world of UFOs, alien abductions, the paranormal
and the bizarre.

Crop Circles

Colin Andrews has stunned the world of crop circle research with
new theories and views about what lies behind the formations.
There have been features and articles in the mainstream media,
together with debate on all the usual Internet sites. The news
broke on 9 August and Colin�s statement is at:

www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews

and at:

www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

two sites which have lots of other interesting crop circle
material. It�s also been posted on UFO UpDates (on August 19)
which is at:

www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates

Colin suggests that the discovery of a magnetic signature in
some crop circles might be significant and might be a clue as to
how they are formed, while serving as a useful test of whether
formations are hoaxed or not. Sensationally, Colin suggests that
20% of formations show no evidence of being made by people,
while 80% do. In a courageous and honest statement that will not
make him popular with some of his allies and friends, he now
believes that most if not all of the pictograms are hoaxes (or
"land art", or whatever term you favour). The genuine
phenomenon, he now believes, revolves around the most basic
patterns: single circles or basic geometric patterns. This story
will run and run over the next few months, and we await with
interest the details of Colin�s research.

UFO Magazine

The latest edition of UFO Magazine was published on 29 August,
so should be in the shops now. It features an in-depth report by
researcher Colin Ridyard, whose tireless efforts with his MP and
the Ombudsman forced the Ministry of Defence to release details
of some sensational UFO cases involving sightings by pilots and
tracked on radar.

Check out www.ufomag.co.uk for more details. Don�t forget that
UFO Magazine�s own conference will be held on 15, 16 and 17
September (details at their website), and don�t forget that the
next edition of their sister publication, The Unopened Files,
will be available from 28 September.

London Calling

I know I shouldn�t be trying to send people away from this site,
but for any of my regular readers who don�t know, can I say that
I write one other Internet column, at the popular
www.ufocity.com site. It�s entitled London Calling, and as
ufocity is a US site, my column gives people a window on British
ufology, or offers a UK perspective on US theories or events.
Recent topics covered have included the Cheshire video affair,
the controversy surrounding John Carpenter and a summary of
recent articles in mainstream scientific journals that have
profound implications for ufology. Check it out.

London UFO Studies Group

Contrary to popular myth, not all UFO sightings take place on
some lonely country road, late at night. There are numerous
sightings (including close encounters and abductions) being
reported in cities - perhaps because there are more people there
to see these things. Over the years a lot has happened in
London, and a group that�s been in the thick of it is Roy Lake�s
London UFO Studies. Roy has been involved in ufology for forty
seven years, so has a wealth of experience. His group is a small
but dedicated one that concentrates on in-depth investigation of
those cases that come their way, most of which are from in and
around London. Their website is at www.aliens.net-hed.co.uk, so
check them out.

Fortean Fish Falls - Now It�s Official

We�ve come a long way from the days of the late, great Charles
Fort, and he�d doubtless be pleased that the phenomenon of fish
falling from the sky has now been officially recognised. On 6
August vast numbers of dead sprats fell on the Norfolk town of
Great Yarmouth. Meteorological Office spokesperson Andy Yeatman
confirmed the incident: �It has rained fish, frogs and even
inanimate objects like straw and plants. Mini-tornadoes build up
under thunderclouds. In this case the tornado gathered over the
sea and the fish got sucked up into the clouds. They were
obviously carried along in the cloud for some distance before
the cloud burst and the fish fell away with the rain�. He added
�The most extraordinary example was during the 1976 Olympics
when it rained live maggots on a yachting event�.

So now it�s official!

Yet Another SAS Book

For those of you who are fans of books like Bravo Two Zero,
comes yet another book by a former SAS soldier. Jihad, by Tom
Carew, was serialised in The Sunday Times on 13 August and will
be published by Mainstream on 18 September, at �16.99. From what
has appeared so far, it looks as if it�ll be worth a read.

Operation Lightning Strike

Finally, there�s now just a month to go until the release of my
latest book. Operation Lightning Strike will be available from 2
October as a trade paperback, and is being published by Simon &
Schuster UK at �9.99. This novel is a direct sequel to Operation
Thunder Child, which will be published in standard format
paperback on the same day, at �6.99. Although publication day is
still a month away, you might be able to get ahead of the game
by ordering at Amazon or any of the usual Internet book sites.
Alternatively, I�m hoping to be able to get copies to the big
UFO conference in Leeds on 16/17 September, so if you�re
planning to come along, stop me and buy one! I�ll be saying more
about this book next month, but suffice to say that even though
it�s a novel, parts of it are based on real events or scenarios
that have been worked up. Watch this space.

Nick Pope
London
September 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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:05:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:25:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


The following, slightly edited here as necessary, was posted to
UFORL yesterday evening:

A significant tenet of this list is that discussions are private
and 'list only' unless otherwise specified, i.e.:

These are the simple 'housekeeping' rules:

1. 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'.

It is not therefore suitable for those who wish to discuss 'alien
abductions', 'MJ-12', etc.

2. The list is also primarily intended to enable secure
discussions and as subscribers may request feedback on new data
or privately debate controversial, sensitive issues, etc., ALL
contributions are therefore 'LIST ONLY - IN CONFIDENCE' unless
otherwise denoted.

If it appears on this list, it shouldn't be seen anywhere else
without the originator's permission.

[Etc.]

We all understand this, which is why I specifically noted in two
recent postings that one could be passed on as an exception to
'list only' and another included material headed, "THIS IS LIST
ONLY", as a reminder of the list material's inherent
confidentiality.

Some content from that latter posting has been passed on to at
least one non-list member, Jan Aldrich, and referred to by
Aldrich on UFO UpDates. I'm thankful that to the 'uninitiated'
it would have made little sense amidst Aldrich's incoherent
ramble, however that's irrelevant.

One of the prime reasons for a 'closed' list is that research
can be carried out, highlighted, debated and with vehemently
opposed conclusions, yet minus that invective, typical of
fanatical 'UFO believers'. In their belief system, as with other
religions, there's no tolerance for any sceptical, or even
remotely critical appraisal.

As a result, the UFO Research List, now approaching 2500
postings in the 18 months of its existence, has rarely seen
anything more contentious than an occasional, virtual, custard
pie.

However, of late, a somewhat critical assessment of one case by
a number of subscribers seems to have provoked the ire of Brad
Sparks, with the result he has now selectively posted
considerable 'list only' material on UFO UpDates, proclaiming it
supports his earnest beliefs and seemingly complaining he's had
enough of those damnable 'skeptics'.

As the UFORL list material posted is a unbelievably ridiculous
distortion of the facts and as I have zero intention of chasing
it, the only loser, as with any fanatical UFO beliefs, will be
the truth.

Robert McLean is a new member of this list and one who, despite
now publicly and repeatedly being branded by Sparks as a
'Skeptic', isn't really, however, I regret that it's primarily
out-of-context extracts from Robert's _statedly ongoing_ and
incomplete research which have been broadcast as evidence of the
great 'UFO evidence cover up', or some other such offering.

Welcome to 'ufology' Robert. Sometimes it's rather sad...

[The irony is, if Brad had been patient, there were some
significant new and related case discoveries yet to be revealed
on UFORL and which he certainly would have found very
interesting].

I must now reconsider the future of UFORL and no matter what the
outcome, I trust many subscribers will agree it was a worthwhile
endeavour and did actually provide a scientific focus on
considerable UFO related evidence.

By necessity, a copy of this e-mail is being forwarded to UFO
UpDates, where hopefully a true perspective of the purported
case evidence published therein, can be better appreciated.
[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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

                    Re: 'Scientific UFO Research' WebRing

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:09:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:10:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Scientific UFO Research' WebRing


The 'Scientific UFO Research' WebRing has now been deleted.

My regrets to those who were members and and the large number of
pending 'applicants' whose submission couldn't be processed
until the Yahoo/WebRing merger was finalised.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

               An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:38:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:15:04 -0400
Subject: An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness


 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:05:52 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'


Patient and gentle listfolk:

 >Some content from that latter posting has been passed on to at
 >least one non-list member, Jan Aldrich, and referred to by
 >Aldrich on UFO UpDates. I'm thankful that to the 'uninitiated'
 >it would have made little sense amidst Aldrich's incoherent
 >ramble, however that's irrelevant.

 >One of the prime reasons for a 'closed' list is that research
 >can be carried out, highlighted, debated and with vehemently
 >opposed conclusions, yet minus that invective, typical of
 >fanatical 'UFO believers'. In their belief system, as with other
 >religions, there's no tolerance for any sceptical, or even
 >remotely critical appraisal.

This is sad. Rather than address issues -- as his critics been
doing, an articulate, informed bunch with quite specific
objections to Easton's pelicanist claims -- all we get are the
sorts of ad hominems to which would-be debunkers always retreat
when greeted with anything other than an audience full of
enthusiastically nodding heads. Anyone who fails to recognize
Easton's brilliance, it appears, practices, suffers from, or is
one of the following:

The critic's words are mere "incoherent ramble." He is a
"fanatical 'UFO believer'." He has a "belief system" (as
opposed, I gather, to mere "beliefs"; "belief system" always
sounds so much more profound). Ufology is mere "religion"
(synonymous with "delusion" in this sort of polemical sleight of
hand). And the ufologist, of course, has "no tolerance for any
skeptical, or even remotely critical[,] appraisal"

Concerning this last, I must say it sounds far more like Easton
responding to his critics. Ufologists, after all, have a pretty
solid record of skeptical and critical writing on UFO cases and
theories (as witness, for example, the raging debates within
ufology regarding Roswell and the abduction phenomenon) --
unlike the debunking community, where self-criticism, debate,
and internal policing are far elusive than needles in haystacks.
A prominent debunker once wrote to a friend of mine that the
idea of criticizing another debunker's work is "strange." Talk
about intolerance of dissent, or of "any skeptical, or even
remotely critical, appraisal.".

Maybe if Easton can't stand the heat, he should stay out of the
kitchen. In the meantime, he can spare us the self pity.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 13

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:11:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:12:42 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Maccabee


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:14:35 +0100

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:28:12 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

<snip>

 >For years I was a MUFON field investigator. Why did I not think
 >to station myself at Police HQ so as to be "on the call" for
 >sightings? That requirement should be in the new MUFON bylaws
 >for all to heed. The investigator and the reporter can keep each
 >other company in the police office. The investigator should
 >respond to any unlawful intrusion calls as they may be
 >abductions in action. I volunteer Bruce Maccabee as my
 >photographer.

Hahaha

OK.

By the way, whatever happened to the Chupacabra song prize?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 13

                 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:31:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:19:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:49:06 +0100
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:54:40 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni

First, this is a gawdaweful case and is not evidential at all,
but it has become a legend. Since we don't have all the
testimony and the real witnesses are loath to talk about this
case, there are huge problems with any analysis. Just like
Roswell there is every silly kind of interloper imaginable
trying to write themselves into the story and the story has
grown to one of extraterrestrial contact. What absolute garbage!

The memo Halt wrote was purposefully vague and conservative. It
was not written for UFO buffs, it was not written for Phil Klass
and UFO skeptics. It was written to report incidents - weird
incidents which were not career enhancing for any of the
participants - through military channels. Probably had Halt and
the APs not engaged in such a big operation nothing would have
been said. However, since they did occur in a sensitive area,
there was a necessity of making some kind of record reporting
something.

Klass ridicules Halt's memo as something so trivial that Halt
shouldn't have made a record. No!  Basically, Halt covered his
and his subordinates' backsides. He is reporting something
strange without going into great detail. Since it was
purposefully vague, higher ups could always come back for more
details, if they deemed it an item of concern. If anything ever
came of it, he could bring out this memo as proof that the
incidents were not ignored.

What happened after this thing became public is amazing. A
circus.  The silliness never ends. I guarantee that no book will
chronicle all the silly things, these will be stripped out so
everything involved here will sound serious as a heart attack.

Second, these incidents happened at night. Halt said right off
at his presentation in Maryland that he identified the
lighthouse at the start of the incident. Since this is important
to any lighthouse explanation, it seems this must be ignored,
glossed over, or you have to question Halt's character. (I have
no problem with a witnesses being subjected to searching probes,
but I also suggest that if someone offers a bad character
judgment, perhaps his testimony should also be checked and
analyzed. Nor is someone's current military assignment
necessarily suggestive or an indication of their competency.) In
the case of analysts with integrity, you could acknowledge that
Halt identified the lighthouse, talked to the lighthouse keeper
and say you do not accept his statement--hopefully giving the
reasons why.

Now, I don't know what experience anyone here has ever had
moving through wooded areas on a dark night, but let me tell you
guard duty or operations at night in such areas are no fun.  It
is easy to lose orientation and you see things that aren't there
and familiar things become unfamiliar. I've seen a half a dozen
men in full combat gear run off a 20 foot drop before someone
realised such an obstacle existed.

Or try driving down a trail at night under black out drive, at
catch up speed--I had one of my guys mistake a trail for a road
after a sharp turn and drive into a ditch. It took six hours to
recover that vehicle, almost all of it in the dark.

So, APs running through the woods, what do you expect? Maybe
sometime they were indeed chasing lighthouse illuminated
reflections.

Penniston kept moving the estimate how distant the light was.
DUH!!!! NO S**T! You might say I feel real strongly about this.
Only the most ignorant would make a point about this! At night
you have no depth perception! Estimates that people make are
based on what they are familiar with. Now if, you have moonlight
or even some back ground lighting from human habitation you can
detect something and estimates might mean something. Woods
screen this out and make things near pitch black. Using your own
light sources may not help and many cases may confuse the issue.

These were Air Farce Apes, not Army troops who are taught night
vision techniques.  The APs had not gained night vision because
they were not using black out conditions.

They are moving through a night time (read disorienting)
environment, they are excited, and they are afraid. (Anyone who
says they are not afraid of the dark is a lair!) Not the best
possible conditions for useful observations.

  There are pros and cons for the light house explanation. One TV
presentation had the Halt tape played at the same time light
rotation of the beacon. Some of the call out of seeing something
matched the frequency of the rotation of the beacon.

As pointed out here once before, the investigator's and/or
analyst's integrity should demand that items that do not fit the
analyst's theories and conclusions, be acknowledged, even if the
analyst's does not agree with them. Such integrity is sadly
lacking in both advocate and skeptical writings.

My point was that unless and until Halt et al, clarify some of
the testimony, no explanation is a done deal.  Much the same
applies in the other direction, also.

Many things in this case are doubtful, there are also many,
natural and man-made things that>might< be involved. Since
eliminating most of these stimuli is nearly impossible, this
case as it currently stands is at best puzzling, and at worst
nothing to get excited about. They now call them NLs, we use to
call them DL, "Damnable Lights" in deference to Isabel Davis'
sensibilities. They are, in fact, DFLs. And under the best night
time conditions interesting but not any kind of proof, and this
case was not under the best of conditions.

Now as for evidence of anything, this case is junk, in my
opinion.

 >Hi Jan

 >>I sent Easton the entire file that Greenwood had compiled on
 >>this case - at least 5 linear inches. After less than a day,
 >>Jamie-boy had the answer. Not likely.

 >I've been watching Easton try to discredit this case ever since
 >he received those statements and I knew you had sent them to
 >him.

Unfortunately, the case is already discredited by all the trash
that has been thrown into the bin with it. Sorting through what
is true and what is false is very difficult. Why people continue
on this road is a wonder to me?  However, if they do, they had
best mention all the pros and cons, and not pick some and ignore
others.

 >However, he was not the only person to receive them. I have>them
 >too. Mine came from the original Cause files. The difference is
 >that one of us took the time and trouble to really investigate
 >them - and it took a year (not a day).

 >For anyone who wants the full story on these interesting
 >statements, Halt's memorandum, the tape recording, the
 >lighthouse theory - and the rest of the Rendlesham Forest case,
 >please read my forthcoming book "You Can't Tell The People"
 >(publishing date Nov 10)

 >The skeptics are in for a great many surprises!

 >Georgina Bruni

Georgina, are you trying to convince skeptics? In most cases
that is like trying to talking to trees. The only thing worse
is talking to believers!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:56:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:49:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:31:49 -0400

 >As pointed out here once before, the investigator's and/or
 >analyst's integrity should demand that items that do not fit the
 >analyst's theories and conclusions, be acknowledged, even if the
 >analyst's does not agree with them. Such integrity is sadly
 >lacking in both advocate and skeptical writings.

Jan, I assure that I have acknowledged all you suggest - not
because they "might fit" or "might not fit" my theories - my
theories are not the real issue. I didn't write this book to
prove my theories.

 >Many things in this case are doubtful

With respect, that is because you have only been following the
information in the public domain - but there's a great deal more
to this case that has not been recognised.

The problem is that too much time has been wasted on mundane
lighthouse theories when people who claim to know so much about
this case should have been looking elsewhere.

 >Now as for evidence of anything, this case is junk, in my
 >opinion.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion but unless you know the
facts you should not (in my opinion) make such a bold statement.

 >Georgina, are you trying to convince skeptics? In most cases
 >that is like trying to talking to trees. The only thing worse
 >is talking to believers!

I always have time for people who are genuinely skeptical and
really do their research. I want to hear their side of the
story. But I don't give much credit to people who take one
fraction of a case and spend an eternity trying to prove it -
forgetting about the whole case. Rather like those people who
cut and paste sections to suit their argument but leave out
anything that doesn't fit (like you mentioned earlier in your
post)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - KRandle

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:24:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:56:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - KRandle


Good Evening all -

Serge asked for a single reference in which PTSD [Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder] was the result of a fantasy. I supplied four,
which he rejected, saying that each was the result of men faking
PTSD. Possibly. However, since the syndrome was created based on
the large number of people claiming horrific combat experiences,
it would seem that the four references would have answered the
question. In fact, Donald W. Goodwin and Samuel B. Guze, in
Psychiatric Diagnosis, wrote, "The decision to award
compensation was made even more difficult by the almost total
lack of evidence that 'post-traumatic stress disorder, delayed
type' exists as a clinical entity."

Peter Brooksmith suggested Janet from 'The Abduction Enigma',
but Greg Sandow rejected it because it could just be anecdotal.
Of course one man's anecdote is another man's empiric
observation.

However, the following reference from the literature should end
this part of the discussion:


Kolb, Lawrence C.
Chapter Title
   Recovery of memory and repressed fantasy in combat-induced
post-traumatic stress disorder of Vietnam veterans.

Source
   Pettinati, Helen M. (Ed);  et al. (1988). Hypnosis and memory.
The Guilford clinical and experimental hypnosis series. (pp.
265-274). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press. xiii, 301 pp.

Abstract
   (from the chapter) techniques used/narcosynthesis
induction/abreaction and the role of the therapist/cases...
presented herein illustrate the powerful process of repression
in impairing memory for both intensively charged
life-threatening incidents in real life and fantasies of
life-threatening events connected with the emotion of terror
((c) 1997
   APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 03:17:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 08:55:34 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein


 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:11:36 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Goldstein
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:14:35 +0100

 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:28:12 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 ><snip>

 >>For years I was a MUFON field investigator. Why did I not think
 >>to station myself at Police HQ so as to be "on the call" for
 >>sightings? That requirement should be in the new MUFON bylaws
 >>for all to heed. The investigator and the reporter can keep each
 >>other company in the police office. The investigator should
 >>respond to any unlawful intrusion calls as they may be
 >>abductions in action. I volunteer Bruce Maccabee as my
 >>photographer.

 >Hahaha

 >OK.

 >By the way, whatever happened to the Chupacabra song prize?


OOps Bruce,

Sorry I haven't kept you informed. We've been recording music
and I wanted to send you a package that included some of the
newest material. The recording process has taken longer than
anticipated. Saturday is our last day. I'll pop something out to
you Monday.

Please privately post me with a mailing address.

Thanks for your patience,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 22:46:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:05:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rudiak


 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:18:39 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 2: UFO & LIGHTHOUSE EXACTLY SAME DIRECTION

 >An important skeptic factoid that has been drummed in again and
 >again is the false claim that the Orfordness lighthouse was
 >exactly "due east" of the East Gate of RAF Woodbridge, and that
 >both the Burroughs-Cabansag-Penniston group and Col Halt's party
 >coincidentally followed this exact "due east" path straight
 >towards Orfordness lighthouse, therefore the light or UFO must
 >have been one and the same as the lighthouse. In fact, as best I
 >can determine from the rather inadequate maps posted, the
 >Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degrees true azimuth from
 >East Gate (the East Gate road is also oriented at this 85 true
 >azimuth), which is somewhat North of due East, whereas due east
 >is 90 degs. More importantly Halt headed towards the UFO at
 >110-120 degrees magnetic which is 105-115 degrees true.

<snip>

 >In other words, the path Halt and the others followed was _not_
 >in the direction of Orfordness lighthouse but about 20-30
 >degrees to the right or South of it. McLean noted that the path
 >he followed to retrace Col Halt's route was "South of East," not
 >due East. McLean's Ordnance Survey grid map references indicate
 >the direction from the landing site to the end point in the
 >second farmer's field was at about 122 degs true azimuth, or
 >about ESE. The compass directions on Halt's trip were repeatedly
 >measured and reported on Halt's real-time tape recording (see
 >Transcript on Easton's website at
 >http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/halttape.htm):

 >HALT: The light is gone now. It was approximately 120 degrees
 >from the site...

<snip>



 >McLean does not seem to realize that the end point of the 2 mile
 >trek that supposedly followed the Orfordness lighthouse instead
 >of a UFO, was in a different direction than Orfordness. He has
 >the end point at grid ref TM385477 and the beginning point at
 >TM364490. The azimuth heading is therefore arctan (13/21) = 32
 >degs south of due east, or azimuth 122 degs. Whereas the
 >Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degs azimuth, just north
 >of due east. (385-364 = 21 east, 490-477 = 13 south)

By moving the "true" landing site to ~120 deg azimuth from East
Gate at RAF Woodbridge instead of ~85-90 deg, I finally begin to
understand how the Orford Ness lighthouse main beam _might_ be
visible from the inland "landing site." If you have have been
following this thread, this point had been bothering me quite a
bit. Various people like Jenny Randles, Ian Ridpath, and Peter
Brookesmith have said the beam was visible from the landing
site. Yet from the more northerly presumed site it didn't seem
possible.

Trying to understand exactly what happened and also casting fair
judgment on the skeptics' lighthouse theory has been badly
hampered by a lack of good data as to where everything and
everyone was relative to one another. In other words, we've
lacked a good map.

I'm reposting my crude text map with some revisions showing the
more southerly landing site where the UFO/lighthouse/whatever
was now apparently viewed by Col. Halt and his merry men. Also,
looking more closely at Neil Morris' scanned map,

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/bntwtr.htm

the distance between the lighthouse and the landing site is
closer to 5 miles
rather than 3 miles.


                          N
                       W--|--E
                          S
          |<---------------------------- ~7 miles  ----------->|

                   Rendlesham Forest
                     ...........              Orford            |  NORTH
               .      .                 oo            |   SEA
____________    .              .               oo            |
Woodbridge__|   .        x Old assumed landing site        x  | Orfordness
   Base  |X East gate           .                         / lighthouse
--------           .       "True" landing site            /
                     .    X    .                       /
                      .......                     /          NORTH SEA
                                             /
                                                                        |
                                                 |
                                                 \/
                                                       Shipwash
                                              lightship
                                             (~20 miles)

So now, as Brad Sparks points out, the "true" landing site is
well south of the line between East Gate and the lighthouse. In
other words, Halt et. al. were not headed toward the lighthouse
in their pursuit of the UFO. If they went about 2 miles east at
azimuth 122, then the landing site would be about 1.25 miles
south of due east.

Another point, as will hopefully become clearer below, it is
also highly questionable that the flashing main beam of the
Orford Ness lighthouse can be seen at the East Gate position,
which would mean something else would have had to trigger the
jaunt through the woods

Off the scanned map of the area provided by Neil Morris:

http://adm2.ph.man.ac.uk/bntwtr.htm

or James Easton:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/map2.jpg Easton maps


the coastline south of the lighhouse slopes to the southwest, or
probably more accurately to the WSW at about 240 deg Azimuth
w.r.t. to the lighthouse. The main lighthouse rotating beacon,
if this is a good respectable lighthouse, should be visible to
at least the coastline. Therefore, let us assume that the
beacon is fully visible to at least 240 deg Az.

The "true" Halt landing site, now that it has been moved south
from where I had presumed it was based on the map in Jenny
Randle's book, "Out of the Blue", and Easton's map above, would
now lie at about 255 deg Az from the lighthouse, instead of
about 270 deg.

Therefore, there is only about 15 deg difference in azimuth
between the southeastern coastline (where presumably the
lighthouse must shine) and the "landing site."

Peter Brookesmith about 2 weeks ago posted some data about the
lighthouse which initially led me to believe that the rotating
beam was visible for a full 360 degrees. Brookesmith then said
not so -- the beam was definitely "masked to the landward side."
He posted the following URL with a photo of the lighthouse:

http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/locator/42.jpg

Indeed, the photo showed a barrier of some kind to the backside
of the lighthouse.

I then found another view of the lighthouse from further inland
showing even more of the shielded backside, though not very
clearly:

http://www.debenweb.co.uk/img/suff/orfd/orf10.jpg

At this point I was asking myself, "If the beam is blocked
towards land, as these photos certainly seem to indicate, then
how could the beam be seen at all by Halt and his men, at least
as a direct, bright beam?"

I then posed this question to Brookesmith, who sort of danced
around the question and didn't give a very satisfactory or
detailed answer IMHO. It was something like it was indeed
masked but not entirely masked, or words to that effect.

So I went looking for better photos of the lighthouse. I
finally found one at (God bless the Web):

http://personal.riverusers.com/~tanseyj/orford.jpg

This is actually the same photo as from Brookesmith's URL, but
much larger and without the cropping at the bottom of the
lighthouse. This photo more clearly shows the housing of the
main beam at the top as well as some of the North Sea shoreline
at the bottom. You'll also more clearly see the window halfway
down, which houses one of the colored sector lights (the green
one) which is visible out to the SE (but not from inland).

The now visible shoreline provides a little orientation for the
photo. The shore slants a little east of true north/south. I'm
guessing, therefore, that the doorway shown at the bottom is
just about due south and the photo vantage point was a little
west of south.

The left edge of the housing at the top would then be about due
west, in the approximate direction of the airbase. The beam
would be very much blocked in this direction by the white
housing (looks like metal) to the left edge of the light
housing.

However, the open part of the housing does wrap around quite a
bit to the southwest and also has prominent "notch" in that
direction. Thus it looks like the beam should be visible well
to the SW and into the WSW, as it should if it is to be fully
seen down the SW coastline.

In addition, I can now see the possibility that the "notch" at
the most SW edge would allow some of the beam to leak even
further to the WSW perhaps as far as where Halt and his men were
(the extra 15 degrees beyond the coastline at the new "true"
more southerly landing site).

I suspect the beam at this point, if visible, would still be
partly blocked by the rear light housing, but some of it might
leak around the right edge because of the notch. The
perspective of the lighthouse from the landing site is probably
very close to the lighthouse view shown in photo 2 above:

http://www.debenweb.co.uk/img/suff/orfd/orf10.jpg

The white shield from this vantage point, would probably block
most of the beam, but over to the right of the beam housing
where it is open and the "notch" would be (and as can be seen in
the photo), some light should leak out and be visible at the
"landing site."


Thus the beam would not be as bright as if one saw the full beam
from the same distance out at sea (to hazard a wild guess, say
1/10th as bright), but it would still be reasonably bright.
Jenny Randles said you could indeed see the light from the
landing site, but it was nothing to write home about.

However, even a little further north of where Halt and his men
were, and the beam probably would be completely blocked by the
rear housing. Thus I seriously doubt if the beam could be
sweeping across the tops of the trees and be seen at East Gate,
even if terrain permitted it.

However, the only way we are going to know for sure whether the
beam was at all visible at East Gate would be for someone
on-site to find out if it was possible. Another piece of data
that is lacking is how bright the lighthouse would have been
from the landing site compared to where the beam would be fully
visible at sea. If the beam is partly blocked at the landing
site and only "peaking" around the edge of the shield in back,
then the light probably wouldn't have been all that dazzling.
Good photos of the lighthouse from the proper azimuths relative
to East Gate and the landing site could tell us a lot.

Again this brings us back to the point I raised about how only
the tip of the lighthouse is visible through _only_ a narrow gap
in the terrain over a very small area. The beam, even leaking
very far to the WSW does not seem capable of leading men away
from the base on a merry chase through the woods in a direction
that takes them further and further _away_ from the direction of
the beam. The terrain and the housing at the rear of the
lighthouse probably wouldn't allow them to see the beam from the
base or as they moved through the woods. This would suggest
that they were chasing after something else.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:07:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:07:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks


James Easton's response to my four points refuting his and other
skeptics' factoids on the Rendlesham case has been to expel me
from his list and divert attention from the scientific issues to
red herrings about the housekeeping rules for his list.  As he
knows from an apologetic email I sent him, I never received his
recent posts about exceptions to his list rules and he has never
modified his list software to put "list only" or similar
reminders in the headings.

In any case, there is a bit of a double standard here since
Easton and others on his list including Jenny Randles have been
cross-posting the same posts here on UFO UpDates and on his UFO
Research List for the past several weeks on this "Orford Ness
Lighthouse 'UFO'" thread which Easton himself started, as I just
discovered last Friday -- all without complaint from Easton or
anyone else till now.  He has even cited the work of his
subscriber Robert McLean in one of his posts here on UpDates as
support for his (Easton's) contentions (Sept 4).  So much for
not revealing the content of allegedly "private" discussions on
his list to outsiders.

The extreme rhetoric used by James Easton suggests I have struck
a raw nerve in exposing the factual errors in his contentions
for the past two years that the Rendlesham military men all
"chased a lighthouse beacon for two miles" (posted Aug 22) or
engaged in a "two mile pursuit of a lighthouse beacon" (Aug 23).
He knows that I reject the ETH yet he describes me as having
"fanatical UFO beliefs" or being some "fanatical 'UFO
believer.'"

Easton claims my posting here supported my "earnest beliefs,"
that I had had "enough of those damnable 'skeptics,'" and that I
was exposing the "great 'UFO evidence cover up.'"  I never made
any of those statements in his quotation marks as he well knows,
he has in fact made them up.

In fact, my posting _refuted_ my own beliefs of the past two
years in which I had accepted and believed Easton's and others'
claims that the Orfordness lighthouse was chased for 2 miles by
two different groups of USAF personnel in Dec 1980.  I publicly
retracted my position in the face of the facts.  Would that
others would show similar integrity in the face of the truth.

Lest we forget, when Easton started this thread on Aug 17
(unbeknownst to me till last week) he was triumphantly declaring
that the Rendlesham case had been "comprehensively" and
"demonstrably proven" to be the Orfordness lighthouse.  He has
claimed that the lighthouse and the UFO were in the same
direction and were never seen simultaneously in different parts
of the sky so they must be one and the same, just misidentified.

Now, as I posted on Sept 12, we find this is not true at all.
Let's go over the skeptic factoids again one by one:

SKEPTIC FACTOID 1: COL. HALT et al. CHASED LIGHTHOUSE FOR 2
MILES

The facts are that, as indicated by Dave Rudiak's analysis and
McLean's on-site investigations, the Orfordness lighthouse
beacon can only be seen in the approximately first 0.1 mile of
the reconstructed path through forest and field, then it
completely disappears for the next 1.9 miles, then it reappears
again only for the final 0.2 mile.

If this is not in fact true, then British skeptics can simply
take a camera on the _entire_ 2-mile path and photograph the
Orfordness lighthouse beacon all along the path.  That would be
"comprehensive proof."  I cannot try this experiment as I am in
California.

SKEPTIC FACTOID 2: UFO & LIGHTHOUSE EXACTLY SAME DIRECTION

The facts are that Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degrees
true from the initial landing site and the Col Halt party's
compass headings toward the UFO were to about 105-115 degs true.

SKEPTIC FACTOID 3: NO MENTION ON HALT TAPE OF PIECES FALLING OFF
UFO

I quoted from the Halt tape which comprehensively proves that he
did report "Pieces ... falling off" the UFO on two separate
occasions.

SKEPTIC FACTOID 4: NO UFO & LIGHTHOUSE SEEN AT SAME TIME

I quoted or paraphrased Halt, Cabansag, Penniston and Burroughs
saying they saw both UFO and lighthouse beacon at the same time
or serially and could distinguish them easily -- as we would
just by considering that the blue and red lights were obviously
not the whitish-yellow lighthouse beam.

These are not the only skeptic factoids in this case, but are
fairly representative of the quality of the work that has been
done and which I in good faith have wrongly relied upon for so
long to mistakenly dispose of this case as conventionally
explained.

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:26:23 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:10:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks


[Non-Subscriber Post]

With respect to Dave Rudiak's re-analysis of lighthouse sighting
angles and beam visibility, just a few comments which may not do
full justice to his details:

It may not be necessary to move the landing site southward.  Col
Halt's 110-120 magnetic compass readings (= 105-115 true)
started from the landing site, not East Gate, and it was from
this landing site that McLean reconstructed the path through
wood and field for 2+ miles at what turns out to be about 122
degs true azimuth.  McLean did not start from East Gate on this
heading.

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                   Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:56:00 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:14:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Mortellaro


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 15:20:30 -0400

 >>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 11:09:23 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

 >>>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >>>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:38:50 -0400

 >>Steve,

 >>Thanks for your informative input, as always.

 >>I guess my question still remains, How do the media _typically_
 >>learn of fast-breaking news?

 >>An example: a tanker truck turns over on a downtown freeway and
 >>either catches fire or spills hazardous material. _In the main_,
 >>how do the media first hear about it?

 >>Is there, by any chance, a wireless 911 frequency that you can
 >>listen to, for calls made via cell phones?

 >>Still curious.

 >>Dennis Stacy

 >Dennis-

 >I hope this information is of interest to our other
 >listeners..... <g>

 >Major "hard" news events come in a variety of forms. A major
 >building fire (such as a factory or warehouse) could become a
 >major story in a big city, but it would have limited impact on
 >traffic flow and wouldn't garner much immediate interest on the
 >part of the public (unless they had a direct connection to the
 >affected building).

 >On the other hand, your example of a truck overturning, which
 >could in turn block traffic, would be of immediate interest to
 >those caught in the traffic jam, as well as those who are headed
 >into that area on the highway. Local media pick up on major
 >traffic problems using a number of sources, which may not be
 >available in all areas. In the Washington Metro market there are
 >cameras installed on the Washington Beltway and surrounding
 >Interstate highways. Local cable television systems have set
 >aside a channel that shows images from those cameras in
 >rotation, and I believe there is a way to access the camera
 >images via the Internet. If there is a major incident on the
 >highway those cameras are usually able to locate it and the
 >media can begin the process of warning approaching motorists. Of
 >course, most people don't have televisions in their car, so
 >local all-news radio stations monitor the cameras and try to
 >keep on top of traffic flow. Local all-news stations have also
 >established cell phone numbers that can be called at no charge
 >to report a traffic problem. There are also services available
 >to radio stations that will provide traffic reports during rush
 >hours, and those services also monitor the cameras and keep in
 >touch with local police.

<snip>

 >Now if all our cars and trucks were to stop running for no
 >reason I'll probably reach for my disposable (mechanical) camera
 >and begin scanning the sky for something unusual. . . . . <g>

 >Steve

I would like to thank all of you experts out there, people
who've worked on or for the media, for your insight as to how
the media gets (or doesn't get) it's news. However I can't.
Mostly because, it's all wrong.

There are, in most major cities, more than half a dozen
frequencies which are _always_ monitored by the media for news.
In the city of NY it would be one Citywide fire frequency (for
all five boroughs) and for Police, about four to five CityWide
frequencies. On these are most of the major breaking stories. It
is not necessary to monitor the literally hundreds of channels
from 30 MHz to nearly one GHz.

The CityWide fire frequency is the one which dispatches units
from other areas, other than the one in which the fire is
located. Monitoring that one frequency allows the reporter to
know where the action is and how serious the fire. It's the same
for police or law enforcement radio. Monitoring just the
Interagency radio frequencies is often most efficient. Show me a
radio station or newspaper which does not monitor these
frequencies and I'll eat my hat.

Unfortunately for them, many of the emergency channels are
switching to digital modes of transmission, with encryption. Of
course there are ways around this, ways to untangle the mystery.
I should know, I've designed a large number of these systems for
law enforcement and installed the receivers for the media as
well.

Surprising how many of you who should know better were not
paying attention when you were at the paper. More surprising and
more disappointing, is the strength of your convictions
regarding how reporters don't sit around all day listening to
their scanners. Tsk, tsk and chame, chame, chame.

Hopefully your opinions regarding the UFO conundrum are more
correct.

Hopefully.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD'

From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc - AGETI <9a4ag@clarc.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 03:06:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:27:11 -0400
Subject: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD'


Dear List members,

In my recent correspondence with journalist Leslie Kean (she
recently published articles about COMETA French UFO report in
The Boston Globe and The Irish Independent) I have found out
that she also published her third article in the French magazine
'VSD' (the one that first released COMETA report back in July
1999).

The article that I am sending you is a translated, non-edited
version. Leslie says that she is not happy that VSD cut much
from this version, but I think that people will be interested to
see how it all looks in the original. Unfortunately we don't
have a published version in English. Anyway here it is posted
with Leslie's permission.

Note that in this third article the focus is more on the
pressure for Congressional UFO hearings in 1997 (Greer,
Rockfeller and Clinton involved).

VSD is a weekly magazine. But since, as Leslie says, it was a
special issue on UFOs, it didn't have the date of a particular
week on it. It was just dated June. Leslie continues: "The VSD
piece was not very well edited, and they cut almost half of what
I submitted... so I'm not thrilled with it, but the information
is important."

So here you go:

===========================================================

Posted with permission of Leslie Kean:

VSD, France
June, 2000

USA: UFOS AND NATIONAL SECURITY
Leslie Kean

The recent diffusion in the United States of the Cometa report
generates multiple reactions starting from politicians from
Congress and military men from the Pentagon. Leslie Kean, an
American journalist, examines the situation

"No response is awaited, only action. The Cometa made no request
to the American government. It is not entitled to do so,"
explains Michel Algrin, spokesperson for the Cometa, attorney
and political scientist. But he adds, "In this report, we
recommend to the French government to cooperate with its
American ally on the subject of UFOs."

Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the Apollo 14 astronaut who was the sixth
man to walk on the moon, strongly supports such cooperation.
Along with five-star Admiral Lord Hill-Norton, the former head
of the British Ministry of Defense and Major Gordon L. Cooper,
one of America's original seven Mercury astronauts, Mitchell is
calling for Congressional hearings to shed light on the UFO
question. "People have been digging through the files and
investigating for years now. The files are quite convincing. The
only thing that's lacking is the official stamp," he explains.
Despite the fact that Mitchell is a national hero, his request
for an investigation has been ignored by the American
government. As the COMETA report points out, the United States
is unique in its silence on this issue. The report UFOs and
Defense notes that many UFO files are classified above top
secret, and accuses the United States of following a policy of
disinformation. It says that the government has an "impressive
repressive arsenal" in place, which includes military
regulations prohibiting public disclosure of UFO sightings.

Air Force Regulation 200-2, ``Unidentified Flying Objects
Reporting,'' for example, prohibits the release to the public
and the media of any data about ``those objects which are not
explainable.'' An even more restrictive procedure is outlined in
the document JANAP 146 (Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication
146), which threatens to prosecute anyone under its jurisdiction
- including pilots, civilian agencies, merchant marine captains,
and even some fishing vessels - for disclosing reports of
sightings relevant to US security.

A few months after the French release of the COMETA report, US
Naval Reserve Commander Willard H. Miller agreed to go on the
record about his participation in a series of previously
undisclosed briefings for Pentagon brass about national security
and military policy regarding UFOs. Miller has been a key
liaison to the Pentagon on the subject for years. In asserting
publicly that "It's time to give some credibility to the fact
that there are those in high places in the government who have
an interest in this subject," W.H. Miller has taken considerable
risks.

Miller retired in 1994 from active duty on the Current
Operations Staff  of U.S. Atlantic Command, Norfolk, Virginia
where he worked operations, intelligence, and special
contingency issues. With over thirty years of experience in Navy
and Joint Interagency operations with the Department of Defense,
Commander Miller has held a Top Secret clearance and thus had
access to sensitive compartmented information.

It has not been easy for Miller to overcome the taboo that the
UFO subject carries among his colleagues in the military. "It is
treated much the way we used to view mental illness. Hide the
crazy daughter in the attic," he says. In a February, 2000
confidential memo titled "Selected Discussions with Key United
States (US) Department of Defense (DoD) Intelligence Personnel
on the Subject of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) and
Extraterrestrial Intelligence (ETI)", Miller spelled out the
details of meetings between 1989 and 2000 with high level
Department of Defense intelligence personnel - including the
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), an Admiral on
the Joint Staff, and the U.S. Atlantic Command Director for
Intelligence - among others.

Concerned that many high-ranking military officers are not
properly informed about the UFO phenomenon, Miller believes that
the generals who have come forward in France could have a
significant impact. "Without preparation and planning for
encounters, precipitous military decisions may lead to
unnecessary confusion, misapplication of forces, or possible
catastrophic consequences," he says.

The Navy Commander's concern is justified by the historical
record.  Declassified government documents show that unexplained
objects with extraordinary technical capabilities pose
challenges to military activity around the globe. U.S. fighter
jets have been scrambled to pursue UFOs, according to North
American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) logs and U.S. Air
Force documents. Peruvian and Iranian Air Force planes attempted
to shoot down unexplained objects during air encounters, and two
Belgium F-16's pursued UFO's in 1990.

In earlier decades, such concerns were openly discussed among
American government officials. In 1960, for example,
Representative Leonard G. Wolf of Iowa entered an "urgent
warning" from former CIA Director Vice Admiral R.E.
Hillenkoetter into the Congressional Record that "certain
dangers are linked with unidentified flying objects."  Wolf
cited Gen. L.M. Chassin, NATO coordinator of Allied Air Service,
warning that "if we persist in refusing to recognize the
existence of the UFOs, we will end up, one fine day, by
mistaking them for the guided missiles of an enemy - and the
worst will be upon us."

Wolf also referenced a three-year study which determined that
air defense scrambles and alerts had already occurred due to the
presence of UFOs. The study said that all defense personnel
"should be told that UFOs are real and should be trained to
distinguish them - by their characteristic speeds and maneuvers
- from conventional planes and missiles."

These concerns were taken seriously enough to be incorporated
into the 1971 "Agreement on Measures to Reduce the Outbreak of
Nuclear War" between the United States and the Soviet Union.
The treaty states that the two countries will "notify each other
immediately in the event of detection by missile warning systems
of unidentified objects... if such occurrences could create a
risk of outbreak of nuclear war between the two countries." The
Cometa assures its readers that UFOs have not been the cause of
any hostile acts "although intimidation maneuvers have been
confirmed."

Reports such as the one from France may open the door for the
United States and other nations to be more forthcoming. Chile,
for example, is openly addressing it's own concerns about air
safety and UFOs.

While Commander Miller alerted the Pentagon, researcher Dr.
Steven M. Greer was working the issue within the US Congress and
the executive branch. In 1993, Greer was invited to meet with
President Clinton's first sitting CIA Director, Admiral James
Woolsey. The three hour event was arranged by futurist John L.
Petersen, President and founder of the Washington area think
tank The Arlington Institute, who "specializes in the area of
national and global security" and currently serves as a Pentagon
consultant, according to Institute materials.

In August 1995, philanthropist Laurance Rockefeller presented
Greer's briefing materials to President William Clinton, Hillary
Clinton, and Presidential science advisor Jack Gibbons while
they spent a weekend at Rockefellers' Wyoming ranch. Clinton
then instructed Associate Attorney General at the Justice
Department, Webster Hubbell, to investigate the existence of
UFOs, as disclosed in his book Friends in High Places.  Despite
this request from the Commander-in-Chief, Hubbell was unable to
obtain information on the subject.

On April 9, 1997, Greer and his associates held an
unprecedented, confidential congressional briefing at the Westin
Hotel in Washington. The VIP's in attendance included
Representative Dan Burton, Chair of the House Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight, with his chief of staff, and
staffers from nearly thirty congressional offices.
Representatives from the executive branch, including a staff
member from Vice President Gore's office, were present, along
with representatives of two state governors, the Department of
Defense, and the scientific community.

Two years after the Washington briefing, the COMETA released its
dramatic report.

"Because the Congress is afraid they won't get re-elected, they
don't even want to talk about this. I just think somebody should
do something," said a congressional staff member. Nonetheless,
one congressman did respond to public pressure.

In 1993, New Mexico representative Steven Schiff requested that
the General Accounting Office investigate the infamous 1947
crash of a mysterious object in the desert near Roswell, New
Mexico.  Two years later, he learned from the GAO that all
documents and radio messages during the relevant time period had
been destroyed "without proper authority." Schiff was unable to
attend the Washington briefing in 1997 and died of an aggressive
skin cancer the following year. No other member has picked up
where he left off. On September 15, 1998, Commander Willard
Miller and Dr. Steven Greer entered the Pentagon through the VIP
entrance. Thirty minutes later, the DIA Director came out of his
office, parting company with an entourage of high-level foreign
Admirals and Generals. He graciously ushered in his two guests,
taking his place at the head of a massive wood table. According
to Miller's confidential memo of February 2000, an Army Colonel,
a DIA staff member and a Defense Department clerk were also
seated around the table. The briefing lasted 50 minutes.

Greer and Miller explained to the DIA Director that there is no
credible evidence of hostility from UFO occupants. "Some US Air
Force denials defy logic and strain the public's tolerance,"
Miller says he told the Pentagon officials.

His point was dramatically illustrated in the aftermath of an
extraordinary event that occurred one spring evening over the
state of Arizona.  On March 13, 1997, thousands observed
enormous, lighted, triangular craft flying low and silently,
sometimes hovering wingless over populated areas. More than 90
meters long, air traffic controllers failed to register them on
radar. To this day, the people of Arizona do not know what
penetrated US airspace that night. In 1999, Arizona attorney
Peter Gersten responded by filing a Freedom of Information Act
lawsuit against the Department of Defense.  The case challenged
the adequacy of the governments "reasonable search" for
information about the triangular objects seen over Arizona in
1997 and elsewhere in the United States over the last twenty
years.

As recently as January 5, 2000, four policemen at different
locations in St. Claire County, Illinois, witnessed a brightly
lit, huge triangular craft flying at 330 meters, according to
the Los Angeles Times. Most alarming was the report from Lebanon
police officer Thomas Barton that he witnessed the hovering
object jump at least 8 miles in 3 seconds. Aeronautical expert
Paul Czysz, who spent 29 years at McDonnell-Douglas designing
faster-than-sound aircraft, says that such rapid motion cannot
be explained in conventional terms. Yet nearby Scott Air Force
base and the FAA purport to know nothing

On February 29, 2000, a reporter brought the issue of military
denial and the Arizona lawsuit to the attention of U.S. Senator
John McCain of Arizona at a California press conference. "I
think it's of great interest," responded the Presidential
candidate, acknowledging that the 1997 "lights" seen over
Arizona had "never been fully explained."

Nonetheless, the DoD continues to maintain that it can find no
information about the triangular objects. It provided details of
its search to the court as required by U.S. District Court judge
Stephen M. McNamee of Phoenix for Gersten's lawsuit. On March
30, 2000, the judge concluded that "a reasonable search was
conducted' even though no information was obtained, and he
dismissed the case.

Once again, the French generals made the same point raised
by their American counterparts. "How can one try to ignore a
phenomena that is manifested by the regular crossing of our
air space by moving objects...If we do nothing, the very
principle of defense and air intelligence would be called
into question," they state.

UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For? recommends that
the French government reflect on "the measures to take in the
event of a spectacular and indisputable manifestation of a UFO."
Surprisingly, the United States has taken one small step in that
direction.  The second edition of the Fire Officer's Guide to
Disaster Control is currently used for training by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at its National Fire Academy
and is taught nationally through the seven universities offering
degrees in fire science. Chapter 13 of the guide is titled
"Enemy Attack and UFO Potential."  It warns fire fighters of
known "UFO hazards" such as electrical fields that cause
blackouts, air and ground travel disruptions by force fields,
and physiological effects. "Do not stand under a UFO that is
hovering at low altitudes. Do not touch or attempt to touch a
UFO that has landed," the book warns.

Dr. William M. Kramer, professor of Fire Science at the
University of Cincinnati and an Ohio Fire Chief, co-authored the
chapter and will be updating it this year. The French Institute
of Higher Studies for National Defense and the National Center
for Space Studies are a few steps ahead of the United States
military and NASA. Not only do they openly present information
acknowledging the existence of UFOs and attempt to explain their
origin, they also recommend a widespread information and
training campaign on preparedness which would reach all sectors
of the relevant political, military, and civilian spectrum in
their country.  Perhaps the report by the bold French generals -
with its goal of "stripping the phenomenon of UFOs of its
irrational layer" - will be a catalyst for American authorities
to examine the issue of UFO's in a new light and to end the
existing impasse.

                          * * * * * *

VSD PHOTO CAPTIONS

Unidentified Flying Objects were said to have flown with
complete impunity over the forbidden zone of the Capitol and the
White House in Washington D.C. in July of 1952, without any
successful attempt of interception.

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) building in Langley, in
the suburbs of Washington D.C.

The astronaut Edgar D. Mitchell from the third mission to the
moon "Apollo 14 " at the command of the lunar module on February
5, 1971. He remains convinced of the reality of secrecy about
UFOs in the USA.

Commander Willard H. Miller of the U.S. Naval Reserve.

Famous since the release of the film "Independence Day" in July
1996, Route 375 - or Extraterrestrial Highway - which borders on
the well-known "Zone 51" in the state of Nevada, remains the
designated meeting point of American  ufologists

An Air Commando of the U.S.A.F. on guard, armed with an assault
weapon M-16 in front of a strategic bomber B-1B "Lancer" on the
air base of Dyesss AFB  (Texas). The Air Force has been in
charge of controlling and defending American air space since
1948.

The "Californian firemen guide," developed by Dr William W.
Bahme, a retired U.S. Navy Captain and lawyer, recognizes the
material existence of UFOs.

===========================================================

Best regards,

Giuliano Marinkovicc
UFO News Co-ordinator
Croatia, Europe
ICQ UIN #67412597,
tel:+385-23-430-970
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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                          Cashman: Easton & Aldrich

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 07:26:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:34:21 -0400
Subject: Cashman: Easton & Aldrich


 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:05:52 +0100
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

James Easton wrote:

<snip>

 >Some content from that latter posting has been passed on to at
 >least one non-list member, Jan Aldrich, and referred to by
 >Aldrich on UFO UpDates. I'm thankful that to the 'uninitiated'
 >it would have made little sense amidst Aldrich's incoherent
 >ramble, however that's irrelevant.

 >However, of late, a somewhat critical assessment of one case by
 >a number of subscribers seems to have provoked the ire of Brad
 >Sparks, with the result he has now selectively posted
 >considerable 'list only' material on UFO UpDates, proclaiming it
 >supports his earnest beliefs and seemingly complaining he's had
 >enough of those damnable 'skeptics'.

<snip>

What's amazing about the above tirade is Easton daring to
rant about two individuals who have done more to advance our
knowledge of UFOs in each year of their work than Easton has
during his entire public presence.

Let's keep in mind that neither Project 1947 nor SHG would be
the viable and productive entities they are without Jan's
untiring and visionary labor. Let's keep in mind that Brad has
written the most detailed investigation of a radar-visual yet
published, and that he was able to offer significant proof that
the incident represented the activity of intelligence.

And what has Easton done, besides flog lazy and easily refuted
skeptical hypotheses on well-known sightings?

Personally, I believe a public apology from Easton is in order.

------
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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:19:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:37:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 21:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:27:20 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Aldrich

Jan wrote:

 >I sent Easton the entire file that Greenwood had compiled on
 >this case - at least 5 linear inches. After less than a day,
 >Jamie-boy had the answer. Not likely.


Jan,

If you're going to make such asinine remarks, then I have little
choice than to explain the true background.

In truth, I received a copy of Greenwood's file in September
1997.

The resulting conclusions and first ever public disclosure of
those original witness statements was published in 'Rendlesham
Unravelled', during March 1998.

You seem to be forgetting that there was in fact a six month
gap.

An awful lot happened during that time and in the imminent,
'Voyager' newsletter for September, I will reveal the copious
hard evidence which confirms precisely what and how Jamie-boy
here, as we can see from a snapshot taken at December 1997, was
perhaps far removed from making instant judgements:

"I've hopefully done all I can to diplomatically clarify and
resolve the issues we have seen develop.

Jan, I welcome your own and ideally [deleted]'s assessment of
how we progress from here. I know you have passed on to
[deleted]'s representatives my opinion that the obvious
conclusions were evident some time ago and that Halt/Penniston
should be asked for a response.

That's greatly appreciated...". [End]

It would still be another three months before I published
anything related.

I believe that the non-disclose or those original witness
statements resulted in (from what I can see) some six years
research being largely wasted.

If this was about 'Roswell', it's the equivalent of discovering
five, largely corroborative testimonies, taken not long
afterwards, which report how material from several balloons and
a radar target was found on the Foster ranch. Unfortunately,
whilst everyone has been looking into a possible 'flying saucer'
explanation, this early evidence was always known about, yet
never revealed until years later.

I can assure you my article will not be a critical appraisal of
anyone or anything and certainly not include confidential
material, however, it will, by default, highlight fundamental
questions.

We need to 'clear the air' about this and someone eventually has
to answer the questions which Jenny Randles and others have also
been asking.

 >Halt said he identified the lighthouse right off in his
 >presentation in Maryland, something that Easton ignored... after
 >all, that fact got in the way of the great "answer".

Jan, this isn't really worth anyone's time responding to,
however, I was actually responsible for detailing Halt's claims
about his observation of the lighthouse. I also explained why he
was evidently referring to the comparative Shipwash lightship
and that the bearing given for that other 'strange flashing
light' noticed was in fact where Orford Ness lighthouse could be
seen.

Contrary to being 'ignored', it's all fully analysed in
'Rendlesham Unravelled' and the later, 'Resolving Rendlesham',
easily available to actually read, on my website at:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/rendlshm.htm


Incidentally, the 'answer' was so simple and had been figured
out by Ian Ridpath long, long time ago... see:

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ridpath.txt

Those original statements merely confirm the solution, although
of course that was important.

Paramount, in fact.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                               Ghostwolf Info?

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:33:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:44:56 -0400
Subject: Ghostwolf Info?


Greetings to all -

I'm currently on the hunt for information pertaining to Robert
Ghostwolf (aka Robert Ghostwolf, Robert Wolfe, Bobby Wolfe,
Robert Parry, Robert Franzone, et al). If you have any info I'd
appreciate hearing from you. All correspondence will be held in
confidence, thanks!

Regards,

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
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                         Adamski Saucer Model Found?

From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:34:40 -0400
Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?


In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
model.

It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

The device can be seen at the following:

http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html
http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html


And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
of UFO pages.

This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 37

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 15:47:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:38:32 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 37


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

       UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 5, Number 37
September 14, 2000
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/


SECOND CHUPACABRA SEEN
NEAR MALPAISILLO

       A second Chupacabra was sighted outside the
sheep pen at the San Lorenzo ranch last week.
       The creature was described as much smaller,
"about the size of a Pekinese dog," with white fur and
prominent fangs.  Workers are standing guard at the ranch,
located in El Barrio, a village on the outskirts of the
small city of Malpaisillo, in the Leon state of Nicaragua.
       "We stay awake all night when the Chupacabra is on
the prowl," said Jorge Luis Talavera, the sheep rancher
who shot the yellow-furred Chupacabra on Friday
night, August 25, 2000.  "We take shifts so we
won't be tired, but it's becoming unbearable."
       The new Chupacabra "prowling Jorge Luis Talavera's
sheep pen at San Lorenzo...is slightly larger than a
Pekinese dog.  This is near the spot where the skeleton
of the alleged (yellow-furred) Chupacabra turned up."
       "Talavera told (the Nicaraguan newspaper) La Prensa
that the animal comes up to the pen, which is adjacent to
the living area and will be killed if it attacks a number of sheep
put out as bait.  Talavera will then fire his shotgun just as
he did days ago with the other animal."
       "'We'll let it taste blood once near, since that's the
way the animal seems to develop the taste for sucking
sheep.  Once its shyness has been overcome, I shall
hunt it down,' stated Talavera, adding that the new animal
prowling his property is white in color."
       Malpaisillo is located 154 kilometers (92 miles)
north of Managua, the capital of Nicaragua.  (See
La Prensa de Nicaragua for September 6, 2000,
"Another Chupacabra prowls Malpaisillo" by Mariacely
Linarte.  Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los
libros Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbidden
Mexico, para eso articulo de diario.)

TALAVERA SAYS UNIVERSITY
REPLACED THE REAL
SKELETON WITH A FAKE

       Residents of Malpaisillo are up in arms, charging
that the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Nicaragua
(UNAN) in Leon botched the examination of the
Chupacabra skeleton and then replaced the
real one with the skeleton of a dog.
       However, Dr. Edmundo Torres, vice chancellor
and director of scientific research at UNAN-Leon,
strongly denied the charges.
       "'That animal was switched around at the university,'
claimed rancher Jorge Luis Talavera."
       "Talavera's reaction followed declarations by UNAN
specialists that the skeleton allegedly belonging to the
slain Chupacabra was that of a domestic dog."
       "Talavera claims that there are several pieces of
evidence 'that prove that the skeleton was indeed
changed at the UNAN-Leon laboratory.'"
       "The first of them 'is that the skeleton (shown on
Managua TV--J.T.) is complete, although I kept a piece
of the front leg,'" Talavera stated.
       "He also claims that the bones turned from a dark
color to a light one, the teeth turned from pink to white,
and instead of the 22 teeth he had counted, there were
now 40, as well as 'more skin on the legs.'"
       "he added that he is willing to turn it (the front leg
bone fragments--J.T.) over to international researchers
for a better analysis of the animal's remains..."
       Other Malpaisillo residents were just as dissatisfied
with the results of the UNAN-Leon analysis, feeling
that it left too many questions unanswered.
       "For Sol Hidalgo, the experts' testimony left some
gaps, such as the question of why an ordinary dog engaged
in such a random act (of slaughter--S.C.) such as draining the
blood of 12 sheep in a single night and leaving them uneaten,
unlike any other wild animal."
       "Leonel Navarro, mayor of Malpaisillo, and Sister Paula
Hidalgo were not satisfied with the scientific results of the
UNAN research laboratory, which established that the
skeleton of the alleged Chupacabra was really that of
a dog."
       "Vice chancellor and research coordinator Dr.
Edmundo Torres explained that the study conducted was
purely scientific and proper for a serious university and
scientific institution and that they have no interest in
concealing the truth."
       "He added that the canids (zoological branch which
includes dogs--S.C.) are solitary hunters who attack
their prey with great speed and on occasion with (feats of)
endurance.," adding that "canids are highly adaptable
and are spread out over 12 branches and 34 species
including coyotes, dogs, foxes, etc.and cat attain speeds
of up to 75 kilometers per hour (45 miles per hour)."
(See La Prensa de Nicaragua for September 3, 2000,
"'That's not my Goatsucker!'" and "Chupacabra study
leaves questions unanswered" by Mariacely Linarte
and Clarissa Altamirano.  Otra vez, muchas gracias
a Scott Corrales para esos articulos de dirio.)
(Editor's Comment:  So where is the real Chupacabra
skeleton at this moment?  My guess is--the pathology
unit at MediLab YY-11 at Area 61.)

CHUPACABRA KILLS GOATS
IN NORTHERN MEXICO

       Ten goats were found decapitated last week in the
small city of San Pedro, in Coahuila state, sparking
rumors that the Chupacabras have returned to
northern Mexico.
       "Several goats were found decapitated on the
premises adjacent to a CONELAP Education Center.
Some locals dared to suggest that the Chupacabra has
reappeared in the region even while many of them have no
certainty that such a creature exists."
       "However, they said, anything is possible."
       "The Municipal Public Safety Office (in San Pedro)
reported that Evaristo Escareto Ramirez, 64, who resides
at Calle Octava 50 in the barrio Agua Nueva
(neighborhood) and the owner of the decapitated
animals, reported to the said jurisdiction indicating
that he was the owner of a herd of goats kept in a
field outside the CONELAP center.  He found that at
least 10 of his animals had been beheaded for
hitherto unknown reasons."
       ""The discovery was a source of surprise for the
community, leading police and municipal authorities
to pursue investigations aimed at finding the responsible
party or parties."
       "Indications at this time are that the means used
to saly the goats remain unknown, although the attempt can
be attributed to members of some cult engaged in some
activities where animal blood is employed in 'spells'."
       "Meanwhile, the community is abuzz with the mystery
surrounding the case.  Yet in fact no one known with any
certainty what occurred with these goats, which were kept
in the very same pasture where they were sacrificed."
       San Pedro is in western Coahuila,
located about 300 kilometers (180 miles) west of
Monterey.
       "However, according to Escareto Ramirez, what took
place" has been very disturbing, "particularly among those
involved in goat farming.  He indicated that the possibility
of the Chupacabra's reappearance in the area cannot
be dismissed."  (See the newspaper El Universal of
Mexico City for August 30, 2000, "Chupacabra
reappears in northern Mexico" by Enrique Proa
Villareal.  Otra vez, muchas gracias a Scott Corrales
para eso articulo de diario.)

CROP CIRCLES POP UP AGAIN
IN SASKATCHEWAN

       Three more crop circle formations have popped up
in Canada's Saskatchewan province.
       On Thursday, August 24, 2000, farmer Ellis Randy
was combining a field of durum wheat on his farm near
Hazlet, Sask. when he came across a crop circle
22 feet (6.7 meters) in diameter.
       "The formation was in a field of durum wheat, very
neat and a tight clockwise spiral lay pattern, 'a
perfect circle,' with no large plant stalks, or entry/exit
paths."
       Heather Randy, the farmer's wife, reported "an odd
feeling when she stepped inside the circle, 'like too
much coffee.'"
       "The formation was well into the field and could not
be seen from pathways or roads."
       On Wednesday, September 6, 2000, cerealogist
Dennis Eklund reported the discovery of a large ringed
crop circle in a wheat field two miles from the city of
Saskatoon (population 187,000)."
       On Thursday, September 7, 2000, residents found
another crop formation one mile from the large ringed
circle.  Eklund reported that it was an area of
"randomly downed crops."
       "The formation consisted of random patches of
downed crop, along with long straight lines of downed
crop, which run straight and then make sharp turns in
the field, essentially following along with the other
(random) patches.."
       "Unfortunately, the field has already been swathed
(combined in the USA--J.T.) by the farmer, but good
photos were taken and diagrams were made beforehand."
       The second Saskatoon formation is similar to a
"random patch" crop circle found in Beaumont, Alberta
a while ago.  (Many thanks to Paul Anderson of
Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada for these reports.)

RED SPHERE UFO APPEARS
OVER GULL LAKE, ONTARIO

       On Wednesday, August 30, 2000, eyewitness J.W.
was at the family home on the shores of Gull Lake,
which is in Lutterworth Township, Ontario, Canada,
located about 112 kilometers (70 miles) northeast of
Toronto, when a strange glow became noticeable in the
night sky.
       "We saw it at 11:05 p.m.," J.W. said, adding that
the UFO approached from the northwest.  "It was a
perfectly shaped sphere, maybe 40 to 70 feet
(12 to 23 meters) in diameter, with 40 to 50 red lights
and three bright blue-white lights crisscrossing
through the center."
       J.W. estimated the object's airspeed at "25
to 35 miles per hour and no sound being heard.
It was a red sphere, and I'd say it was 200 to
300 feet (60 to 90 meters) off the ground."
       J.W. added that there was a story in the
Minden, Ont. Times about "a power blackout
that lasted for 50 seconds in two towns nearby.  The
UFO increased speed and flew away to the north."
(Email Form Report)
(Editor's Note: Minden, Ontario, on Provincial
   Highway 30, was a UFO hotspot back in the 1970s, with
over 500 sightings reported.)

HORSESHOE-SHAPED UFO SEEN
IN ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN

       On Saturday, September 9, 2000, at 9:30 p.m.,
Daniel H., his brother and his girlfriend were strolling down
Main Street in Ann Arbor, Michigan (population 112,000)
when something unusual happened.
       "As we were walking, I saw a family pointing up in the
sky," Daniel reported, "I thought they were looking at the
tall buildings, but I overheard the little girl ask her dad,
'What is that?'  To which the father responded, 'I don't
know.  I've never seen anything like it.'"
       "I looked up and saw an object moving north, high
over the buildings.  At first I thought it was some kind
of odd-shaped balloon, but, as I watched, it turned in the
sky, giving me a better look at it.  The object was lit up.  It
was a red/ochre color, and it was shaped something like
a horseshoe, with the open end facing the back."
       ""At this point I drew my comrades' attention to the
object, and they watched it as well, as all talked about
what it could be.  The night was hazy, and the object
wasn't bright, so it could not be seen unless you were
looking right at it."
       "My brother thought the reddish color was a
reflection of the downtown lights.  Who knows?"
       "Anyway, we watched the object move slowly north
right above the street.  We were still walking around
looking in the sky," discussing what the object was.
       Then the trio "saw a plan following a similar flight
path.  The thing is, the plane looked like a small
passenger jet, but it was tiny compared to what we saw.
We talked about the relative size, and if indeed the objects
were flying at the same height (altitude--J.T.) the object
(UFO) would have been half a football field (45 meters)
in length.  It did appear that the heights were comparable.
It was wild, and like that little girl's daddy said, 'I've never
seen anything like it..'" (Email Form Report)

UFO GROUPS PLAN FOR A
SKYWATCH IN THAILAND

       Two UFO groups are planning an intensive
skywatch at two sites in Thailand when that country's
current monsoon season comes to an end.
       In May of 2000, Thai ufologist Pop Hongsom and
his girlfriend, using binoculars, tracked a series of red
UFOs over Kala Hill in Thailand's Nakhonsawan
province.
       "I saw only unidentified red running lights in the
early hours of the night," Pop Hongsom reported.  "We
saw them between 7 and 8 p.m.  Right now the skies are
cloudy and rainy, but when the (monsoon) season
ends, we will return there."
       Pop Hongsom is a member of Dr. Thepanom
Muangman's UFO group, which is attempting to
make direct contact with the aliens.
       The group will be setting up skywatches at two
sites: Kala Hill and at Pranburi Beach and Songkla
Beach in Prachuabkirikhan province.  (Many thanks to
Pop Hongsom for this news story.)

ATLANTIS ASTRONAUTS GO ON
AN EXTENDED EVA ABOARD
THE SPACE STATION

       "Space shuttle Atlantis blasted into orbit and gave
chase to the international space station on Friday,"
September 8, 2000, "providing a perfect kickoff to the
torrent of launches that lies ahead."
       "It was the first time a space shuttle took off on
its first try since John Glenn's return to orbit in 1998."
       "'It's a great day,' said NASA's new launch
director Mike Leinbach."
       ""'Make (the space) station into a home,'
Launch Control urged the seven astronauts and
cosmonauts."
       "'We intend to do just that,' replied
commander Terrence Wilcutt."
       "The uninhabited space station was soaring over
Hungary 6,600 miles away, when Atlantis vaulted
off the pad."
       Wilcutt and his crew arrived "at a space station
that's nearly twice as big as it was the last time
astronauts visited in May.  The reason is Russia's
Zvezda control module, which soared in July."
       The crew, which consists of five Americans and
two Russians, are unloading both the shuttle and the
Zvezda.  "Among the thousands of pounds of gear for
use by the permanent (space station) crew, due to
arrive in November: oxygen generator, carbon
dioxide removal system, color TV monitor, ham radio,
exercise machine, batteries, wrenches, sockets,
flashlights, and, not to be forgotten, a toilet."
(Editor's Comment:  Imagine the fuss a year or so from
now when the permanent crew hears a knock on the
airlock hatch and an alien voice saying, "Do you mind
if I use the can?")
       "There are also American and Russian meals, a
food warmer, gas masks, notepads, Russian-to-English
and English-to-Russian dictionaries, toothpaste, soap,
sunblock and no-rinse shampoo."
       Following a successful docking with the space
station on Sunday, September 10, 2000, the crew
began transferring equipment from the shuttle to
the station.
       On Monday, September 11, 2000, American astronaut
Edward Lu and Russian astronaut Yuri Malenchenko
"ventured from the space shuttle Atlantis to make the
grueling ascent" up the station.
       Malachenko is a veteran cosmonaut who performed
many spacewalks while living aboard the Russian space
station Mir.
       Lu and Malachenko "were paired for a grueling climb
up the 140-foot space station to erect a 6.6-foot
(2-meter) boom for a compass.  By measuring Earth's
magnetic field, the compass, called a magnetometer,
can determine which way the space station is
pointed."
       The two men "laid cable and installed a navigation
unit on the exterior of the 140-foot station.  Wearing
300-pound spacesuits, they carried the bundled cables
on their backs, along with the boom and the tools.
The work went flawlessly.  The spacewalk lasted six
hours and 14 minutes."
       "'Got a great view back at the nose of the shuttle,'
said Lu, who was on his first spacewalk."
       Lu now joins the ranks of the USA astronauts who
have performed a total of 50 EVAs (extra-vehicular
activities or spacewalks--J.T.) since Major Ed White
performed the first one outside of his Gemini space
capsule back in May 1965.
       "To get to the top of the towering station, Lu and
Malenchenko first took a 40-foot ride on the shuttle
robot arm.  Then they ascended hand-over-hand, clipping
and unclipping their tethers like rock-climbing ropes
as they moved up."
       "It was deliberate travel, slowed by a multitude of
obstructions such as antennas and docking targets."
       "Astronaut Daniel Burbank, watching from the
cockpit, guided Lu and Malenchenko up the stack."
       "'Watch your head,' Burbank ordered.  'Don't move
right.  Bring your legs straight up.    Watch your right
foot.  Put your feet up.'"
       By the end of the mission, the Atlantis crew is
expected to transfer 4,800 pounds of equipment
to the space station."  (See the Duluth, Minn. News-
Tribune for September 9, 2000, "Perfect, punctual
liftoff: Atlantis chases space station," page 4A and
September 11,2000, "Atlantis cruises to station
docking."  Also USA Today for September 12, 2000,
"Spacewalkers make tough climb up International
Space Station," page 4A.)

CHRISTIANS STILL UNDER
SIEGE IN TRINIDAD, TEXAS

       The Gray family remains under siege at their
47-acre ranch near Trinidad, Texas while state and
federal law enforcement agencies ponder their
next move.
       "Inside the barbed wire about 10 adults and seven
children belonging to the extended family of John Joe
Gray and his wife Alicia have dug in for a long siege
on their 47-acre homestead near Trinidad, about 75
miles (120 kilometers) southeast of Dallas.  The
children's ages range from 3 months to 7 years."
       "Gray, 51, is a wanted man, out on (bail) bond
for allegedly assaulting two state troopers" after being
stopped on the highway near Paradise, Texas back
in December 1999.
       Gray's daughter, Lisa Tarkington, 30, "has
refused to surrender her sons, Joe, 4, and Samuel, 2,
after losing custody of them in a divorce over a year
and a half ago."
       "Another daughter, Rachael Gray Dempsey, 24,
is wanted for failing to appear in court for several
traffic violations, including driving without a license
and using fictitious license tags (plates--J.T.)"
       "The fictitious tags used by Rachael Dempsey
had come from the Embassy of Heaven," a sect
of 400 fundamentalist Christians with its mother
church in Oregon.
       Mrs. Dempsey, however, has denied being a
member of the Embassy of Heaven and has described
her family as "Bible-believing Christians who have
accepted Jesus Christ as our personal savior."
(Editor's Comment:  And for this, plus sundry traffic
misdemeanors, the Assahollahs of Jerusalem are
howling for her death.)
       "Outside the barbed wire--and keeping a very
respectful distance from it--Henderson County law
enforcement officials and Texas Rangers mull over
how to enforce the law without a bloody gun battle."
       "'We are told there are children on the property,
and the last thing we want is another Waco,' says
Ronny Brownlow, chief deputy sheriff of Henderson
County.  'Time is on our side.'"
       But not everybody shares his optimism.
       "In Anderson County, where Gray scuffled with
troopers, District Attorney Doug Lowe says officials
are 'walking on eggshells.  Our goal is to get him back
before the courts and to give him a fair trial.  We would
like to have a resolution, but ultimately the federal
people will probably have to deal with it.'"
       A news broadcast on WWCR short-wave radio on
Wednesday, September 6, 2000, quoted a spokesman
for the FBI as saying the Bureau "is monitoring the
situation" in Trinidad.  (See the National Examiner
for September 19, 2000, "Another 'Waco' brewing in
Texas," page 19.)

UNUSUAL CATASTROPHIC
RAINS DRENCH JAPAN

       "Flooding and landslides triggered by the heaviest
rains in at least a century killed seven people in Japan."
       "In Nagoya, authorities ordered 400,000 people to
evacuate their homes.  Automakers Toyota and Mitsubishi
stopped production because of the relentless downpour."
       "In central Japan, power outages interrupted bullet
train (Shinkansen in Japanese--J.T.) services.  About
50,000 passengers were forced to sleep at railway
stations or in trains that ground to a halt."
       "Twenty-three inches of rain (57 centimeters) was
recorded in Tokai, near Nagoya," on Tuesday,
September 12, 2000.  "Rainfall was expected to
surpass 32 inches (75 centimeters) in some areas."
       "The rainfall was the highest on record for a
24-hour period since the local observatory began
keeping records in 1891 and was nearly a third
(33 percent) of the usual annual rainfall."  (See
USA Today for September 13, 2000, "Heavy rains
kill seven, bring Japan to a halt," page 20A.)


from the UFO Files...

1938: PERRY'S ALIEN

       Sightings of aliens, humanoids and other UFO
occupants were pretty scarce in the pre-Roswell era.
But they did happen on occasion.  As you'll see in this
particular case from the state of Massachusetts
       Somerville is a small, highly-populated, heavily-
urbanized city on the north bank of the Charles, just
across the river from Boston.  And the first week of
September found the Boston area baking in an
unprecedented late-summer heat wave.
(Editor's Note: A heat wave eventually broken by
the catastrophic hurricane that struck the New
England states on September 21, 1938.)
       "In many respects, the summer of 1938 was
memorable.  The twin-rotor German Focke-Angelis
FW-61, 'the first modern helicopter,' was
demonstrated in Berlin."
       But when Malcolm B. Perry jumped off the
Metropolitan Transit Authority (now the Massachusetts
Bay Transportation Authority or MBTA--J.T.) bus on
Somerville Avenue and glanced at the Late Edition
of the Record-American, he was probably more
interested in the Red Sox than the new German
"helio-copter."
       It was about midnight, and 22-year-old Malcolm Perry
was just returning from a date across the river in
Boston.  "The air had a clean fresh smell to it after
a summer shower.  A few scattered fleecy clouds moved
with a slight westerly breeze, while a bright moon, midway
to zenith, illuminated the quiet streets."
       As he walked along, Perry had a sudden strange
shiver, as if he were being watched by unseen eyes.
Quickly he glanced over his shoulder.  The damp street,
with its close-set brownstone buildings and dim yellow
streetlights, was deserted.  He listened for footsteps.
There were none.
       So he kept on walking, and then he sensed it
again, that eerie feeling of being watched.
       "Perry glanced skyward and was startled to see a
strange flying object just a few yards above him."
       "'When first seen, it was in back of me and near the
moon,' he said.  'Both I and the object were traveling
from east to west. (from the Bunker Hill Monument
towards Cambridge--J.T).I thought it was a Navy blimp
at first glance and only gave it a casual look and
continued walking.'"
       "'I then glanced up again to my left and it was up
to me and moving steadily westward.  At this point, I
looked for the usual gondola (or) propellers...beneath the
blimp, and to my amazement, there were none.'"
       "The silvery object flew silently against the wind with
'steady, slow even motion.'  Its outline was sharp, and
the body--'comparable to a twelve-inch ruler held at
arm's length'--reflected the moon's glow.  The craft
appeared to be slimmer than a conventional blimp.
Both ends tapered to sharp points, and there were four
rectangular portholes on one side, through which Perry
could see interior lights of 'an orange hue.'"
       "'At this point,' Perry said, 'I could see the (dark)
silhouette of a person looking down at me..."
       And what a person!  Tall and gaunt, almost skeletal,
with a long head, stooped shoulders and spindly dangling
arms.  The entity seemed to be leaning on the windowsill,
peering down at him.  The orange background glow
prevented Perry from making out any of the entity's
facial features.
       "'I had a terribly strong urge to wave with all my might,
but restrained myself and instead turned and looked up
and down the street to see if anyone else was seeing
what I was watching.  No one in sight.'"
       "'.I looked back and could see other people in other
portholes apparently changing places (and) looking down.
At this point, it disappeared behind some low scudding
clouds, and I couldn't see it anymore.'"
       "'I looked in the newspaper the next morning for a
report of an unusual object, but saw nothing, so I
decided to keep it to myself...'"  (See the book
Mysteries of the Skies: UFOs in Perspective by
Gordon I.R. Lore Jr. and Harold H. Denault Jr.,
Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1968,
pages 135 to 137.)

       Well, 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 stories 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.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:00:48 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:43:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Morris


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 22:46:43 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:18:39 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >>SKEPTIC FACTOID 2: UFO & LIGHTHOUSE EXACTLY SAME DIRECTION

 >>An important skeptic factoid that has been drummed in again and

<snip>

 >I'm reposting my crude text map with some revisions showing the
 >more southerly landing site where the UFO/lighthouse/whatever
 >was now apparently viewed by Col. Halt and his merry men. Also,
 >looking more closely at Neil Morris' scanned map,

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

 >the distance between the lighthouse and the landing site is
 >closer to 5 miles rather than 3 miles.

 >                         N
 >                      W--|--E
 >                         S
 >         |<---------------------------- ~7 miles  ----------->|

 >                  Rendlesham Forest
 >                    ...........              Orford            |  NORTH
 >              .      .                 oo            |   SEA
 >____________    .              .               oo            |
 >Woodbridge__|   .        x Old assumed landing site        x  | Orfordness
 >  Base  |X East gate           .                         / lighthouse
 >--------           .       "True" landing site            /
 >                    .    X    .                       /
 >                     .......                     /          NORTH SEA
 >                                            /
 >                                                                       |
 >                                                |
 >                                                \/
 >                                                      Shipwash
 >                                             lightship
 >                                            (~20 miles)


David, All.

I have the large scale Ordnance Survey Maps of the area at 2.5
miles to the inch and can scan this and will place it for a
short time on my website. When it's in place I'll forward the
URL to the list. The scale is such that the base layout, runway,
forest paths etc are shown. Unfortunatly the Orford Ness light
is not on the same map sheet, the scale is just too large.

An observation I'd like to make. Should we not be examining the
visibility of the coastal lights at Orford Ness a little nearer
home?.

Were not the first reports of "lights in the forest" from base
security _inside_ the base parimiter?. If the "coastal lights"
of the Ness are _not_ visible from the area down by the East end
of the runway then it must have been something else that was
spotted. I have very great doubts any lights from the Ness could
be visible at the east end of the base as can be seen on the
map, that part of the base/runway is surrounded on 3 sides N, E
and S by what I believe was then fairly mature forest of
considerable depth. If you now take the further evidence from on
the ground on the _coastal_ side of this forestry that the Ness
light has _very_ limited visibility anyway, and further the main
beam is sheilded to landward together with the navigation lights
mounted on the seaward side of the tower, it would seem to make
the mis-observation of the Ness lights even more unlikly from
_within_ the base parimiter fence.


Neil.

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


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

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

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:32:53 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:45:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Regarding:

 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:07:09 EDT
 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

Brad,


I have already explained what needs to be. It's really very
simple; another subscriber's contributions to a private mailing
list, plus confidential correspondence clearly headed "THIS IS
LIST ONLY" - as UFORL subscribers can confirm - were publicly
revealed. As a result, it was necessary to ensure both list's
subscribers appreciated the situation and take whatever action
was required to avoid this being repeated.

Outwith UFORL I can't comment on issues re individual
subscribers - although UFORL members would be made aware of
related matters that UpDates subscribers weren't.

Your regret for any misunderstandings is accepted, so far as I'm
concerned. Any other aspects re your private mail, I wouldn't
reply to in public, especially in relation to mail not long
received.

Maybe something will be done about debunking the myths you are
promoting. However, it's been explained already on UFORL and
you've completely ignored this! Personally, I wouldn't sweat it
- I think those who want only the true facts, already know what
they are or can easily locate them nowadays.

My last posting to UFO UpDates was noted to be "slightly edited
here as necessary". Perhaps I should add that, as you know,
UFORL subscribers were made aware of the _full_ situation,
including proposed action to be taken. They were asked if, for
whatever reason, anyone wanted to leave the list would they
please do so now, then we could see where UFORL was to go from
there.

So far as I can see, the number of subscribers that have since
resigned, is NONE.

Those are the only nodding 'eds of consequence.

The sagacious 'Woodentops' of ufology might well bobble in
disapproval from their perceived lofty heights.

Although I do sometimes wonder how JC can even stand up with a
head so massively out of proportion to the rest of him.

And 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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:17:50 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:10:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 22:46:43 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:18:39 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >Thus I seriously doubt if the beam could be sweeping across the
 >tops of the trees and be seen at East Gate, even if terrain
 >permitted it.

 >However, the only way we are going to know for sure whether the
 >beam was at all visible at East Gate would be for someone
 >on-site to find out if it was possible.

Hi,

As I have said several times before in my writing on the case
and indeed as I have posted in this debate, a glow from the
lighthouse beam _was_ visible from the gate area sweeping over
the trees.

The only alternative is that I saw the UFO return on several
different nights. I don't think I did!

I am sure this pulsing sweep of light that I saw over the forest
more than once in the early l980s was from Orford Ness.

This isn't directly relevant to the lighthouse / UFO debate -
which remains at issue - except that I always considered it an
argument against the lighthouse. Because anyone spending time at
the East Gate area would surely have seen this glow , wondered
what it was and sought to find out at some point in the days/
weeks before or after the encounter what was causing it.

I suspect the beam was reflecting off low cloud (very common in
winter in the UK of course). So weather conditions are probably
relevant to whether it is seen or not, but I saw it more than
once - so it wasn't a fluke effect.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:19:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:13:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >model.

 >It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >The device can be seen at the following:

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html
 >http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html

 >And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
 >of UFO pages.

 >This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
 >certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.

 >--
 >Nobody in particular


This is _too_ good...lol! Talk about getting your fingers
slammed in the door a couple of times...ouch!

Regards,

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
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded
it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:33:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:16:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles


 >From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:00:48 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 22:46:43 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 22:52:25 EDT
 >>>Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 08:18:39 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >I have very great doubts any lights from the Ness could
 >be visible at the east end of the base as can be seen on the
 >map, that part of the base/runway is surrounded on 3 sides N, E
 >and S by what I believe was then fairly mature forest of
 >considerable depth.

 >Neil.

Hi,

I have answered this question several times - offering a
description to this list in recent weeks of what you could and
could not see from various locations relevant to this case
during the early l980s.

I'll not repeat that again here, but the gist was that from the
access road to the East Gate (start point of the first sighting)
you _could_ see the lighthouse beam over the trees. You could
not see any other lights at all due to the proximity and density
of trees. You only started to see lights (eg from Shipwash) as
you entered the forest and walked down the logging track. And
you only saw the Orford Ness beacon itself and lights on
buildings on the ness from the vicinity of the alleged landing
site.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                       Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:51:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:18:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?


Dear Chris:

 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)


 >In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >model.

 >It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >The device can be seen at the following:

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html

 >And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
 >of UFO pages.

 >This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
 >certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.


I'm not sure what angle your coming from, but... I shall address
this from as many angles as I can.

1) More than one person has pointed out to me either star
systems that Mr. Adamski gave details about BEFORE they were
ever on any charts, and or predictions he made about the future
that came true

2) Whether number one actually occurred or not is sort of
irrelevant at this point as we are discussing something that is
past tense and even if it was a hoax doesn't really reflect an
ANYTHING beyond itself in the world of ufology. In other words,
one hoax doesn't disprove anything beyond itself. C?

3) I talk with Jimmie Holman on many occasions on the Undernet
servers in the #UFO channel. He's a very nice gentleman with a
cute little doggie named Foxxie. He had a falling out with
Derrel Sims, who he was the webmaster for. I never really got a
good understanding of why this happened. But the same thing
occurred between Derrel and Roger Lier, as many of you know.
None of these quarrels, however, properly reflect on whether the
evidence removed from anyone's body is genuine, or alien, or
anything else for that matter.

4) As you appear to be debunking things these days I will have
to assume that this is your twist on things. Well let me throw
another twist at you. Did Jimmie tell you that he was an
abductee and had numerous implants placed into his body? Maybe
not. I guess I shouldn't speak of what is spoken in private in
public. But, then again, what is openly spoken in open channel
on IRC IS public already.

5) It's interesting to see that people with implants can have
falling out with those who investigate such things. It's
interesting that people who remove such implants can have the
same conflict with the one who started them on their journey
into the public lime light of UFOlogy. So much conflict!!?? I
wonder why it floats around so much amongst people all trying to
find out the truth about this stuff? Influences, now that's
another story altogether. I shouldn't go there right now. We
would be here all day.

6) Maybe the answer to number 5 is that everyone is trying to
debunk everyone else because the paradigm that is unfolding
doesn't fit into the box that their CURRENT mind set is in.

7) While you are at it ask Mr. Holman about the person who
committed suicide after his whole family had a close encounter
together. Or you can talk to me about the gentleman who
suddenly went crazy after getting followed down the highway by
THEM. The mind set that doesn't allow for that which is really
bizarre is the one that breaks in the wind when actual contact
occurs, instead of bending like the willow. I went through that
myself with my own 1st close encounter. It's not something you
want to have happen to ya.

8) So, if he was a hoax that's fine. If not, then that's ok
also. It doesn't really matter, as I said before. So much
evidence, from all the physical trace cases, the pilot
sightings, radar, implants, etc., etc., etc. that hoaxes are
just part of the territory. Not everything can be genuine. And
MOST of this I don't believe is a hoax either. But, then again,
maybe you're the correct one. Yeah, it's really all a hoax. Keep
believing it. C where it gets ya when ya get your own encounter.
Ha ha ha ha ha. Stop that. Bad host. Bad host.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:47:16 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:20:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Clark


 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:32:53 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:07:09 EDT
 >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>


James,

 >Although I do sometimes wonder how JC can even stand up with a
 >head so massively out of proportion to the rest of him.

 >And us.

To the best of my knowledge -- though I'm hardly an expert on
this -- Jesus Christ's head was (or, who knows, is) in normal
proportion to the rest of his person.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

              Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - An Audience Of

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:59:26 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:21:39 -0400
Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - An Audience Of


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness Lighthouse)
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:38:24 -0500

 >The critic's words are mere "incoherent ramble." He is a
 >"fanatical 'UFO believer'." He has a "belief system" (as
 >opposed, I gather, to mere "beliefs"; "belief system" always
 >sounds so much more profound). Ufology is mere "religion"
 >(synonymous with "delusion" in this sort of polemical sleight of
 >hand). And the ufologist, of course, has "no tolerance for any
 >skeptical, or even remotely critical[,] appraisal"

Jerry, perhaps you could tell us which sceptics are doing a good
job? You have in the past claimed that there is a difference
between genuine sceptics and mere pelicanists. I'd like some
examples.

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:06:31 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:22:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Rimmer


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:56:31 +0100

 >I always have time for people who are genuinely skeptical and
 >really do their research. I want to hear their side of the
 >story. But I don't give much credit to people who take one
 >fraction of a case and spend an eternity trying to prove it -
 >forgetting about the whole case. Rather like those people who
 >cut and paste sections to suit their argument but leave out
 >anything that doesn't fit (like you mentioned earlier in your
 >post)

 >Georgina Bruni

Could you perhaps name some of the 'genuine' sceptics, as
opposed to the closed-minded pelicanists?

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Alevy

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:59:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:28:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Alevy


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >model.

 >It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >The device can be seen at the following:

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html
 >http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html

 >And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
 >of UFO pages.

 >This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
 >certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.


Hello Chris,

I would say that your standard for conclusive proof is somewhat
lacking. That you would repeat information you heard over an
IRC channel without even examining the source of the information
or making that source available to others for their own
independent confirmation certainly constitutes misinformation if
not possibly disinformation.

Do you just take everything said on an IRC channel at face
value?

The origin of the Adamski photos has been know for a number of
years, at least to me ;-) and most certainly they do not show

"a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure materials'
properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object that is
clearly identical to Adamski's saucer."

What they do show is the model of a spacecraft that Thomas
Townsend Brown had developed. This can be seen in information
provided below which readers can examine themselves at the
website commissioned by the Townsend Brown family.

Some of the real issues after one gets past the smokescreen you
have created concern the connections between Thomas Townsend
Brown, Naval Research whom he worked for at one time, Naval and
Air Force Intelligence and Adamski.

Both men, Thomas Townsend Brown and George Adamski must have ;-)
known of the source of the photos. However, I have not to date
seen in the literature or spoken with anyone who has shed light
on this connection.

Edward Ruppelt comments in the second edition of his book
regarding Air Force Intelligence's examination of Adamski's
photos without sheding light on the source of Adamski's pictures
although separately Ruppelt does mention Adamski claimed a
connection between himself and US Navy researchers.

These issues are left as exercises for the intelligence minded
readers of the list.

Here is the address of the web site commissioned by the Townsend
Brown family to explore on your own regarding Thomas Townsend
Brown's life's work.

http://www.soteria.com/brown/

The relevant caption headings are under the heading: Look at
the hyperlinks in the descriptions to see Brown's
research paper and proposal

http://www.soteria.com/brown/docs/space.htm

This page has the descriptions for the object:

http://www.soteria.com/brown/pictures/index.htm

Photos of his apparatus and the space vehicle model can be
found in the hyperlinks.

Early Experiments and Models

A model of the space vehicle described in the research proposal.

Another view of the model of the space vehicle described in the
research proposal.

Another view of the model of the space vehicle described in the
research proposal.

The experimental setup for testing a model of the space vehicle
described in the research proposal.

Larger view of the experimental setup for testing a model of the
space vehicle described in the research proposal.


Next time take a deep breath before you say "which (to me)
conclusively prove."

Gary Alevy








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Conrad

From: Cheyne Conrad <chyren23@q-net.net.au>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:16:00 +0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:30:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Conrad


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >model.

 >It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >The device can be seen at the following:

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html
 >http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html

 >And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
 >of UFO pages.

 >This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
 >certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.


Interesting, Chris.

It seems almost certain that the Adamski photos were hoaxed, and
the majority of his story complete bunk, if not all of it, but
consider this extract from a book by John Grant in which is
recounted,

"..an interesting story which was told to me by the President of
one of the British flying-saucer associations. Some years ago,
he and its secretary were having a quick sandwich in a London
cafe, when their eyes were drawn to the top of the drinks
cooler. It was astonishingly like an Adamskian UFO. And Adamski,
of course, had been a soft-drinks seller! With pleasing
objectivity, the two ufologists rushed round to the newspapers,
and the exposure was published widely.

All seemed well until our friends received a 'phone call from
the north of England. The caller explained that he had read
Adamski's book, thought it was a load of rubbish, but that the
design of the UFO would be absolutely excellent for the top of a
soft-drinks cooler. Yes, he'd patented it - and you could find
examples of his device in use all over the country!"

-- p.151, 'A Directory of Discarded Ideas', John Grant, 1981

I don't know how accurate this story is, but I offer it for
consideration anyway with the  idea that cautionary research is
needed by *both* sides of the critical fence. Other than that,
it is an important discovery by Holman. Let's see how the dating
holds up.

C D Conrad










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks RB47Expert@aol.com
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:25:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:35:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks


[Non-subscriber Post]

 >From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:32:53 +0100
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'


 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:07:09 EDT >
 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' >
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Brad,

 >I have already explained what needs to be. It's really very
 >simple; another subscriber's contributions to a private mailing
 >list, plus confidential correspondence clearly headed "THIS IS
 >LIST ONLY" - as UFORL subscribers can confirm - were publicly
 >revealed. As a result, it was necessary to ensure both list's
 >[sic] subscribers appreciated the situation and take whatever
 >action was required to avoid this being repeated.


James,

I have not seen any messages "clearly headed 'THIS IS LIST
ONLY'" on the UFO Research List since probably 1999. So I don't
see how that is relevant to my point that you could easily put a
label or reminder like that in the headers of _every_ posting
but have never done so (unless the real reason for not doing so
is so you yourself can continue to cross-post at will on UFORL
and UFO UpDates). Quite possibly one was captioned this way
recently but I never received it due to E-mail difficulties as
you know. Since you have shut down your list there is nothing
to resign from, so it's not surprising that no one has.

 >Maybe something will be done about debunking the myths >you are
 >promoting. However, it's been explained already on UFORL and
 >you've completely ignored this!

I am baffled by this remark, as well as your overboard comment
yesterday about my purportedly "unbelievably ridiculous
distortion of the facts." I am waiting to hear what these
"myths" and "ridiculous distortions" of the facts are, since
none have been "explained already on UFORL" and I have not
"completely ignored" anything. Show me what I have supposedly
ignored.

As I have already indicated here on UFO UpDates, I posted on
UFORL on Sept 4/5 ff. My shocked reactions to the data showing
that the 2-mile lighthouse chase was a physical impossibility
due to a north-south ridge line along Butley River that
reportedly "completely blocks" the view of Orfordness lighthouse
from 1.9 miles of the 2.2 mile path taken by the USAF groups in
Rendlesham. In case anyone wonders, this has nothing to do with
trees -- trees only make it worse by blocking the skyline even
more than the terrain. It apparently does not matter much which
path one takes because the ridge runs so long in the north-south
direction.

There was more than a week of in-depth discussion in which any
misunderstanding on my part of these facts could have been
cleared up, but wasn't. Instead the 1.9-mile invisibility of
Orfordness lighthouse was reconfirmed again and again.
Likewise, I posted refutations of other factoids and nothing was
posted back that "explained" away my points.

I mean, do you seriously contend that Col Halt's compass
headings to the UFO were _not_ 20-30 degrees away from the
Orfordness lighthouse???? If Halt and his merry men, and the
group two nights earlier, really did follow a straight line to
the lighthouse, shouldn't the recently reconstructed path be a
lot closer than about 37 degrees away???? A UFO moves around a
lot, a lighthouse cannot.

As Ian Ridpath claims in his revised article currently on your
website (http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ridpath.txt), "Had a real UFO
been present as well as the lighthouse, the airmen should have
reported seeing two brilliant flashing lights among the trees,
not one. But they never mentioned the lighthouse, only a
pulsating UFO." Of course we know that isn't true, that _all_
the airmen "mentioned the lighthouse" in the First Night
sightings, at least one (Cabansag) clearly mentioned seeing
_both_ the lighthouse and the UFO lights simultaneously.

Is it a problem with mathematics? Maybe you think I am in error
in subtracting the approximately 85-degree heading to Orfordness
lighthouse from the 105-115-degree headings recorded by Halt (as
corrected for magnetic declination). Maybe 115 minus 85 doesn't
equal 30 degrees. It seems to me it does equal that. Maybe we're
in different universes and the rules of arithmetic don't apply
the same here in the U.S. versus over there in UK-world.

Is it a problem with geography? Maybe you can challenge the
approximate 85-degree true azimuth to the Orfordness lighthouse.
Maybe you can just move the geography around to wherever you
like and that will solve everything! (Never let it be said that
skeptics won't move mountains to explain a case! That could be
the new motto for UFO debunking, since it moves beyond the realm
of scientific skepticism which is a valid endeavor and into the
realm of propaganda and Orwellian rewriting of history, science
and math. "How many fingers am I holding up, George?" "Four."
More electric shocks applied. "How many fingers?" "Five." "Now
you're making progress.")

I could be off a few degrees since the maps presently available
online are rather poor, and the lighthouse symbol itself covers
2 degs of azimuth on one cheesy online map. The direction from
the landing site will not be different from about 85 degs by
more than a fraction of a degree, so that is negligible.

Maybe it's a problem with geophysics. Maybe the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration/ National Geophysical Data
Center's Geomagnetic Synthesis program just doesn't synthesize
magnetic declination (correction) values correctly! Maybe it
reads the International Geomagnetic Reference Field model wrong.
Maybe the correction factor is a lot higher than minus 5.2
degrees for the date and lat-long-elev coordinates in question
than NOAA-NGDC-IGRF indicates or even Ian Ridpath's erroneous 10
degrees (nearly 100% error).

Maybe you can overturn all of geophysics and get Col Halt's
110-120 magnetic compass readings "corrected" to true north by
much much more, by say 35 degrees! Then you you will be dead on
to the Orfordness lighthouse.

The best way to settle this is for investigators in Britain to
simply film the visibility/non-visibility of Orfordness
lighthouse along the 2.2 mile path, continuously without
interruption. That is the scientific approach. Maybe this
1.9-mile invisibility is some kind of mistake. I'm certainly
willing to grant that possibility. Let's check it out. It's a
question of fact, scientific fact, and does not call for
vituperation and "fanatical UFO believer"-type name-calling.

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 14

             Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -

From: Tom Carey <TCarey1947@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:33:06 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:47:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at Roswell Debunked -


 >From: Ignatius Graffeo <ufoseek@ufoseek.org>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 14:59:06 -0400
 >Subject: Irish Times: Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked


 >from The Irish Times
 >http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/science/2000/0911/sci1.htm

 >Monday, September 11, 2000 BST

 > Myth of UFO at  Roswell Debunked

 >By Dr William Reville

 >Most people are familiar with stories of aliens visiting Earth
 >in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). For some reason the
 >belief that aliens are here is much stronger in America than in
 >Europe, and thousands of Americans claim to have been abducted
 >by aliens, ushered aboard spacecraft and subjected to physical
 >examination.

 >Many magazines devoted to aliens/UFOs regularly report UFO
 >sightings and human contact with aliens. Nevertheless, there is,
 >to my knowledge, no hard evidence that aliens are visiting
 >Earth. Probably the most celebrated event in the alien genre is
 >the Roswell Incident. The story of what happened at Roswell is
 >told by Robert Park in the May/June 2000 edition of The
 >Sciences. Park effectively, to my mind, explains away the whole
 >incident as an artificial by-product of paranoid US military
 >secrecy.

<snip>

My edited rebuttal to Prof. Park is published in the current
edition (Sep./Oct., 2000) of THE SCIENCES magazine which
published Park's original "Voodoo Science" concerning Roswell.
In his reply to me, Park addressed none of the factual points
that I raised concerning his "analysis" and especially his grasp
of the subject matter, dismissing them as a "giant conspiracy
theory - the last resort of 'voodoo science'". Pretty pathetic
performance if you ask me.

Anyone wishing the unedited version of my rebuttal to Prof. Park
can request it by E-Mailing me at TCarey1947@aol.com.

Tom Carey








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                  Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:19:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:29:08 -0400
Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Clark


 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:59:26 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness Lighthouse)
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:38:24 -0500

Hi, John,

 >Jerry, perhaps you could tell us which sceptics are doing a good
 >job? You have in the past claimed that there is a difference
 >between genuine sceptics and mere pelicanists. I'd like some
 >examples.

First, though, you might answer a question I've asked at least
twice and that you've ducked just as often:

What is the difference between the approach Magonia and you
advocate and that of the traditional skeptic/debunker?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

               Budd Hopkins' Intruders Foundation: UFO Seminar

From: Intruders Foundation Conference <IFConfer@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 21:55:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:31:30 -0400
Subject: Budd Hopkins' Intruders Foundation: UFO Seminar


Intruders Foundation Seminar Series - New York City

Saturday, October 14, 2000
The Allagash Abduction Case
Speaker:  Charles Foltz

One of the most important cases in the history of the UFO
abduction phenomenon occurred in August of 1976.  Four men, all
long-term friends, were on a camping trip near the Allagash
River in Maine when they were simultaneously abducted from a
canoe.  Consciously, they only remembered the UFO and its light
shining down on them.  That, as well as a missing time period
and subsequent dreams and flashbacks eventually led them to
explore their experience with researcher Raymond Fowler.

Charles Foltz is an artist, photographer, and medical
illustrator.  He has appeared, with others of the "Allagash
Four" on Unsolved Mysteries, the Joan Rivers Show and Sightings,
as well as on specials on A&E, TBS, and Japanese and Canadian
TV.

At our seminar Charles will show slides of the drawings and
paintings of his abduction that he and his fellow
artist-abductees made after their experience and later hypnotic
sessions.  He will answer questions from the seminar attendees
about this important abduction case -- the only such incident in
which the four witnesses have all come forward and presented
their mutually corroborative evidence.


REGISTRATION & INFORMATION

The seminar will be held at the meeting rooms of A.R.E., on the
tenth floor of 150 W. 28th Street, New York.  The price for the
seminar is $30 for non-members and $20 for members of IF,
seniors and students.  Reservations must be made by telephone,
at 212-645-5278, and will be filled on a first come, first
served basis. Payment must be made in advance to secure the
reservation.  Make checks payable to the Intruders Foundation,
P. O. Box 30233, New York, NY 10011.  Only 50 reservations will
be accepted for each seminar.

On-street parking is generally available in the neighborhood.
The seminars will begin at 7:30 p.m. and end at 10:00 p.m. Doors
open at 7:00 p.m. There will be a one half-hour intermission,
during which light complimentary refreshments will be served.  A
book table will offer books, videotapes and other material for
sale to those interested. For additional information, call IF at
212-645-5278.

Hope to see you there!

Intruders Foundation Website:  www.intrudersfoundation.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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:29:17 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:33:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Young


 >From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:51:41 -0700

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >>Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >1) More than one person has pointed out to me either star
 >systems that Mr. Adamski gave details about BEFORE they were
 >ever on any charts, and or predictions he made about the future
 >that came true

Mr. Beaver:

Could you provide any details about these two claims. Adamski
co-wrote several books, maybe his claims are there were we could
check. If the exact locations of the unkown star systems were
given, perhaps we can check the newer catalogs. Save with his
predictions. Can we have any details? Dates? Specifics?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Hale

From: Scott Hale <sh5259a@american.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:42:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:36:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Hale


 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:59:11 -0400
 >From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>,
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

 >Hello Chris,

 >I would say that your standard for conclusive proof is somewhat
 >lacking. That you would repeat information you heard over an
 >IRC channel without even examining the source of the information
 >or making that source available to others for their own
 >independent confirmation certainly constitutes misinformation if
 >not possibly disinformation.

Come on... let's be a bit more sensible here. Misinformation or
disinformation for what purpose?

It doesn't take a whole lot of work for somene to shoot down the
already flimsy claims of George Adamski. Note when he said
"which (to me) conclusively prove..." he was suggesting that
others may not find what he considers fairly solid suitable
proof.

Now your logic is "because it's on IRC, it must be bogus". Well,
having helped run the channel Chris is referring to I can tell
you that some of the contributing members are excellent
researchers and can back up their data. They aren't anonymous
UFO buffs or cyberwackos, sorry to disappoint you.

Just thought I'd drop my two cents down... it's been a while.


Scott Hale







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                         Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:48:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:38:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ghostwolf Info?
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:33:19 -0700

 >Greetings to all -

 >I'm currently on the hunt for information pertaining to Robert
 >Ghostwolf (aka Robert Ghostwolf, Robert Wolfe, Bobby Wolfe,
 >Robert Parry, Robert Franzone, et al). If you have any info I'd
 >appreciate hearing from you. All correspondence will be held in
 >confidence, thanks!

As I recollect the leading source of information and leaks about
Ghostwolf is Richard Boylan.

Interesting all the other AKAs, but kind of goes with what
another person mentioned awhile ago that his name should be
Robert Hoaxwolf.  :)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Chippendale

From: Anthony Chippendale <anthonyc@ufon.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:03:53 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:41:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Chippendale


Hi Yoda,

 >From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:51:41 -0700


 >1) More than one person has pointed out to me either star
 >systems that Mr. Adamski gave details about BEFORE they were
 >ever on any charts, and or predictions he made about the future
 >that came true

Lots of people make correct predictions about the future. It
doesn't mean that they've been visited by aliens.

 >2) Whether number one actually occurred or not is sort of
 >irrelevant at this point as we are discussing something that is
 >past tense and even if it was a hoax doesn't really reflect an
 >ANYTHING beyond itself in the world of ufology. In other words,
 >one hoax doesn't disprove anything beyond itself. C?

 >3) I talk with Jimmie Holman on many occasions on the Undernet
 >servers in the #UFO channel. He's a very nice gentleman with a
 >cute little doggie named Foxxie. He had a falling out with
 >Derrel Sims, who he was the webmaster for. I never really got a
 >good understanding of why this happened. But the same thing
 >occurred between Derrel and Roger Lier, as many of you know.
 >None of these quarrels, however, properly reflect on whether the
 >evidence removed from anyone's body is genuine, or alien, or
 >anything else for that matter.

I don't think this has anything to do with Adamski. Jimmie's
background in ufology is irrelevant to the fact that he
discovered the connection between Adamski and Brown.

 >4) As you appear to be debunking things these days I will have
 >to assume that this is your twist on things. Well let me throw
 >another twist at you. Did Jimmie tell you that he was an
 >abductee and had numerous implants placed into his body? Maybe
 >not. I guess I shouldn't speak of what is spoken in private in
 >public. But, then again, what is openly spoken in open channel
 >on IRC IS public already.

Again this has nothing to do with the Adamski photographs. This
is personal information about Jimmie's private life that has no
business been on an Internet mailing list.

 >5) It's interesting to see that people with implants can have
 >falling out with those who investigate such things. It's
 >interesting that people who remove such implants can have the
 >same conflict with the one who started them on their journey
 >into the public lime light of UFOlogy. So much conflict!!?? I
 >wonder why it floats around so much amongst people all trying to
 >find out the truth about this stuff? Influences, now that's
 >another story altogether. I shouldn't go there right now. We
 >would be here all day.

 >7) While you are at it ask Mr. Holman about the person who
 >committed suicide after his whole family had a close encounter
 >together. Or you can talk to me about the gentleman who
 >suddenly went crazy after getting followed down the highway by
 >THEM. The mind set that doesn't allow for that which is really
 >bizarre is the one that breaks in the wind when actual contact
 >occurs, instead of bending like the willow. I went through that
 >myself with my own 1st close encounter. It's not something you
 >want to have happen to ya.

Again this is private information and has nothing whatsoever to
do with the Adamski photographs.

Now for my comments. I was in the chat room yesterday afternoon
(or morning, depending on your time zone) when Jimmie
"announced" his findings. I was immediately intrigued by the
photos that he had found during his research. And I fully
support his conclusions. Brown's photos, as shown on our
website, are identical to Adamski's photos of the "alien space
craft".

And there is a lot more evidence that says that the 2 sets of
photos are one and the same. Just take a look at Jimmie's
findings at:

http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html

---
Anthony Chippendale,
#UFO Channel Operator,
The UFO Network (UK) - http://ufon.org/ufonet/.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                 Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:53:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:44:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles


Hi,

I just wanted to pass comment on the way this debate has been
heading.

Firstly, I think we should all recognise that we are each - in
our own way - seeking to learn the truth about this case. That
is very difficult indeed. IMO this is the most complex,
confusing UFO case I have ever been associated with and possibly
the most complex in history. It is no surprise that 20 years on
we are still unclear about what happened. We may never be clear.

As such all we can reasonably do is discuss and debate the
evidence and seek to examine all the options for what went on
here. We should do that in a spirit of endeavour, friendship and
community - something that surely the UFO field can muster.
Indeed when it does so it proves again and again its superiority
over the sadly all too often irrelevant and cold contributions
from mainstream science and the bluff and bluster from the
debunkers (as opposed to serious sceptics - a very different
matter I would add).

I suspect many were at least partly swept away (as was I) by the
way this case has 'taken off' and is being feverishly debated on
at least four lists in parallel. I don't think it is a surprise
- therefore - that some cross publishing occurred. Indeed it is
probably good that it has. If information is confidential, of
course, it should be treated as such. But I doubt anybody here
was deliberately trying to breach confidences rather than
further the debate and try to defend a personal perspective. I
have to say that I might have made a similar error since it
would have been very easy to lose track of who was saying what
on which list about what point and whether it should, or should
not, be discussed anywhere else.

I fear this case suffered badly from the decision to withhold
data (taken by whoever for whatever reason it was taken - no
doubt with what was considered necessary motives). The 'hiding
away' of key data like the original witness statements for many
years stalled this case. And even if it was justified (only
those who did it can explain) it symbolises what we cannot allow
to happen again if we are to hope to reach responsible answers.

So, for me, Ufology deserves to see and to discuss this case in
its most public forum (ie here) and not in secret. There are - I
and I quite understand James' position here - legitimate reasons
why sometimes confidentiality is needed and preliminary
discussion elsewhere makes sense. But as a general principle
Ufology IMO should not emulate governments inept obsession with
secrecy - even if I am sure that is not the intention. We owe it
to ourselves to talk this out like civilised adults.

So I would hope we can accept that, live with each others
different views, and move on with this discussion.

 From where I sit this case is not - and as I have said on this
list over recent weeks - never was completely resolved. But it
has taken definite steps in that direction. This is not a battle
between good and evil, right and wrong, the lighthouse and the
aliens, nasty debunkers and good old Ufology circling the wagons
to ward off the attacking enemy.

No - surely - its a reasoned quest for truth. And that truth has
to embrace the serious questions brought into the arena by the
lies of James Easton and Ian Ridpath. And, yes, it has to
embrace reasoned counter arguments to this data from people like
Brad Sparks and Jan Aldrich.

What is needed here is tolerance and understanding and a
realisation that we learn from one another. Truths about matters
as complex as these do not appear by magic. They are not
fostered by adopting a fixed opinion of what happened and
sticking your flag in the ground before resisting all attempts
to dislodge it from its position of pre-eminence. We reach a
consensus by the gradual coming together of conflicting evidence
and resolving the key questions that such conflicts provide.

That is where we are with this case. Nobody - IMO - has proven
beyond reasonable doubt that they have all the key answers. The
role that things like the lighthouse played in this case is,
surely to any reasonable observer, seen to be of potential
significance, not an irrelevance (as I for some time thought it
was) , and we owe some people a debt for making that clear.
Equally, as it stands this idea doesn't resolve all the evidence
without resorting to a worrying dismissal of contradictory
evidence. So those who point this out are right to do so.

We progress by accepting these things and moving on from there -
seeking to demonstrate whatever we believe by reasoned means as
most people in this case have done for many years. We respect
opposing views and argue it out without descending into
personality clashes and disputes that  move away from the facts.
We appreciate the problems of witness testimony and
misperception that UFO investigation teaches to the initiated.
But we do not resort to assuming or inferring that a witness
must be deceiving us if it is the only way to prove a point.
Because whilst some witnesses do deceive and we are wise not to
forget it, making that charge is usually the last desperate
defence of the debunker and is a substitute for real evidence.
It is in effect guesswork and that is rarely good enough in
Ufology.

Reasoned guesses about this case are perfectly alright, of
course, as long as we keep them in context and realise that they
are such. Often they are wrong. Sometimes they turn the key that
opens the door to an unexpected truth. So I am denouncing
neither such methods nor the defence of sincerely held views
about this case (which many people hold). Merely noting that
these are a part of the way to tackle these issues - not a means
to do so all by themselves.

We surely here have to bear these things in mind and move
forward with this case in the proper way. Let us not allow the
discussion of these events to degenerate into a squabble. It
deserves 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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                CPR-Canada News: Viscount, Saskatchewan Crop

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 05:39:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:50:28 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Viscount, Saskatchewan Crop



CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 15, 2000

_____________________________


VISCOUNT, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLES


Preliminary Report - September 15, 2000

Viscount, Saskatchewan
September 12, 2000


Report received yesterday of two circles at Viscount,
Saskatchewan. Two circles, about 45' and 43' diametre, about
100' apart, in wheat. Farmer found them September 12 while
combining. He reports no tracks when first found, and very neat
lay, with plants pressed down fairly hard to the ground, but not
damaged. The circles are located well into the field with no
nearby roads, etc. in a relatively remote area of the country,
just south of Viscount. Two similar circles were found at
Viscount last year, and also at Rocanville, Saskatchewan in
1996.


_____________________________


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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                    Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:43:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:58:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Salvaille


 >From: Greg Sandow <greg@gregsandow.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:56:54 -0400


 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 21:54:13 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote

<snip>

 >>But _you_ did. So did the woman who saw the weather balloon
 >>earlier. "Not a soul...?" Surely neither of you actually meant
 >>to speak for the entire rest of the city. Or maybe you do?
 >
 >First this, then Serge. Allow me to rephrase my sentence, whose
 >meaning must have been clear to most of us

<snip>

Greg,

You are referring to me in an exchange I am not participating
in, and in a most unflattering way.

I would appreciate that, in the future, you refrain from doing
that.

You are already addressing me to the third person in another
thread, which is gross. If you want some precisions on this kind
of attitude and its implications in human communications, I'll
be glad to oblige. But I am sure that a psychology buff such as
you knows what I mean.

I don't know how you were raised, but the two following
principles are part are my education: look at people when you
talk to them and don't talk publicly about others in their back.

Clear?

Thanks.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                         Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:27:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:04:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:48:36 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:33:19 -0700

 >>Greetings to all -

 >>I'm currently on the hunt for information pertaining to Robert
 >>Ghostwolf (aka Robert Ghostwolf, Robert Wolfe, Bobby Wolfe,
 >>Robert Parry, Robert Franzone, et al). If you have any info I'd
 >>appreciate hearing from you. All correspondence will be held in
 >>confidence, thanks!

 >As I recollect the leading source of information and leaks about
 >Ghostwolf is Richard Boylan.

 >Interesting all the other AKAs, but kind of goes with what
 >another person mentioned awhile ago that his name should be
 >Robert Hoaxwolf.  :)

 >Cheers,

 >Robert


How about any credible sources regarding info on Ghostwolf?

Regards,

Royce








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:39:14 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:07:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Myers


I wonder why anyone would try to defend Adamski and his blatant
UFO hoax? The pictures that Mr. Holman has discovered are just
more dirt to bury the coffin with. As for claims of
disinformation, that's just stupid.

Another interesting note: Mr.Holman _never_ states the photos
are conclusive proof. In fact, he promotes further investigation
on his website featuring the photos. Disinformation? How about
uninformed or ignorant...


Regards,

Royce J. Myers III

eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open
Mind"...or your silly belief that Adamski really photographed
UFOs let alone rode in them...
eXpos News    http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame   http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                  Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Wright

From: Bruce Wright <magnus@io.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:09:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:22:17 -0400
Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads - Wright


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:19:18 -0500

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:59:26 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: An Audience Of Nodding Heads

 >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: An Audience Of Nodding Heads (was: Orford Ness Lighthouse)
 >>>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:38:24 -0500

 >Hi, John,

 >>Jerry, perhaps you could tell us which sceptics are doing a good
 >>job? You have in the past claimed that there is a difference
 >>between genuine sceptics and mere pelicanists. I'd like some
 >>examples.

 >First, though, you might answer a question I've asked at least
 >twice and that you've ducked just as often:

 >What is the difference between the approach Magonia and you
 >advocate and that of the traditional skeptic/debunker?

Well, for one thing, I don't think the old-line debunkers
devoted 80 percent of their time to weak attempts at tormenting
Jerry Clark.

Bruce W.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                    Re: Orford Ness lighthouse - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 15:11:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:29:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness lighthouse - Randles


 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:44:39 -0400
 >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Randles


 >From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:53:24 +0100

and:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m15-007.shtml

Hi,

Er - ooops!

As I trust you realised the following line in my message earlier
today...


 >...And that truth has to embrace the serious questions brought
 >into the arena by the lies of James Easton and Ian Ridpath...

Should - of course - have read 'by the _likes_' of James Easton
and Ian Ridpath.

As they both well know from our debates on this case - and as is
evident from the context of my message - I certainly don't think
what they are saying constitutes lies!

This was a typing error and apologies if it gave any momentary
offence.

Hope that's very clear!


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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                              A Carpenter Note

From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 10:47:27 -0400
Subject: A Carpenter Note


Friends,

I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
just a comment or two:

Don't flatter yourself, Carpenter. Your FL case is unbelievably
weak but the recent discussion of your unethical actions has
nothing to do with anything except what you refuse to mention in
all of your communications - ethics!

I recommend listening to a show yourselves at sightings.com
under Archived Shows. John Carpenter is the first hour of Jeff
Rense's 11-11-99 show.

For the "first-ever video of an abduction" seems you are missing
some critical facts such as: who the "abductee" is (can't be
found), where is the factory, where the video was taken? (don't
know), can you prove there were power surges when the abduction
occured (no) and who provided the tape and why won't they answer
any of the above questions? (I don't know this one.)

Gary Hart
_________


From: "Mike Farrell" <vidhunter@hotmail.com>
To: StarmanJC@aol.com
Subject: John Carpenter Does it Again!!!
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 23:26:24 GMT

-----------------------------------------------
PLEASE POST FAR AND WIDE TO DISPEL UGLY RUMOURS!
-----------------------------------------------
Greetings Researchers,

You're going to love this bit of blame-shifting!

During a recent discussion on the case of Dr. Jonathan Reed and
his "Evidence of a ET", a message from John Carpenter to a
friend arrived in my mail box. It's a real gem!

I'm sending copies of this to all those involved and concerned
with the Carpenter "File-Sale" travesty, including one to John
himself, so he can know and understand in no uncertain terms
that he will not be allowed to blame his fellow researchers or
government disinformation agents for his "moment of weakness"
when he sold those "abductee files" to Robert Bigelow (140 files
for $14,000) for personal gain 3 years ago without consideration
for the confidentiality of his patients and the integrity of the
"Abduction & Contact" Community.

Read his "conspiracy theory" below, then my comments as the
person who helped to break this story on the Internet mailing
lists. Here's one "cover-up" we can expose right now for the
cowardly act that it really is! How many times can we say "shame
on you, Mr. Carpenter??!" And shame on Constance Clear for
jumping on Carpenter's bandwagon without knowing the facts of
this case.

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

Email from John Carpenter (to one of his friends):

I saw Jonathon Reed speak in Laughlin, Nevada in March. It was
indeed controversial and perplexing and different. There is a
good point to be made about "good evidence" not being allowed
and researchers being discredited.

The whole Internet
turmoil about me came up just as I was trying to present the
first-ever videotape of an abduction caught by a 24-hour
surveillance cameras at a factory -- and the worker's return
one hour and 50 minutes later in a laser-like "puddle" of light.

Recent video and scientific analysis proves the source of the
light beams is in the air, plus, the speed and nature of the
lights are "beyond plausible Earth ability" according to expert
Jeff Sainio.

Many more details available if you are interested. Constance
Clear, MSW, also believes this is one reason I am under attack
by people I have never met or heard of before. I don't know, but
thanks for this interesting article

John

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

Dear John (and fellow researchers),

Let's get right to the point!

The fact that you got caught with Bigelow's money in your pocket
some 3 years after the damage was done to your patients at the
same time you were trying to promote your new video of an
abduction caught on surveillance camera is PURELY
COINCIDENTAL!!!!!

How do I know this, sir? Let me run thru this explanation again
for those who missed it the first time around.

I'll do this without dragging other people's names into this,
though they and you know who they are.

Back in May and June, I began a discussion on the pros and cons
of establishing a global abductee database, called Project GAD.
I received one strong negative response from a researcher in the
States who claimed to be the chief investigator for a case
involving the alledged "professional misconduct" of MUFON's
Director of Abduction Research.

That's you, Mr. John Carpenter.

I replied with inquiries and found out for the first time more
than I needed to know about the mess you got yourself into with
your finances and ex-wives.

Actually there are two ex-wives involved, Denise and Elizabeth.
It's all a bit confusing trying to keep track of your personal
tribulations.

But that's just the point.

As researchers, we keep our personal problems out of our
professional dealings and don't use them as excuses for our
unethical solutions. After all, Mr. Carpenter, we all have our
share of personal struggles with money and marriage partners.

Anyway, after some further inquiries, I discovered that many top
researchers, especially those with positions in MUFON, already
knew about your clandestine sale of abductee files for several
years, but said nothing for fear of getting dragged into this
whole messy affair. Let MUFON take care of it's own was the
sentiment expressed.

Well, in July or so, someone on my private mailing list went
ahead and posted my messages to the UpDates List, alerting other
researchers to the controversial precedent you established.

 From there it was picked up by concerned and outraged abductees
and other researchers and kicked around in discussion for
awhile.

Now, Mr. Carpenter, if your new accusations about why you have
been under attack are true, then I am a disinformation agent
working for the secret world government. If you knew me, you
would know how silly that idea is.

No, Mr. Carpenter, I'm afraid it won't be that easy to wiggle
out of this one.

The fact is your "professional misconduct" was exposed quite by
accident some 3 years after the fact. If I had not started the
discussion about a global abductee database, I never would have
found out about what you did and how you tried to shift the
blame off yourself to protect your position with MUFON and your
reputation for the sale of your future book.

It's all rather pathetic, you know.

All you had to do was be "man" enough to admit your mistake
under a period of extreme personal stress and make amends by
contacting those abductees whose confidentiality you violated.

No, just because you sold them to Robert Bigelow and not some
nobody off the street doesn't make it right.

And you might tell your current wife the "real story", because
everyone can tell from her recent emails threatening legal
action, that she is defending you blindly without knowing the
facts of your misdealings.

Now you want to infer that just as you are about to release new
evidence for the abduction phenomenon, that certain researchers
have orchestrated a plot to discredit you. Now you have insulted
and further distanced the very ordinary researchers around the
world who are the ones who buy your books and tickets to your
lectures.

We're not well-known celebrities in positions of authority and
influence like you have been, Mr. Carpenter. Which is why we
expect more professional and accountable behavior from big-name
hotshot director's like you. And if figures like you make a
mistake, because nobody's perfect, then all we expect is for the
matter to be addressed and corrected as mature adults.

You know, Mr. Carpenter, in reviewing the responses to your
case, most people, especially in positions of responsibility
like you, have expressed the need to put this whole mess behind
us and get on with our work. They have emphasized that someone
of your stature has obviously learned your lesson and we have
all benefited from seeing the consequences of such "professional
misconduct".

But now as you continue in your search for someone else to
blame, you have bit hard the very hands that feed your UFO
income.

No, Mr. Carpenter, there is no "conspiracy" to invalidate your
new discoveries. In fact we'd all like to see evidence of an
abduction, even if it's just a security camera showing someone
missing for a time.

Our so-called "attack" on you has nothing to do with your
efforts to solve the abduction mystery. But it has everything to
do with what you did with those 140 abductee files some 3 years
ago.

Is that clear enough for you now?

Now if you don't mind, us ordinary-nobody UFO researchers would
like to go back to our work without hearing anymore false
accusations from the likes of you.

My advice to you is to be very careful of what you say about
this matter in the future.

A worldwide clearinghouse for researchers and abductees is being
constructed and all the discussions about you will be posted for
patients to review, so when they have to make that tough
decision to chose a therapist to help them understand and deal
with their "experience", they will think twice before going to
so-called professionals like you, Mr. Carpenter.

Signed, an ordinary-nobody UFO researcher with nothing to gain
or to lose by speaking my mind on important in-house dirty
laundry issues that others would like to sweep under the rug.

Oh, and sorry for all the "Internet turmoil", Mr. Carpenter. But
you asked for this one!

And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

__________________________
THINK GLOBALLY-ACT LOCALLY!

Mike Farrell UFO Video Hunter & Researcher 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.
********************************************
"We the people, are going to prove that UFOs are true ~ not the
scientists, not the authorities, not the military. We, the
hundreds of thousands of people with cameras in our hands, are
going to produce the evidence that is going to be seen around
the world and is going to prove that UFOs are real and that we
are not crazy!" (from Jaime Maussan on "UFOs-Best Evidence
Caught on Tape-Part One" / USA-TV-1997)

"The person who is truly alive comes to breakthrough.
However traumatic the 'alien encounter', it seems it becomes
a breakthrough experience and later on the person finds
that their life is larger, their consciousness is larger,
and the universe is larger for them."
(from Frank Fletcher-Catholic Theologian,
on Compass Show / AUS-TV-1996)
***************************************************








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

               Re: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' -

From: Franois Parmantier <parcol@club-internet.fr>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:35:46 +0200
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:08:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' -


 >From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc - AGETI <9a4ag@clarc.org>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 03:06:26 -0500
 >Subject: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD'

 >Dear List members,

 >In my recent correspondence with journalist Leslie Kean (she
 >recently published articles about COMETA French UFO report in
 >The Boston Globe and The Irish Independent) I have found out
 >that she also published her third article in the French magazine
 >'VSD' (the one that first released COMETA report back in July
 >1999).

 >The article that I am sending you is a translated, non-edited
 >version. Leslie says that she is not happy that VSD cut much
 >from this version, but I think that people will be interested to
 >see how it all looks in the original. Unfortunately we don't
 >have a published version in English. Anyway here it is posted
 >with Leslie's permission.

 >Note that in this third article the focus is more on the
 >pressure for Congressional UFO hearings in 1997 (Greer,
 >Rockfeller and Clinton involved).

 >VSD is a weekly magazine. But since, as Leslie says, it was a
 >special issue on UFOs, it didn't have the date of a particular
 >week on it. It was just dated June. Leslie continues: "The VSD
 >piece was not very well edited, and they cut almost half of what
 >I submitted... so I'm not thrilled with it, but the information
 >is important."

 >So here you go:

<snip>


Dear List members,

I usually don't write to the list because my english is not good
enough, but I want to react to this message.

I have compared the original version with the one published and
found no difference. There has been obviously no cut. Photos and
captions are also the same.

This issue uncludes also an interesting interview with General
Letty about consequences of the Cometa report. General Letty
explains that they decided to publish the report in the french
magazine VSD "in order to create a shock".

The last question of this interview is : "What do you think about the
silence of the US authorities on the (ufo) phenomenon ?"

General Letty: "It is embarrassing. We wish they communicate
                 more on what they know"


Best regards


Franois Parmantier











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                 Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' -

From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc - AGETI <9a4ag@clarc.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:39:10 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:18:41 -0400
Subject: Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD' -


Dear researchers,

Sorry, a correction of Leslie Kean's 3rd COMETA Article In 'VSD'

I have just found out that the piece that I posted was the
original article, published in VSD and edited by them.

The article below, is a broader version not published in VSD.
This version has much more interesting data than the one
published.

Here it is:

================================================================


By Leslie Kean (draft non-released version for VSD):


COMETA spokesperson Michel Algrin says that the report was
delivered to French president Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister
Lionel Jospin. "No response is awaited, only action," he says.
"The COMETA made no request to the US government. It is not
entitled to do so," says Algrin, an attorney and political
scientist. "But, in its report, it recommended to the French
government to seek for a cooperation [sic] with its American
ally on the subject of UFOs."

Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the Apollo 14 astronaut who was the sixth
man to walk on the moon, is one of many supporters of such
cooperation. "It's significant that individuals of some standing
in the government, military and intelligence community in France
came forth with this," he said in a recent interview from his
home in Florida. Mitchell, who holds a doctor of science degree
from MIT, is convinced "at a confidence level above 90%, that
there is reality to all of this."

He joins five-star Admiral Lord Hill-Norton, the former head of
the British Ministry of Defense and Major Gordon L. Cooper, one
of America's original seven Mercury astronauts, in calling for
Congressional fact-finding hearings into the UFO question.
"People have been digging through the files and investigating
for years now. The files are quite convincing. The only thing
that's lacking is the official stamp," Mitchell says.

Despite the fact that Mitchell is a national hero and has been
honored with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the USN
Distinguished Service Medal and the NASA Distinguished Service
Medal, his request for an investigation has been ignored by U.S.
officials.

As the COMETA report points out, the U.S. is unique in its
silence on this issue. UFOs and Defense notes that many UFO
files are classified above top secret, and accuses the U.S. of
following a policy of disinformation. It says that the
government has an "impressive repressive arsenal" in place,
which includes military regulations prohibiting public
disclosure of UFO sightings.

Air Force Regulation 200-2, ``Unidentified Flying Objects
Reporting,'' for example, prohibits the release to the public
and the media of any data about ``those objects which are not
explainable.'' An even more restrictive procedure is outlined in
the Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication 146, which threatens
to prosecute anyone under its jurisdiction - including pilots,
civilian agencies, merchant marine captains, and even some
fishing vessels - for disclosing reports of sightings relevant
to US security.

Although some documentation has been released through the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), researchers have had an
increasingly difficult time accessing information about a
subject that the U.S. government claims does not exist. A 1980
federal suit is a case in point. The case was filed in the US
District Court of the District of Columbia against the National
Security Agency (NSA) for 156 UFO documents the agency refused
to release. The NSA provided U.S. District Court Judge Gerhard
A.Gesell with a 21-page, Above Top Secret affidavit justifying
the withholding. No one else was permitted to see the affidavit.
The judge dismissed the lawsuit stating that "public interest in
disclosure is far outweighed by the sensitive nature of the
materials and the obvious effect on national security their
release may entail."

MILITARY CLOSE ENCOUNTERS

A few months after the French release of the COMETA report, U.S.
Naval Reserve Commander Willard H. Miller agreed to go on the
record about his participation in a series of previously
undisclosed briefings for Pentagon brass about national security
and military policy regarding UFOs. Miller has been a key
liaison to the Pentagon on the subject for years. "It's time to
give some credibility to the fact that there are those in high
places in the government who have an interest in this subject,"
he says, taking a considerable risk by coming forward.

Miller retired in 1994 from active duty on the Current
Operations Staff (J3) of U.S. Atlantic Command, Norfolk,
Virginia where he worked operations, intelligence, and special
contingency issues. With over 30 years of experience in Navy and
Joint Interagency operations with the Department of Defense,
Commander Miller has held a Top Secret clearance with access to
sensitive compartmented information.

It has not been easy for Miller to overcome the taboo that the
UFO subject carries among his colleagues in the military. "It is
treated much the way we used to view mental illness. Hide the
crazy daughter in the attic," he says.

In a February, 2000 confidential memo titled "Selected
Discussions with Key United States (US) Department of Defense
(DoD) Intelligence Personnel on the Subject of Unidentified
Flying Objects (UFOs) and Extraterrestrial Intelligence (ETI)"
prepared for this reporter, Miller spelled out the details of
meetings between 1989 and 2000 with named high level Department
of Defense intelligence personnel - including the Director of
the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), an Admiral on the Joint
Staff, and the U.S. Atlantic Command Director for Intelligence -
among others. Miller says he initiated briefings "to provide the
flag officers with information to help the military
decision-making processes when these unexplained craft are
encountered by members of the Department of Defense."

Concerned that many high-ranking military officers are not
properly informed about the UFO phenomenon, Miller believes that
the generals who have come forward in France could have a
significant impact. "Without preparation and planning for
encounters, precipitous military decisions may lead to
unnecessary confusion, misapplication of forces, or possible
catastrophic consequences," he says..

The Navy Commander's concern is justified by the historical
record. Declassified government documents show that unexplained
objects with extraordinary technical capabilities pose
challenges to military activity around the globe. U.S. fighter
jets have been scrambled to pursue UFOs, according to North
American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) logs and U.S. Air
Force documents. Peruvian and Iranian Air Force planes attempted
to shoot down unexplained objects during air encounters, and
Belgium F-16's equipped with automatically guided missiles
pursued UFO's in 1990.

In earlier decades, such concerns were openly discussed among
American government officials. In 1960, for example,
Representative Leonard G. Wolf of Iowa entered an "urgent
warning" from former CIA Director Vice Admiral R.E.
Hillenkoetter into the Congressional Record that "certain
dangers are linked with unidentified flying objects." Wolf cited
Gen. L.M. Chassin, NATO coordinator of Allied Air Service,
warning that "if we persist in refusing to recognize the
existence of the UFOs, we will end up, one fine day, by
mistaking them for the guided missiles of an enemy - and the
worst will be upon us."

Wolf also referenced a three-year study which determined that
air defense scrambles and alerts had already occurred due to the
presence of UFOs. All defense personnel "should be told that
UFOs are real and should be trained to distinguish them - by
their characteristic speeds and maneuvers - from conventional
planes and missiles" the study said.

These concerns were taken seriously enough to be incorporated
into the 1971 "Agreement on Measures to Reduce the Outbreak of
Nuclear War" between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The treaty
states that the two countries will "notify each other
immediately in the event of detection by missile warning systems
of unidentified objects...if such occurrences could create a risk
of outbreak of nuclear war between the two countries."

The COMETA assures its readers that UFOs have not been the cause
of any hostile acts "although intimidation maneuvers have been
confirmed." In France, they say, there have been "visits above
secret installations and missile bases" and "military aircraft
shadowed" by UFOs. Like Miller, they warn against impulsive,
uninformed actions. "In the face of an unknown situation, one
must be on guard against any instinctive self-defense reaction
that could be easily interpreted as a provocation."

Reports such as the one from France may open the door for the
U.S. and other nations to be more forthcoming. Chile, for
example, is openly addressing it's own concerns about air safety
and UFOs. The now retired Chief of the Chilean Air Force has
formed a committee with military and civil aviation experts to
study recent near collisions between UFOs and civilian
airliners.

GOVERNMENT WITNESSES: EXTRAORDINARY AND UNAMBIGUOUS EVENTS

While Commander Miller alerted the Pentagon, researcher Dr.
Steven M. Greer was working the issue within the U.S.Congress
and the executive branch. Greer, an emergency physician who has
assembled government documents, visual evidence and credible
witness reports on UFOs, also attended some of the Pentagon
briefings with Miller.

In 1993, Greer was invited to meet with President Clinton's
first sitting CIA Director, Admiral James Woolsey. The three
hour event was arranged by futurist John L. Petersen, President
and founder of the Washington area think tank The Arlington
Institute, who "specializes in the area of national and global
security" and currently serves as a Pentagon consultant,
according to Institute materials. Petersen's credentials include
stints at the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the
National Security Council staff.

Petersen declined to answer questions concerning his purpose in
hosting the dinner meeting at his home in Arlington, Virginia.
However, he obviously was aware of the high stakes involved. In
a sensitive memo he sent to Greer just prior to the meeting, he
said that the dinner with Woolsey would "move the whole thing to
a much, much higher plane..." and that "the most powerful people
in the world will have a deep, compelling interest in our
activities..." At the same time, he pointed out that the meeting
- kept secret until 1998 - would raise "significant red flags
for those who don't want to see this succeed."

Greer says he only needed 15 minutes to present Woolsey with the
documentation he brought in a large briefcase. Woolsey was
already convinced as to the reality of UFO's. Most of the
meeting was spent discussing "what all of this means" and "the
geopolitical implications of disclosing this matter fully to the
public," Greer says

In August 1995, philanthropist Laurance Rockefeller provided
Greer's briefing materials to President Clinton, Hillary
Clinton, and Presidential science advisor Jack Gibbons while
they spent a weekend at Rockefellers' Wyoming ranch. Clinton
then instructed Associate Attorney General at the Justice
Department, Webster Hubbell, to investigate the existence of
UFOs, as disclosed in his book Friends in High Places. Despite
this request from the Commander-in-Chief, Hubbell was unable to
obtain information on the subject.

Greer has worked tirelessly in an effort to bring about
Congressionsal hearings into the UFO question. He has earned the
trust of over 100 government witnesses with personal, first-hand
knowledge of UFO phenomena and related projects who are
committed to testify under oath. These witnesses made their
observations while in the Air Force, Army, Navy, NASA, private
industry and intelligence operations. According to Greer, they
are waiting only for Congressional subpoenas to protect them from
penalties for violating national security oaths before coming
forward.

Apollo Astronaut Edgar Mitchell has talked to a number of these
witnesses. "They have stated their first hand experience with
conviction and their stories check out," he said. Coupled with
the new military disclosures acknowledging national security
concerns, advocates for Congressional hearings believe that the
testimonies of these highly credible government witnesses could
force, once and for all, a government examination of the "extra-
terrestrial hypothesis" as has been done in France.

As a small prelude to these hearings, eleven witnesses risked
coming forward "for ethical, moral and patriotic reasons" as
Greer explained it. On April 9, 1997, Greer and his associates
held an unprecedented, confidential congressional briefing at
the Westin Hotel in Washington. The VIP's in attendance included
Representative Dan Burton, Chair of the House Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight, with his chief of staff, and
staffers from nearly thirty congressional offices.
Representatives from the executive branch, including a staff
member from Vice President Gore's office, were present, along
with representatives of two state governors, the Department of
Defense, and the scientific community.

Greer told the attendees that the witnesses "have directly
handled this subject or have been present while it was occuring
- major events, unambiguous events, not a light in the sky, but
extroardinary events" and "are tremendously dedicated to trying
to bring this forward to the public."

For over one and a half hours, participants heard from a
Pentagon cryptologist who said he viewed extraterrestrial space
debris containing indecipherable writing, and a NASA
subcontracter who saw restricted satellite photos showing flying
discs that were routinely airbrushed out before public release.
A navy pilot and his crew experienced electromagnetic effects in
their airplane when a 300 foot UFO flew 25 miles in two seconds
directly in front of the plane, as confirmed by Gander radar and
official government documents.

Witnesses touched on national security concerns such as those
brought to the Pentagon by Commander Miller. Loring Air Force
base was visited by a silent triangular ship which hovered over
B-52's on strategic alert. A senior admiral, amid command center
chaos, issued a "force down" order against an elliptical-shaped
craft of unknown origin, tracked by satellite, radar, and chased
by military planes. According to the witness, it literally jumped
between states in under a minute, flew out to sea and suddenly
left the earth's atmosphere.

By all accounts, the VIP's present paid close attention. They
had been clearly informed that these witnesses were only the tip
of the iceberg out of a pool of more than 100. "This is a
subject that can either bore you to death or shock you to death
or absolutely leave you speechless" witness Major Steven Lovekin
told them.

A veteran Congressional staffer received a standing ovation
when, unsolicited, she took the floor and declared her
determination to bring this information to the public by
organizing for hearings on capitol hill. The next day, Miller,
Lovekin, Mitchell and Greer brought the same information to the
Joint Staff Vice Director for Intelligence at a private Pk�tagon
briefing.

PROTECTING HARD-EARNED REPUTATIONS

Two years after the Washington briefing, the COMETA released its
dramatic report which ended by stating that "only increasing
pressure from public opinion, possibly supported by the results
of independent researchers, by more or less calculated
disclosures, or by a sudden rise in UFO manifestations might
perhaps induce U.S. leaders and persons of authority to change
their stance." Witness testimonies and other evidence presented
in 1997 did not seem to create movement in that direction.

"Because the Congress is afraid they won't get re- elected, they
don't even want to talk about this. I just think somebody should
do something," says the Congressional staffer who is working for
hearings behind the scenes.

When Representative Burton left the Westin Hotel that night, he
requested that all information on the subject be sent to his
office. Yet a recent inquiry to Burton's office revealed that
whatever interest the Congressman may have shown will not bear
fruit until the demand for hearings - from both the press and
the public - escalates. "We haven't heard a very loud call for
hearings on this issue yet," said press secretary John Williams.
"As far as any intention of holding hearings regarding the
existence of UFOs or anything that pertained to that briefing,
we have no intention of holding any hearings on that right now."
Williams stated that Burton's interest in the subject is purely
personal.

Some representatives are interested, but only behind closed
doors, says a democratic campaign manager, requesting anonymity,
who has been intimately involved in electoral politics for 29
years. He has met personally with a number of members of
congress on the subject. "With our thirty second commercials'
ability to destroy hard-earned reputations, particularly using a
subject like this, people are very hesitant to take a leading
role on the subject, although they know that it's a very real
matter," he says.

Nonetheless, one congressman did respond to public pressure. In
1993, New Mexico representative Steven Schiff requested that the
General Accounting Office investigate the infamous 1947 crash of
a mysterious object in the desert near Roswell, New Mexico. Two
years later, he learned from the GAO that all documents and radio
messages during the relevant time period had been destroyed
"without proper authority." Schiff was unable to attend the
Washington briefing in 1997 and died of an aggressive skin
cancer the following year. No other member has picked up where
he left off.

Dr. Greer, who has privately briefed both Representative
Christopher Cox and Senator Richard Bryan of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, is asking supporters to apply pressure.

Missouri, the "Show Me" state, has become the first to launch a
ballot initiative urging Congress to convene hearings in which
government witnesses can testify "regarding their personal
knowledge of any UFO-related evidence." Certified by the
Missouri secretary of state in March, the initiative states that
"the Federal Government's handling of the UFO issue has
contributed to the public cynicism toward, and general mistrust
of, government - a development injurious to our republic."

Robert Bletchman, a Connecticut attorney who conceived of the
initiative, has no doubt it would win votes in the November
election, as long as the requisite number of signatures are
collected in time. "My expectation is that Missouri will kindle
a firestorm of proactive interest throughout the country in
those sixteen states that allow for the direct initiative," he
says. Hundreds of thousands of votes would be involved. "What
does Congress pay attention to? How real people at the ballot
box actually vote," Bletchman says. "Maybe for the first time the
politicians would have to pay overt attention."

  THE REAL NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT

On September 15, 1998, Commander Willard Miller and Dr. Steven
Greer entered the Pentagon through the VIP entrance. After
passing through metal detectors, they were escorted past armed
security guards, up the massive staircase and into the innermost
ring of the Pentagon. An electrically controlled door brought
them into the comfortable outer office of the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), adorned with mahogany,
walnut, brass, and military plaques.

Thirty minutes later, the DIA Director came out of his inner
chamber, parting company with an entourage of high- level
foreign Admirals and Generals. He graciously ushered in his two
guests, taking his place at the head of a massive wood table.
According to Miller's confidential memo of February 2000, an
Army Colonel, a DIA staff member and a Defense Department clerk
were also seated around the table. The briefing lasted 50
minutes.

Greer provided the military officials with declassified
documents from the CIA, DIA, FBI, NORAD, SAC (Strategic Air
Command) and NMCC (National Military Command Center),
referencing specific UFO events connected with military forces
and bases. At the general's request, he provided a
"comprehensive overview" of the subject.

Commander Miller's Military Information Outline prepared for the
briefing included a discussion of national security
implications, military risks and recommended courses of action.
Greer and Miller explained to the DIA Director that there is no
credible evidence of hostility from UFO occupants. "The only
threat to the national security of the United States is the
continued denial of undeniable physical UFO occurrences and
sightings to a public growing increasingly frustrated with its
government's weak explanations," Miller says he told the
Pentagon officials. "Some US Air Force denials defy logic and
strain the public's tolerance, he said.

His point was dramatically illustrated in the aftermath of an
extraordinary event that occurred one spring evening over the
state of Arizona. On March 13, 1997, thousands observed
enormous, lighted, triangular craft flying low and silently,
sometimes hovering wingless over populated areas. Hundreds of
feet long, air traffic controllers failed to register them on
radar. To this day, the people of Arizona do not know what
penetrated US airspace that night.

In response to public demand, Phoenix city council member
Frances Barwood initiated an investigation into the Arizona
triangles. "I like answers. I don't like unfinished business.
People need to push their elected officials to find out what is
invading our air space," she says. Barwood says she personally
spoke with over seven hundred people who saw the objects.

She was never provided any reasonable explanation. Instead, the
councilwoman was given the run-around from her city, state and
federal government - including Arizona Senator John McCain - and
was publicly ridiculed by the mayor of Phoenix. Yet she still
considers this "an issue of state and national significance."
Barwood has retired from politics to write a book about this
experience. "The fact that the government never interviewed one
witness doesn't make me feel too secure about our national
security," she commented during a recent interview.

Arizona attorney Peter Gersten responded by filing a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Defense in
1999. The case challenged the adequacy of the governments
"reasonable search" for information about the triangular objects
seen over Arizona in 1997, and elsewhere in the US over the last
twenty years.

As recently as January 5, 2000, four policemen at different
locations in St. Claire County, Illinois, witnessed a brightly
lit, huge triangular craft flying at 1000 feet, according to the
Los Angeles Times. Most alarming was the report from Lebanon
police officer Thomas Barton that he witnessed the hovering
object jump at least 8 miles in 3 seconds. Aeronautical expert
Paul Czysz, who spent 29 years at McDonnell-Douglas designing
faster-than-sound aircraft, says that such rapid motion cannot
be explained in conventional terms. The object would be a
"fireball" and "people on board would be mush," he says. Yet
nearby Scott Air Force base and the FAA purport to know nothing

On February 29, 2000, a reporter brought the issue of military
denial and the Arizona lawsuit to the attention of U.S. Senator
John McCain of Arizona at a California press conference. "I
think it's of great interest," responded the Presidential
candidate, acknowledging that the 1997 "lights" seen over
Arizona have "never been fully explained."

Nonetheless, the DoD continues to maintain that it can find no
information about the triangular objects. It provided details of
its search to the court as required by U.S. District Court
Stephen M. McNamee of Phoenix for Gersten's lawsuit. On March
30, 2000, the judge concluded that "a reasonable search was
conducted' even though no information was obtained, and he
dismissed the case.

Like Barwood, Gersten is incredulous. "What is it that has
unlimited, unrestricted access to our airspace in populated
areas?" he says. "With so many worries about terrorist attacks,
how could they not know what these triangles are?"

The danger of such blatant denial is what Navy Commander Willard
Miller brought to the attention of the three star general from
the Defense Intelligence Agency that day in 1998. Miller told
him that the continued denial of information "causes the public
to begin to loose additional faith in the military and the
government. That's not good for the country. That type of non-
response threatens the stability, trust and fabric of an open
democratic society," he said.

Miller and Greer left the DIA director with a multi- volume
package of briefing materials and video documentation which had
been prepared for the Washington briefing in 1997.

Once again, the French Generals make the same point raised by
their American counterparts. "How can one try to ignore a
phenomena that is manifested by the regular crossing of our air
space by moving objects...If we do nothing, the very principle
of defense and air intelligence would be called into question,"
they state.

According to Miller, all of the high-ranking military officers
at the briefings showed "a great amount of inquisitiveness."
There was little laughter. "The briefings were accorded the same
serious attention given to other briefings on national security
matters," says Miller. He has yet to assess, however, whether he
achieved the desired effect of transforming military policy
towards UFO encounters and response to public inquiries.

  "WHAT SHOULD WE PREPARE FOR?" ASK AMERICAN FIRE FIGHTERS

UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For? recommends that
the French government reflect on "the measures to take in the
event of a spectacular�and indisputable manifestation of a UFO."
Surprisingly, the United States has taken one small step in that
direction. The second edition of the Fire Officer's Guide to
Disaster Control is currently used for training by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at its National Fire Academy
and is taught nationally through the seven universities offering
degrees in fire science. Chapter 13 of the guide is titled
"Enemy Attack and UFO Potential." It warns fire fighters of
known "UFO hazards" such as electrical fields that cause
blackouts, air and ground travel disruptions by force fields,
and physiological effects.

  "Do not stand under a UFO that is hovering at low altitudes. Do
not touch or attempt to touch a UFO that has landed," the book
warns.

Researched primarily by now deceased US Naval Reserve Captain
Charles Bahme, a Los Angeles deputy fire chief who also worked
for the Department of Defense and the U.S. State Department, the
chapter describes the role that fire fighters should play "in
the event of the unexpected arrival of UFOs in their
communities." As an example, it outlines a scenario of a UFO
crashing into the boiler room of a school, where the spilled oil
ignites, endangering the lives of those inside the craft. The
fire officials are instructed to let the military take over.

Dr. William M. Kramer, professor of Fire Science at the
University of Cincinnati and an Ohio Fire Chief, co- authored
the chapter and will be updating it this year. Kramer says that
"the vast majority of fire fighters believe very definitely that
UFOs are genuinely unidentifiable craft and are not natural
phenomena native to our known earth and our known existence."
Like most people, they are reluctant to admit this publicly.

The French Institute of Higher Studies for National Defense and
the National Center for Space Studies are a few steps ahead of
the United States military and NASA. Not only do they openly
present information acknowledging the existence of UFOs and
attempt to explain their origin, they also recommend a
widespread information and training campaign on preparedness
which would reach all sectors of the relevant political,
military, and civilian spectrum in their country. Perhaps the
report by the bold French generals - with its goal of "stripping
the phenomenon of UFOs of its irrational layer" - will be a
catalyst for American authorities to examine the issue of UFO's
in a new light.


=======================================================

Re-sent by:

===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===
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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                   Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:23:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - McCoy


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >model.

 >It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >The device can be seen at the following:

 >http://www.ufon.org/html/adamski-brown_connection.html
 >http://www.ufon.org/html/photo_comparison.html

 >And can be compared with the classic Adamski photo on a number
 >of UFO pages.

 >This was pointed out to me by Jimmie Holman, arch enemy of
 >certain abduction experts, whose persistence is remarkable.

 >--
 >Nobody in particular


Hello All,

This whole Adamski thing has me bothered.

One, the Townsend experiments, two, the chilling resembalance to
a Chicken ah, brooder/incubator that I have seen.

Townsend, I think is legit. Adamski like Meier, well, we have
seen the fruits of their labor: no real proof, just garbage. The
only contactee that would count is the whole of humanity.

Yes, the old saucer on the Whitehouse lawn, maybe the Kremlin
(The Russkis seem to be the only determined spacefarers
lately.), who knows.

I know what I have seen, and experienced other things that I
cannot explain, but there still is no truth, never will be as
long as Charlatans from Adamski to Meier, to Cooper to Boylan
are out there .

I still say the Adamski craft is an old Style Chicken Brooder -
holes were vents on the top and they had three heat-lamp type
bulbs to keep the little guys (chicks) warm. I just saw a gas
powered (propane) version - talk about a neato UFO! Glowing
innards yet. It'll happen folks - just wait and see!

Puwck Puuuwcking way too long .

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                  Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Beaver

From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:25:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 19:38:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Beaver


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:29:17 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Mike Beaver <yoda@foxinternet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:51:41 -0700

<snip>

 >>1) More than one person has pointed out to me either star
 >>systems that Mr. Adamski gave details about BEFORE they were
 >>ever on any charts, and or predictions he made about the future
 >>that came true

<snip>

 >Could you provide any details about these two claims. Adamski
 >co-wrote several books, maybe his claims are there were we could
 >check. If the exact locations of the unkown star systems were
 >given, perhaps we can check the newer catalogs. Save with his
 >predictions. Can we have any details? Dates? Specifics?

 >Bob Young

Dear Bob:

Sorry Bob. I can't help you here. I wasn't really trying to
defend Adamski. I'm open to him having been either a hoax or
genuine. It was just something a couple people mentioned in
passing. They didn't provide any details at the time. And,
honestly, as I said, I really don't care whether he was a hoax
or not.

Anyway, one of the people who mentioned it is in Portland,
Oregon and is a member of this list. I think he may shy away
from presenting such evidence openly on this list as he also
mentioned how Ms. Randle was rather ruthless in her debunking of
his Adamski material. Don't reply to this particular sentence. I
don't make character judgements of people here. It was his
statement.

Some of you probably know who I'm talking about. But, of course,
it's his option to put forth information if he wants to. But,
then again, it may have been given to him in the same manner as
it was given to me. That is, he may not actually know where that
data is, even if it is exists. Sorry that I can't be of more
help here.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                 Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:54:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 19:41:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found? - Deardorff


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700

 >>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >>Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >>In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >>which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >>hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >>didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >>model.

 >>It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >>materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >>that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >>The device can be seen at the following:

GT,

There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 15

                          Olympic Opening Ceremony

From: Steven G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:02:44 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:07:38 -0400
Subject: Olympic Opening Ceremony


All,

During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
around 8:35 pm EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important icons in
the Aboriginal culture - a culture which has a clean lineage
going back perhaps as far as 100,000 years.

I cannot imagine anyone in the UFO/ET research community who
watched that icon being hoisted and who did not feel a chill up
their spine or the hair on their neck rise.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                    Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Moroff

From: Daniel D. Moroff <smoothie7@home.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 22:02:30 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:17:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Moroff


 >From: Steven G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:02:44 EDT
 >Subject: Olympic Opening Ceremony
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >All,

 >During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
 >around 8:35 pm EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
 >floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important icons in
 >the Aboriginal culture - a culture which has a clean lineage
 >going back perhaps as far as 100,000 years.

 >I cannot imagine anyone in the UFO/ET research community who
 >watched that icon being hoisted and who did not feel a chill up
 >their spine or the hair on their neck rise.

 >Steve


Hey Steve,

With all due respect, that opening ceremony took place Friday
morning at between 4am and 8 am edt. Obviously NBC is a day
behind as they will be for the 17 days.

Find a satellite dish and tune into CBC, at least some of the
events will be seen live. FYI There is a 15 hour time
difference between New York and Sydney, thus when it's between 7
& 11PM here, it's only 10 am to 2pm there. 4 am to 8 am here
is, therefore 7pm to 11pm there. Anything NBC tells you about
live is probably not. Just like their coverage of anything to
due with UFO's They call them the way they see them and if they
don't see them, they make them up. A long established TV credo!

Dan "I Know Nothing" Moroff








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                         Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:46:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:24:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Gates


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:27:29 -0700

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:48:36 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:33:19 -0700

 >>>Greetings to all -

 >>>I'm currently on the hunt for information pertaining to Robert
 >>>Ghostwolf (aka Robert Ghostwolf, Robert Wolfe, Bobby Wolfe,
 >>>Robert Parry, Robert Franzone, et al). If you have any info I'd
 >>>appreciate hearing from you. All correspondence will be held in
 >>>confidence, thanks!

 >>As I recollect the leading source of information and leaks about
 >>Ghostwolf is Richard Boylan.

 >>Interesting all the other AKAs, but kind of goes with what
 >>another person mentioned awhile ago that his name should be
 >>Robert Hoaxwolf. :)

 >How about any credible sources regarding info on Ghostwolf?

Define "credible source" in the UFO community. Bottom line is he
probaby has those people who think every word out of his mouth
is a revelation, never to be doubted, you have the fence sitters
who aren't sure, but like the story he is telling, then you have
in house UFO community skeptics who want to see verifiable
information and proof.

Then you have the hard core skeptics (Klass, Oberg) whose bottom
line is, and always will be, no matter what proof or evidence is
presented, that the person in question is either a hoaxer,
misidentified a planet or weather balloon etc., because UFOs
aren't real so therefore they can't be.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                    Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Lovett

From: Diane Lovett <Diane@futurepaths.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 23:02:49 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:20:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Lovett


 >From: Steven G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:02:44 EDT
 >Subject: Olympic Opening Ceremony
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >All,

 >During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
 >around 8:35 pm EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
 >floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important icons in
 >the Aboriginal culture - a culture which has a clean lineage
 >going back perhaps as far as 100,000 years.

 >I cannot imagine anyone in the UFO/ET research community who
 >watched that icon being hoisted and who did not feel a chill up
 >their spine or the hair on their neck rise.


Steve,

It certainly did raise chills up my neck.

I have wondered why the "creator" beings of Aboriginal culture,
depicted on cave drawings going back thousands of years, have
not been discussed more in UFO/ET circles. Abductees sure
recognize those beings.

Perhaps the ceremony will inspire some discussion of this long
neglected evidence staring us in the face. Diane







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                        Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:27:19 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates


 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >Friends,

 >I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >just a comment or two:

<snip>

 >And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
data and received money.

The story from John C was that the files were all redacted, i.e.
all the personal information deleted. I posted an email to this
List and also sent a copy to NIDS asking two simple questions.
Did the person receiving the email actually see the files with
their eyes, and to avoid privacy issues, I asked if the files
were in fact redacted. So far in the last month and a half NIDS
has chosen to not confirm the fact the files were redacted.

Again 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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                         3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:21:45 -0400
Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?


Hi Everyone,

I was pondering on this thought the other day when I was
reminded about it on the List.

It concerns the communication aspect of Contact UFO cases, such
like the Alagash incident, mentioned on the list recently.

When carrying out our investigations, is there a tendency for us
to overlook things that are staring us in the face?

*Let me expand on this.

In a lot of contact cases throughout the years, contact was
triggered by the flashing of lights, from the people on the
ground to the object in the sky. (Please note I do realise CSETI
uses a similar action to the above)

Now what I  want to ask is, if the object returns the flashing
pattern i.e. 3 flashes from you - 3 flashes returned by object.
If beings of some kind are not on board the observed object, and
the object is returning the flashes' is it within the
possibility of programmed devices to understand and to know when
a flash is sent by the observers to the object itself, so it
then knows to return a flash?

How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
source?

Would this possibly suggest some kind of pre-programmed device
inside such an object? Or are we to think that the object, is an
intelligence within itself?

And for those who may differ on contact cases and their reality,
if neither of the above is the answer' then what makes an object
return the light flashes?

Interested in any light thrown on this one!

Regards,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                   Reports From The Bridge Of The Brooklyn

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 02:15:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:29:12 -0400
Subject: Reports From The Bridge Of The Brooklyn


I promised that I would report back to the list regarding any
record at NYPD, NYS Police or the Sheriff's offices in NY
regarding the Linda Cortile case, sightings of a UFO or traffic
problems on or near the Brooklyn Bridge.

I've checked everything I could check regarding reports of _any_
unusual activity occurring in New York City on that evening.

Nothing.

The files which were accessed were for a thirty day period
before and after the event. There are no reports on file. Checks
were made on NCIC files, NY City 911 records and at all of the
downtown precincts. Nothing. I also interviewed one Detective
Richard Goldberg, Captain and assistant CO of one of New York's
largest precincts. He was unable to find any record of anything
which comes close to a UFO or traffic blockage on the Brooklyn
Bridge.

In fact, no one even tried to sell the bridge that entire year.
That there were no records available to me or to a captain of
the NYPD does not mean the reports were not made. It means that
the reports (if there were any made) are not available to view.

A thorough check was also made with the NY Times, the Post and
the Daily News archives. Errol, be thankful that you live in
Canada. And for two reasons. Your media is a lot better
organized up there and at least you people get Formula 1 news in
Canada. Here, they think Formula 1 has something to do with
pabulum.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:41:55 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:33:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 23:07:09 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:07:34 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks

 >In any case, there is a bit of a double standard here since
 >Easton and others on his list including Jenny Randles have been
 >cross-posting the same posts here on UFO UpDates and on his UFO
 >Research List for the past several weeks on this "Orford Ness
 >Lighthouse 'UFO'" thread which Easton himself started, as I just
 >discovered last Friday -- all without complaint from Easton or
 >anyone else till now.

Brad,

Although I don't have time for this, in every sense, ...

Aside from a brief reference to related material on UFO UpDates,
I also compiled, some time ago now, a summary comprising all of
Robert McLean's invaluable local insight and made it available
outwith UFORL.

It amounts to 30 pages and emphasises that the data you have
mentioned on the UpDates list is missing _vast_ amounts of
relevant information.

More importantly, beforehand, I specifically requested and duly
received Robert's permission.

You also seem to only recently have discovered UFO UpDates and
perhaps don't appreciate that UFORL subscribers will sometimes
cross-post their _own_ material to other lists, such as this
one, or reference material they originally posted on UFORL. I do
so quite often.

That's the source of other UFORL list material on UpDates.

Before accusing anyone of double standards, perhaps you might
simply have asked some courteous questions in search of an
explanation.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 14:17:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:38:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Regarding:

 >From: Brad Sparks RB47Expert@aol.com
 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:25:35 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:35:36 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Sparks

Brad wrote:

 >Since you have shut down your list there is nothing to resign
 >from, so it's not surprising that no one has.

Brad,

UFORL was never been taken off-line and is operating as before.

The reservation was whether there's a future for any forum which
is that proverbial 'middle ground'. There's a lot of questions
therein, duly being addressed elsewhere.

I'll take a moment now to dispel the further claims you have
made.

 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 1: COL. HALT et al. CHASED LIGHTHOUSE FOR 2
 >MILES

 >...the Orfordness lighthouse beacon can only be seen in the
 >approximately first 0.1 mile of the reconstructed path through
 >forest and field, then it completely disappears for the next 1.9
 >miles, then it reappears again only for the final 0.2 mile.

As previously explained, you still seem to be mixing up events
from two separate nights.

It was Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston [BP&C]who were involved
in the abortive lighthouse pusuit:

"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]

"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...


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.
[Cabansag]

That's where the 'two mile' chase originates. It had nothing to
do with Halt. He did later follow much the same route - not yet
being aware that the lighthouse had so deceived BP&C [he didn't
interview them until a week later]. That's a different story
though.

Is this clear now?


 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 2: UFO & LIGHTHOUSE EXACTLY SAME DIRECTION
 >
 >The facts are that Orfordness lighthouse was at about 85 degrees
 >true from the initial landing site and the Col Halt party's
 >compass headings toward the UFO were to about 105-115 degs true.

It's not contended they were 'exactly in the same direction',
although I've no idea where you get '85 degrees true' from.

You really have to read the material on my web site, especially
'Resolving Rendlesham'.


 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 3: NO MENTION ON HALT TAPE OF PIECES FALLING OFF
 >UFO

 >I quoted from the Halt tape which comprehensively proves that
 >he did report "Pieces ... falling off" the UFO on two separate
 >occasions.

I've already explained this was never an issue and you're
apparently confusing it with the 'exploding light'. I wrote to
you:

HALT: Pieces are falling off it again.

And presumably would have done so every five seconds as the
beacon revolved!

Remember - Halt's using the starscope....

I can't recall anyone claiming that Halt never said 'pieces are
falling off'.

You're mistaking this for the fact I cited that in his memo,
Halt claims the light exploded into five white lights and duly
vanished:

"At one point it appeared to throw off glowing particles and
then broke into five separate white objects and then
disappeared".

In truth, Halt never mentions the light 'exploding', the five
white objects are an unrelated observation - we know which
coastal feature they probably were - and a pulsating red light
was seen again shortly afterwards, so it never disappeared at
all.

Halt confirms in his recording:

"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".

However, he's either completely forgotten about this later
sighting, or omits it [he's never mentioned the 'second coming'
in any subsequent retelling] realising it compromises any 'UFO'
element, especially as the red light is now seen "clear off to
the coast". [End]

So why bring it up again as a purported 'skeptic's' mistake?


 >SKEPTIC FACTOID 4: NO UFO & LIGHTHOUSE SEEN AT SAME TIME

 >I quoted or paraphrased Halt, Cabansag, Penniston and Burroughs
 >saying they saw both UFO and lighthouse beacon at the same time
 >or serially and could distinguish them easily -- as we would
 >just by considering that the blue and red lights were obviously
 >not the whitish-yellow lighthouse beam.

How is this supposed to be another error of the 'skeptics'?

I was the person responsible for clarifying - some TWO YEARS ago
- how the red and blue lights initially seen that first night
were evidently a separate observation from the eventual beacon
light identified.

I was also responsible for highlighting and explaining Halt's
comments about seeing _both_ the lighthouse and the 'tiny
flashing light' near the farmhouse.

See 'Resolving Rendlesham':

http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/rend3.htm

It was published in August 1998, over TWO YEARS ago now.


 >These are not the only skeptic factoids in this case, but are
 >fairly representative of the quality of the work that has been
 >done...

No Brad, the published, solid evidence, remains unaffected. As
anyone can see.

All you are representing is something else entirely.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                        Re: Olympic Opening - Anthony

From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:16:42 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:36:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Olympic Opening - Anthony


 >Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Lovett
 >From: Diane Lovett <Diane@futurepaths.com>
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 23:02:49 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - Lovett

 >>From: Steven G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:02:44 EDT
 >>Subject: Olympic Opening Ceremony
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>All,

 >>During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
 >>around 8:35 pm EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
 >>floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important icons in
 >>the Aboriginal culture - a culture which has a clean lineage
 >>going back perhaps as far as 100,000 years.

 >>I cannot imagine anyone in the UFO/ET research community who
 >>watched that icon being hoisted and who did not feel a chill up
 >>their spine or the hair on their neck rise.


 >Steve,

 >It certainly did raise chills up my neck.

 >I have wondered why the "creator" beings of Aboriginal culture,
 >depicted on cave drawings going back thousands of years, have
 >not been discussed more in UFO/ET circles. Abductees sure
 >recognize those beings.

 >Perhaps the ceremony will inspire some discussion of this long
 >neglected evidence staring us in the face. Diane

Dear Steve and Diane,

Mary Rodwell, Australian researcher of ACERN has featured some
of these aspects in her video presentation, 'Expressions of ET
Contact' which won the International UFO Congress Film Festival
'EBE' Award in 1999, for further details of this research please
email:

starline@iinet.net.au

Hope this information is useful.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:12:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:39:49 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

Previously, Roy wrote:


 >In a lot of contact cases throughout the years, contact was
 >triggered by the flashing of lights, from the people on the
 >ground to the object in the sky. (Please note I do realise CSETI
 >uses a similar action to the above)

 >Now what I  want to ask is, if the object returns the flashing
 >pattern i.e. 3 flashes from you - 3 flashes returned by object.
 >If beings of some kind are not on board the observed object, and
 >the object is returning the flashes' is it within the
 >possibility of programmed devices to understand and to know when
 >a flash is sent by the observers to the object itself, so it
 >then knows to return a flash?

 >How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >source?

 >Would this possibly suggest some kind of pre-programmed device
 >inside such an object? Or are we to think that the object, is an
 >intelligence within itself?

 >And for those who may differ on contact cases and their reality,
 >if neither of the above is the answer' then what makes an object
 >return the light flashes?

Hi, Roy!

I understand the question at hand. However, isn't it possible
that such a device might be under remote control? After all, we
do send remote probes to Mars and the like. I am aware of the
time delay that OUR technology suffers from in these instances.
However, the controlling entity of the probe might have more
advanced technology or simply be in high orbit over the planet.
Since you mentioned CSETI, I'll go a step further and suggest
that if such probes exist, then CSETI's attempts to contact or
listen for signals from alien beings isn't as useless as many
would suggest (you didn't; I am generalizing, here).

Granted, I am using absolute human reasoning to try and predict
the actions of an ET. However, if you want to call a duck, you
use a duck call, right? You wouldn't use your own language and
say, "Here, ducky, ducky, ducky." One would go, "Quack!"
Likewise, an advanced alien technology that sends a probe would
likely look for signs of the simplest communication, not the
most advanced. As many anti-CSETI-ists have pointed out, RF is
as primitive to ET technology as, say, a blinking light is to
RF!

Therefore, a blinking light makes about as much sense. What
could be simpler?

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                 Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - 'Wandjina' -

From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 13:12:43 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 13:22:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Olympic Opening Ceremony - 'Wandjina' -


 >From: Steven G. Bassett <SGBList2@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:02:44 EDT
 >Subject: Olympic Opening Ceremony
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >All,

 >During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
 >around 8:35 pm EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
 >floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important icons in
 >the Aboriginal culture - a culture which has a clean lineage
 >going back perhaps as far as 100,000 years.

 >I cannot imagine anyone in the UFO/ET research community who
 >watched that icon being hoisted and who did not feel a chill up
 >their spine or the hair on their neck rise.



                   Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
                 Phenomena Research Australia


EBK & Researchers,

Just a follow up on that main images seen at the Olympic Opening
Ceremony 16th Sept 2000.

THE WANDJINA IMAGES:

IMAGE, DATA & STORY:
http://hometown.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/wandjinahome.htm

IMAGE 1:
http://members.nbci.com/praufo/prawandjina/wandjina1.jpg

IMAGE 2:
http://members.nbci.com/praufo/prawandjina/wandjina2.jpg

THE DISCOVERY:

In 1838 a party led by Captain George Grey stumbled across some
paintings in the Kimberley district of Western Australia that
have been the subject of controversy ever since.

Exploring among hills near the Prince Regent River, Grey's party
found a number of caves in which some extraordinary figures were
painted. Describing the main painting in the second cave Grey
investigated, Grey wrote in his journal that"

"It was the figure of a man, ten feet 6 inches [3.2 metres] in
length, clothed from the chin downwards in a red garment, which
reached to the wrist and ankles"

"... The face and head of the figure were enveloped in a
succession of circular bandages or rollers... these were
coloured red, yellow and white: and the eyes were the only
features represented on the face. Upon the highest bandage or
roller, a series of lines were painted in red, but... it was
impossible to tell whether they were intended to depict written
characters, or some ornament for the head.."

Grey went on to say that the painting;

"... had the appearance of being much more defaced, and ancient,
than any of the other's that the party had seen".

These Wandjina (the spirit in the cloud), as the paintings have
become known, have given rise to many theories. Anthropologists
are satisfied that the paintings are consistent with Aboriginal
mythology in the region, but it has also been suggested that the
paintings are of a priest dressed in his cassock, perhaps one
from a visiting Portuguese or Spanish ship. Some even contend
that the Wandjina represent visiting extraterrestrials, with
their spherical helmets to protect them from our earthly
environment.


Regards,

John W. Auchettl   - Director PRA Research

Dr. Ron Barnett    - Deputy Director


PRA HOME PAGE:

http://members.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/Pra1.htm

http://www.ozemail.com.au/~lear400/Pra1.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 >
   Sep > Sep 16

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:06:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 15:41:54 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach


 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:12:59 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>Now what I  want to ask is, if the object returns the flashing
 >>pattern i.e. 3 flashes from you - 3 flashes returned by object.
 >>If beings of some kind are not on board the observed object, and
 >>the object is returning the flashes' is it within the
 >>possibility of programmed devices to understand and to know when
 >>a flash is sent by the observers to the object itself, so it
 >>then knows to return a flash?

 >>How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >>people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >>source?

 >I understand the question at hand. However, isn't it possible
 >that such a device might be under remote control?
...
 >Likewise, an advanced alien technology that sends a probe would
 >likely look for signs of the simplest communication, not the
 >most advanced. As many anti-CSETI-ists have pointed out, RF is
 >as primitive to ET technology as, say, a blinking light is to
 >RF!

Roy, this capability is well within our grasp, based on light
sensors and programmable microprocessor devices. There is no
inherent intelligence needed in the device itself, apart from
the "intelligence" designed or engineered into it.

In fact, due to the miracles of modern technology, my kid has a
Lego MindStorms "droid" that does substantially the same thing.
One of the games you can play is to have your Lego droid play a
sequence of long and short (sonic) beeps, then wait for you to
play the same sequence back via flashlight. If you flash the
wrong code, the droid "knows".

As to Roger's observation about remote control: it wouldn't be
necessary to monitor for any signals in "real time". As with the
robotic droid example, no inherent intelligence is necessary.
The probe could be programmed to send a signal upon receiving
some indication of possible intelligence.

So, a programmed device like the one speculated about could
be used to facilitate simple (programmed) communication
between "live" intelligence at either end.

-Kurt Jonach (eWarrior)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                         Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 14:53:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:01:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info? - Myers


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:46:26 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 06:27:29 -0700

 >>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:48:36 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Ghostwolf Info?
 >>>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:33:19 -0700

 >>>As I recollect the leading source of information and leaks about
 >>>Ghostwolf is Richard Boylan.

 >>>Interesting all the other AKAs, but kind of goes with what
 >>>another person mentioned awhile ago that his name should be
 >>>Robert Hoaxwolf. :)

 >>How about any credible sources regarding info on Ghostwolf?

 >Define "credible source" in the UFO community.

<snip>

"Credible source": Richard Boylan certainly isn't one of them...


 >Then you have the hard core skeptics (Klass, Oberg) whose bottom
 >line is, and always will be, no matter what proof or evidence is
 >presented, that the person in question is either a hoaxer,
 >misidentified a planet or weather balloon etc., because UFOs
 >aren't real so therefore they can't be.


This isn't a thread about skepticism - I'm simply asking for
info on a fraud.


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
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded
it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                      Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:05:02 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >>Friends,

 >>I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >>regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >>I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >>just a comment or two:

 ><snip>

 >>And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

 >The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
 >me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
 >because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
 >in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
 >whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
 >data and received money.

Dear Kind and gentle List Folk... and EBK,

MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.
Note that in a previous post, it was indicated that Carpenter
wrote his version of the events surrounding the "What If"
scenario. It was also indicated (by moi) that this version
would be published in the MUFON Journal.

Well, it will, but not until the MUFON investigation is
completed. When, is MUFON's business, not ours. After the
results of the investigation are completed, John Carpenter's
version of the story will be published, if indeed he still wants
to do so in light of whatever evidence has been turned up by the
internal (Read: INTERNAL) MUFON investigation.

I said that this investigation is none of anyone's business. It
ain't.

However the result of that investigation _is_ the business of
all of us. Fine point? Don't be ridiculous. It's about as broad
as you can handle. "You" being the List, not anyone in
particular. In spite of the fact that I can think of a few
"you's" out there in the ether.

 >The story from John C was that the files were all redacted, i.e.
 >all the personal information deleted. I posted an email to this
 >List and also sent a copy to NIDS asking two simple questions.
 >Did the person receiving the email actually see the files with
 >their eyes, and to avoid privacy issues, I asked if the files
 >were in fact redacted. So far in the last month and a half NIDS
 >has chosen to not confirm the fact the files were redacted.

 >Again the silence has been deafening.

Not to me it ain't. What's deafening is the noise. By
definition, referring to communications, "noise" is that which
carries no information. It's something which masks the data.
Let's stop making noise and wait until it's time for the filters
to be put in place. The noise filters. So we can get to the
data, the real truth. _Whatever_ it may be.

Cheers,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                   Re: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News - 9-16-00

From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 20:56:40 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:14:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News - 9-16-00



----------------------------------------------------------------
                     Jeff Rense Weekly E-News
----------------------------------------------------------------

                         The Week Ahead
                     9-17-00 thru 9-23-00

            Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories
                          From rense.com
                 Jeff Rense E-News is distributed
                 exclusively by Free Subscription.

                   --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        * READER'S CORNER *

Talk about an active readership!! Thanks for all these wonderful quotes!

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

From: KAT MAN
    "A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and
prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is
in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins." - Benjamin Franklin


From:   WizdomLass
    Everyone hears what you say. Friends listen to what you say.
    Best friends listen to what you don't say.

    If all my friends were to jump off a bridge, I wouldn't jump
    with them, I'd be at the bottom to catch them.

   "If you judge people, you have no time to love them"
                               ~Mother Teresa

   �Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle."
                               ~Plato

   Yesterday is the past, tomorrow is the future. Today is a gift
   that is why we call it the present.


From: Kathi
SATISFACTION : If you don't always get what you want, think of all
the things you don't want that you don't get.
                             (printed on a sugar packet)


From: DJ Moore
    "Caring is the rent we pay for being on this Earth." anon.


From: Tony Downing
    "Those unbiased to others have been nurtured by a higher order"
                               By Tony Downing (Poet)

From: dulcet tone
    "The day humanity is completely finished with these exploiters
in the name of religion, this very Earth can become a paradise."
Osho (1985), from his book, From the False to the True.


From: SJones
    A "normal person" is someone you don't know very well.
                    --- (I forget who said this originally...)

From: Barry Amundsen
     "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away ..."
                               Tom Waits

From: Peggy
     Suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.


From: JB Outrider
      to "know" what is real
      is a full time occupation,
      unfortunately so often we
      are distracted by many things.


From: Rick Visneau
      If you continue to think the way you've always thought,
      you'll continue to get what you've always got.

      If what you have isn't becoming to you, then it ought to be
      coming to me.


From:   Jim Lightfoot
      "The less they know, the more they seem to be sure".
         A Chinese saying.


From: Bill Stadler
       Reality is the history we don't know.  (author forgotten)


From: Vasudeva
       I am a nobody.
       Nobody is perfect.
       Therefore, I am perfect!


From:   James Miklasevich
     "When in doubt, shut up and sit down."  James Miklasevich


From:   rip
     Involvement and commitment is pretty well defined in a ham and
     egg breakfast. The hen was involved but the pig was committed.


From: The Riley's
      Evil spreads only as quickly as good retreats.


From: tjpro@eatel.net
      A watched pot never boils.


A SPECIAL THANKS TO EUGENE FIELDS.
All of the following come from him:

From: Eugene Fields
Jeff.. We have here my collection of quotes (I use as signatures)
that has taken several years to accumulate...use as you like
Enjoy - g


"When you look into the abyss, the abyss looks back at you" - Nietzche


"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however
improbable, must be the truth." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle


"When I found out that one of my years was seven of theirs, I
started biting absolutely everything." - Max Carlson, b. January 1,
1983 From: Every Dog Has His Day: Poems by Writer's Dogs


"When I am working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I only
think of how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the
solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong."
                                  -R. Buckminster Fuller-


"What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the
creation of the world." --Albert Einstein


"We...must learn to live love as the flower lives beauty."
                              --Henry Miller

"We may learn to deprive large masses of their gravity, and give
them absolute levity, for the sake of easy transport."
                              -Ben Franklin, 1780


"TIME IS WHAT A LIFE IS MADE OF."    Henry I. Russek, M.D.


"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people
who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about
it."                            - Albert Einstein


     "The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting
     for our wits to grow sharper."            Eden Phillpotts


"The illusion of freedom (in America) will continue as long as it's
profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the
illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take
down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move
the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick
wall at the back of the theater."- Frank Zappa


"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance � it is the
illusion of knowledge."                - Daniel J Boorstin


              ~~~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.~~~


"Recent history is the record of a vast conspiracy to
impose one level of mechanical consciousness on mankind."
                                        Allen Ginsberg

"Please accept my resignation.  I don't care to belong
to any club that would have me as a member."  Groucho Marx


    "One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life
    comes from being happy over the good fortune of others."
                             ~ Archibald Rutledge ~


"New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without
any other reason but because they are not already common."
                        John Locke


         May there always be work for your hands to do,
         May your purse always hold a coin or two.
         May the sun always shine warm on your windowpane,
         May a rainbow be certain to follow each rain.


"Life was never meant to be a struggle; just a gentle progression
from one point to another, much like walking through a valley on a
sunny day."         --Stuart Wilde


     "Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition
      that's troublesome."       Isaac Asimov


     "It is wise to disclose what cannot be concealed."
            --  Johann Friedrich Von Schiller  --


"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly, what is
essential is invisible to the eye."   Antoine de Saint-Exupry


    "If you suppress The Truth it becomes your enemy...if you
    expose the truth it becomes your weapon." Col Corso


"Human beings are not dominated by material things, but by ideas
for which they are willing to give their lives or their life's
work"                        - Winston Churchill


"How come if someone tells you there are 1 billion stars in the
universe you believe them, but if they tell you a paint job's
still wet you have to touch it to make sure?"


    "Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and
    thinking what nobody has thought."   Albert Szent-Gyrgyi


"Discovery commences with the awareness of anomaly, i.e. with the
recognition that nature has somehow violated the paradigm-induced
expectations that govern normal science. It then continues with a
more or less extended exploration of the area of anomaly. And it
closes only when the paradigm theory has been adjusted so that
the anomalous has become the expected."        Thomas Kuhn


           "Beware of the Military Industrial Complex"
               -President Dwight D. Eisenhower-


"We shall not cease from exploration. And the end of all our
exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place
for the first time."        T. S. Eliot


"All truth passes through three stages: first, it is ridiculed;
next it is violently attacked; finally, it is held to be self-
evident."  -- Schopenhauer


"All great spirits have encountered opposition from mediocre minds"
                                            Albert Einstein

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

          Got a favorite quote?  Feel free to send it:
             mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=quote

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

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

                 --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                           Cosmiverse!

No time to research? Cosmiverse will deliver the latest Space,
Science, and Technology news direct to you every morning. Need
a homepage? Perhaps a planner or new address? Cosmiverse is
perfectly tailored to fit your needs! Let Cosmiverse provide it
for you--FREE at     http://www.cosmiverse.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                        * TOP STORIES *

           Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
                       http://rense.com

   * Voice Recognition, Iris Scans - And Now Identification By
        How You Walk
   * Russian Lawyers Suspect US Sub 'Memphis' Of Ramming Kursk
   * SOHO C3 Possible Incoming Object Observed
   * Blood Donors With No Symptoms Can Pass CJD - Blood Supply
        Unsafe
   * West Nile Virus Kills Eight Israelis, Hospitalizes 100
   * Pakistan Sends Major Nuclear Warning To India
   * Human And Cattle Genomes Contain Many Identical Genes
   * School's Out - Forever?
   * Primate Goes Extinct - Is Anyone Concerned?
   * Bizarre Interview Over HIV-AIDS Connection With SA Minister
        Of Health
   * US Military EMF Pulses May Have Caused Recent Air Crashes
   * BUSHWHACKED - HUD Fraud, Spooks And The Slumlords Of Harvard
   * Dear Lt. Col. Michael Gibson...About Your Chemtrail
       "Response"...
   *  Palestinians Warn Of 'Religious War' If Israel Touches 'One
        Stone' Of Al-Aqsa
   * 'Probably Too Late To Save The Planet' - TIME Magazine Top
        Story
   * Was Conan Doyle A Killer And A Thief?
   * ETs And Chemtrails - The Cover-up Converges
   * Devil Defeats The Pope In Vatican Exorcism Battle
   * Ancient City Found In India Irradiated By Nuclear Blast 8,000
        Years Ago...
   * Thatcher Blasts Blair - Says He Wants To Abolish Britain
   * 'Whirling Disease' In Trout - Fish Version Of Mad Cow/Mad Deer
        Disease?
   * NY York Poison Spray Truck Blasts Woman In Phone Booth
   * Is That Dropped And Missing US Nuclear Bomb Dangerous Or Not?
   * Tomatoes And Bananas May Be GM Modified To Contain
        Hep B Vaccine

        Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                      TEXT by: W. C. VETSCH

�For years there have been basically two sets of books kept on
the Planet Earth. The set for the elite were called text books"
and they contained the Truth. The set of books for ordinary
people were known [to the elite] as X-Text which means bad text
or text filled with disinformation and propaganda with just a
tiny bit of real truth to give them some sense of credibility.�

In the FREE BOOKS section at:
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/az16/index0.html

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
                      9-17-00 thru 9-22-00

              (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can
             change due to late breaking stories, etc).

SUN 9-17   Encore 8-25
   Scott Mandelker Soul Evolution And The Cosmic Plan
   Scott Enyart The Missing RFK Murder Photos


MON 9-18
   Mike Ruppert:  CopvCIA.com - Drugs And Politicians


TUE 9-19
   Dr. Cary Savitch, MD:  Reality Check On AIDS


WED 9-20
   Carl Limbacher: Newsmax.Com Report
   Glenn Kimball: Bible Texts And Ancient Egypt Connections


THU 9-21
   Dr. Louis Turi: Divine Astrology Readings


FRI 9-22
   Scott Portzline:  Nuclear Accident Updates
   Jim Phelps:  Nuclear Black Projects


  Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com

                  --<>--   --<<<+>>>--  --<>--

                         Occult Theocrasy

Published Posthumously - occult, secret societies and sundry
other covert movements throughout the world. The most complete
work on this topic.  741 pp., Hardcover  Full table of contents
at:

http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index37.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/
Rense.com Store:
         http://www.sightings.com/store/store.htm
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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:39:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:16:39 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


From: royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Evans

Roger wrote:

 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 10:12:59 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Hi, Roy!

 >>I understand the question at hand. However, isn't it possible
 >>that such a device might be under remote control? After all, we
 >>do send remote probes to Mars and the like. I am aware of the
 >>time delay that OUR technology suffers from in these instances.
 >>However, the controlling entity of the probe might have more
 >>advanced technology or simply be in high orbit over the planet.

Hi Roger,

Yes I can go along with this, but I would like a sceptic's
viewpoint on these objects which carry out such actions? I mean'
we are in agreement, when we say that if there isn't a being at
the controls then it must have some kind of pre-programmed
device - sensor call it what you will. I am looking to see what
kind of answer could also be given to such actions by UFOs in
these circumstances' from those who are more sceptical of such
cases so I am widening this debate.

Best for now,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:27:22 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:20:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Bruni

 >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:06:31 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >Could you perhaps name some of the 'genuine' sceptics, as
 >opposed to the closed-minded pelicanists?

 >John Rimmer
 >Magonia Magazine
 >www.magonia.demon.co.uk


John

I consider Barry Greenwood a healthy sceptic. I read some of his
recent work and noticed that he addresses the subject from all
sides. Contrary to what some researchers think, Barry was not
actually on the Rendlesham case, it was his colleague Larry
Fawcet.

I think Lyn Picknet and Clive Prince are excellent researchers,
very sceptical in all areas, but they do work hard at their
investigations. Having said that, their suggestion in their last
book "The Stargate Conspiracy" that Jack Sarfatti, Sir John
Whitmore, others, and myself were targeted by the CIA, is not
how I see it. I for one was not targeted by any agency, the
alleged set-up, via an unsuspecting political journalist was not
orchestrated by anyone. It was I who approached him. I know John
Whitmore and I know the story and find it hard to imagine that
he was targeted, however the phones in the house where they
gathered (which was owned by Andrija Pucharich) were apparently
monitored by the CIA.That might be where Lyn and Clive figured
there was a set-up.

Colin Andrews has spent years researching crop circles and I
respect his efforts. I don't agree with his latest theories
though. I tend to think the patterns are caused by several
things. So we cannot dismiss them all in favour of Colin's
latest theories - just some. John King did a good interview with
Colin a few years ago which is worth reading for anyone who
thinks there's a conspiracy in his latest claims.....

I don't give any credit to the likes of Philip Klass. Anyone who
makes suggestions that a UFO encounter witnessed by numerous
military personnel, was the result of an hallucination by being
stoned on dope, is not serious in my opinion. That's not to say
that some of the guys didn't smoke dope, but dope does not cause
such hallucinations, and I doubt the sober Colonel was ever
stoned!

I think most good researchers need to have an open mind. When
you work in this way you have an advantage because you don't
know where the road will lead. If you approach a case in a
sceptical way you are going to walk that route and miss out on
the positive aspects of the case. The same goes for being too
much of a believer, you might miss out important facts which
lead to more mundane answers.

Ufology is a complex subject and takes time and effort. Sceptics
who make wild claims need to back them up with facts - not more
theories.

We have been watching one person playing at being a sceptic on
these lists for quite some time now, claiming to have
"discovered" new documents and announcing all over the net that
a certain case is solved. This is nonsense in the extreme
because those documents where not "discovered" by him, but were
posted to him by another researcher.

This person has spent considerable time building up a reputation
for himself as being the person to have solved this case, when
in fact he has not done any investigation into these documents
whatsoever, but merely taken them as they stand. There are lots
of clues in those statements (I know because I also have copies)
but one needs an open mind to see them. A sceptic with no
experience in investigation will not notice anything but what he
wants to see. Therefore the clues will not be acknowledged and
thus not lead to further research.

I consider these people to be a curse on the investigation of
ufology because there are people who actually fall in line with
their theories without questioning them.

I would consult the "respectable" sceptics when investigating a
case, and I would examine their theories. But what I find is
that many of them have a habit of picking out "only the parts"
of the case that suits their theories and dismissing anything
that goes against it. Some even claim the witnesses are liars if
it doesn't fit what they want to believe. The latter is what I
consider to be a "fanatical" sceptic and they should have no
place in the serious study of ufology.

Hope this helps

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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                      Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Jones

From: Sean Jones <tedric@tedric.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 17:22:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:24:19 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote - Jones


 >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >Subject: Re: 'Linda' Case Footnote
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:44:45 -0500 (CDT)

Afternoon Chris, Mark, All listers following this thread

 > >95% of reported UFOs are classed as IFOs.

 >Nope, sorry. I'd have to disagree with those qualifiers. We've
 >been carefully studying UFO sighting reports nationwide for more
 >than a decade, and the 95% trend does seem to be real. There's
 >no question that for *raw* UFO data, only about three to five
 >percent unknowns are found after sifting out IFOs and insufs
 >*and* looking at the remaining reports carefully for content,
 >quality and reliability (as per the Vallee classifications). On
 >the first pass, there may be as many as about 15% to 20%
 >Unknowns, but these drop dramatically when we start really going
 >through the cases. And, we've actually done some really
 >rigourous sifting. We've made copies of all the cases, given
 >sets to everyone at the table (as many as 15) and then had each
 >of us pick out high-quality UFOs by consensus. CEs were always
 >included in the batches every year.

<Huge snip>

Chris

I kinda hafta agree _but_ when I was researching/writing "101
Possible Explanations for UFO's" I had to include people
out-right lying to get the number of IFO's up to 95%.

 From my own personal experience I would put the percentage of
unknowns at around 10%  from my decade an a half of UFO
research. Perhaps your extra years have given you some more
insight?

But onto Stan's comments of about 30% unexplained. I would have
to say this to me appears way out of the norm. Perhaps the only
way get a realistic true figure would be to put _all_ the UFO
databases together and then compare stats. Or perhaps we could
ask Larry Hatch what figures his UFO data base show for another
comparison to Chris's.

Also, to bring this back in line with the thread heading (well
ish) in my own personal experience I would also put abductions
in the same percentage figures 90% (Explainable one way or
another) - 10% that can't be explained.

Now that is bound to set the cat amongst pigeons! <g>

Anyone care to comment on that?
--

    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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                  Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:01:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:26:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Sandow


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:24:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Peter Brooksmith suggested Janet from 'The Abduction Enigma',
 >but Greg Sandow rejected it because it could just be anecdotal.
 >Of course one man's anecdote is another man's empiric
 >observation.

First, many thanks to Kevin for his informative and helpful role
in this discussion.

As for my comment, which Kevin notes here, of course Kevin is
right. My point had been about the way empirical observations
reach us. In this case, Peter had read an empirical account
credited to William P. Cone in "The Abduction Enigma,"
coauthored by Kevin, Cone, and Russ Estes.

Since I don't know anything about Cone (the book doesn't even
specify his training, experience, or other credentials), I don't
know how much weight to put on his observations. That's why I
called them "anecdotal." They're a story one reads in print,
perhaps accurate, perhaps not. I'm not criticizing Cone at all
here, or saying that I expect his account to be inaccurate. This
is only a question of how to assess what one finds in books and
other media.

My point was that -- when important scientific questions are
being discussed -- I'd rather get my information from
peer-reviewed journals, or from books written by people whose
credentials are known. That way, at least, I know that the
writer is known in his or her field, and that his or her
colleagues agree that what the writer says should be listened
to.

This isn't infallible. Nonsense has appeared in peer-reviewed
journals, and occasionally there's even fraud in science. But at
least it's a start. If someone is a credentialed scholar or
scientist, they've served an apprenticeship in their field.
Their work has been watched by others, and if their reports of
what they've seen were inaccurate, or their research was shoddy,
or their citations of others' work were misleading, they
probably wouldn't have advanced to the point where we'd be
reading them.

Compare the situation in ufology. I have a certain minor
standing as a ufologist, but how does anyone know whether to
believe what I say? If I say I've observed something at Budd
Hopkins's support groups, how do you know you can trust me? If I
say I've read something in a book or a psychology journal, how
many people check to see that what I claim to have read even
exists?

This is why peer review is important, and why ufology, alas, is
still largely an amateur discipline.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                   CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Saskatoon,

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 17:25:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:30:58 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #2 - Saskatoon,



CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 17, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #2 - SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLE


Following is a field report on the Saskatoon, Saskatchewan crop
formation from Dennis Eklund, Saskatchewan director for
CPR-Canada. Additional ground images have also been added to the
report on the web site, from Dennis Eklund and field research
assistant Beata Van Berkom:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/saskatoon00.html

The central hole may indicate this particular formation to be
man-made, however the node deformities, with similarities to
those in the random areas, (would) still need to be explained.
Dennis indicated that a tuft of standing crop had been present
in the centre of the circle when the first brief ground
inspection was done, but was gone when they returned later that
day, either taken or trampled by visitors. Similar feelings of
disorientation or lightheadedness were also described by the
farmer inside the Hazlet, Saskatchewan formation and the camera
malfunctions are also commonly reported in many formations,
which should also be taken into account.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                           'Great Dreams' UFO Site

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 01:58:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:32:41 -0400
Subject: 'Great Dreams' UFO Site


Hi All,

Came across this site on a search, what a load of UFO links!
http://www.greatdreams.com/ufos.htm

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 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                                The Wandjina

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:24:48 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:36:18 -0400
Subject: The Wandjina


For those interested in pursuing more detail on the Wandjina,
the following has been extracted from my document - "Australian
Aboriginal culture & possible UFO connections" - which can be
found at:

http://www.project1947.com/forum/bcabor.htm

Aboriginal myths incorporate the idea of "sky-beings", with the
Wandjina being among the most interesting to consider. The
Wandjina have been preserved in a fascinating oral tradition and
in a large collection of rock paintings scattered throughout the
Kimberley region of northern Australia. The paintings have
received all manner of interpretations from stylised
representations of a pervasive myth system to naive "ancient
astronaut" theories. It is however fascinating to see that the
indigenous tribes viewed the Wandjina as "the spirit in the
cloud." Indeed, the unique painting style shows a logical
sequence from human figures to stylised representations of
clouds. This duality of anthropomorphic form and "clouds" is
widespread in primitive cultures and finds an interesting
parallel in the biblical accounts in "Exodus." While this line
of thought is suggestive of superior "sky beings" acting as
cultural catalysts for primitive societies, I should point out
that making mythological component comparisons, can make for
interesting exercises, full of emotive similarities, but are
purely speculative. [1]

References:

1:

The Art of the Wadjina by I.M. Crawford (Western Australian Museum), 1968;

The journals of George Grey, "Expeditions of Discovery"

The Australian Aboriginal by A.P. Elkin (1954)

Australian Religions by M. Eliade (1973)

The Past is human by P. White (1974)

Yorro Yorro - Everything Standing up alive - Spirit of the
Kimberley by David Mowaljarlai & Dutta Malnic, Magabala Books,
Broome, WA, 1993

Messengers of the Gods - Tribal Elders reveal the Ancient Wisdom
of the Earth by James Cowan, 1993, re; The cave at Wanalirri

On the issue of abductees & the Wandjina motif I have commented
on this in my paper ""UFO Abductions & Science: A case study of
strange evidence" pg 47 of the Australian Ufologist, Vol.3
No.3, 1999 see:

http://www.powerup.com.au/~ufologist/Ufologist_Page_2.html

(This is extracted from my comments on a fascinating 1976 New
South Wales, Australia abduction case)

In the case of the reporter of the 1976 episode, she was keen to
utlise hypnotic regression, primarily to perhaps improve her
recollection of what the "beings" looked like. She was not
greatly disturbed about the incident, and really only wanted to
perhaps resolve the incident to her satisfaction, as it had
always being a nagging mystery for her. She was counciled before
regression not to expect anything revelatory or not to become
too immeshed in any particular aspect. She was advised that the
technique was not the automatic pathway to accurate
recollection, and that it was susceptible to fantasy and
imagination.

The woman's husband and I sat in on the regression at her
request. We were both silent observers. The session revealed
little beyond the conscious recollection, other than small
clarifications of the beings' appearance, a brief impression of
being outside, "floating feelings", looking out a window, the
feeling of strong pressure being felt on her forehead, a
impression of some kind of object "like a bolt, with a nut,
attached to a cord", plus other fragmentary recollections. She
started to become uncomfortable with the experience and the
session was ended. Her main objective with the session had been
to try to confirm her impressions of what the "beings" looked
like. It was clear that this was a stumbling block to the
further unfettered progression of the hypnosis. She found the
focusing on the beings appearance frightening and did not want
to continue. The psychologist and I respected her wishes and no
further sessions were undertaken. Since then, I have kept in
contact with her. She is still puzzled by her experience. Her
conscious memory remains clear and consistent. Of the various
images she has come across since then she was most struck by the
Wandjina aboriginal rock paintings. Considering their haunting
appearance and the dominance of the large dark eyes and the
absence of a mounth, you can perhaps understand why.

Whitley Strieber came to Australia during October, 1988, and
asked to meet with the witness. A meeting was arranged on, which
I sat in on. I came away satisfied that the meeting would not
bias any subsequent regression work.

Strieber was to write in his sequel to "Communion" -
"Transformation", that the woman's experience was "the best
description of the gray beings" he had received, from the
thousands of letters that followed the publication of
"Communion". Whitley Strieber again referred to this experience
in his recent book, "Breakthrough", when he was struggling with
the possible "negative" nature of the "Visitor experience". He
described this case as one of the most compelling "negative"
letters he had received. He suggests that the noise of the
woman's vacuum cleaner may have somehow prevented the disabling
"sonic attack" often used to render people unconscious, thereby
allowing her a clear and conscious awareness of the beings'
presence. Strieber was deeply disturbed by "the bullying, the
compulsion, the cruel and extremely clever deceits" of the
"visitors" revealed in this case. Strieber speculates that the
reason for this revolves around the aspect of "forcible
abduction". The resistance lead to the "negative" aspects. While
Whitley Strieber has reconciled this aspect in his own mind,
there are many that cannot embrace it, and just as many perhaps,
who have no need to, because their experiences are more
"positive". It is a puzzling and frustrating issue for which
answers at this point are uncertain, while we still need to
grapple with the questions of reality of these experiences.

Regards,

Bill Chalker








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 17

                           Further On The Wandjina

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:29:25 +1000
Fwd Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 23:38:41 -0400
Subject: Further On The Wandjina


The following comes from a file document I prepared back in
1976. I believe it will be of interested to the list.

Regards,

Bill Chalker

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

The Wandjina

By Bill Chalker

(Copyright: 1976, 2000)

In March, 1837, George Grey led an expedition into the interior
of the Kimberleys in north west Australia, originally to see if
the inland sea existed. Although no such inland sea was found,
Grey widely explored a part of the Kimberley. It was during this
exploration that Grey discovered 2 sites with rock paintings of
the type we now refer to as Wandjina paintings.

Grey relates the discoveries in his journals , and his drawings
appear in Volume 1 of his Expeditions of Discovery (1841).
Subsequent expeditions into the area by Brookman (1901), Love
(1930), Elkin (1930, 1948), members of the Frobenius expedition
(1938), Coates (1952) and Crawford (1962, 1963 and 1964) confirm
most of Grey s material.

Indeed Wandjina type paintings are dispersed over a wide area of
the Kimberley and are generally assumed to illustrate the
principal characters of an extraordinarily complicated myth
system. Interpretations of what these figures represent, vary
quite markedly from mere nature symbolism, to evidence for
intrusion by other races, to indications of visitations by
anomalistic anthropomorphic phenomena that is aliens and the
like.

Although subsequent expeditions have indicated some inaccuracies
in Grey s drawings most compare reasonably well with established
and documented sites. But one of Grey s drawings is somewhat
unique. He located a painting of the figure of a man 10 feet 6
inches in length, clothed from the chin downwards in a red
garment, which reached to the wrists and ankles.

In Greys own words:

The face and head of the figure were enveloped in a succession
of circular bandages or rollers, or what appeared to be painted
to represent such. These were coloured red, yellow and white,
and the eyes were the only features represented on the face.
Upon the highest bandage or roller, a series of lines were
painted in red, but although so regularly done as to indicate
that they were intended to depict written characters, or some
ornament for the head&. The painting was more injured by the
damp and atmosphere, and had the appearance of being much more
defaced and ancient than any of the others, which we had seen.
This figure brings to mind the description of the prophet
Ezekiel.

It was this particular painting that sparked considerable
controversy. It was bandied about as evidence for early
incursions by foreign peoples and the series of lines & painted
in red , which may have depicted written characters , were given
all manner of interpretations. Indeed it was suggested by some,
that these characters represented a decipherable script. Thomas
Worsnop indicated they read, I am a great personage& , they
being made by traders from the Red Sea area. Professor Campbell
suggested the script was archaic Japanese, and offered the
translation: the number of the hopeless ones is 62 , from which
he concluded that a Japanese vessel floundered on the coast
leaving survivors. Probably no less exotic a connection is the
suggestion by Professor Homet that similar markings were found
curved onto stones in certain parts of South America. The
suggestion is that perhaps a superior people in these areas were
the source or stimuli for the marks.

The only problem with all these speculations, is that the
painting, upon which they were based, has not been found yet, or
rather its existence, in the form Grey described and drew, has
not been confirmed. I. M. Crawford, of the Western Australian
Museum, suggested he found the painting upon which Grey based
the strange sketch. Crawford s figure however is 2 feet shorter
than the Grey dimensions, and appears to have a top feather
projecting out of the top bandage or roller . This
dissimilarity and other factors suggest that Grey s second cave,
the locality of the Ezekiel figure has not actually been found.

Generally the Wandjina figures that have been found are
connected with the sky by most indigenous tribes. Indeed, the
aborigines view the Wandjina as the spirit in the cloud ,
understanding them as being both human in form and cloud like.
The elaborate head-dress is usually interpreted as the
lightning, which the Wandjina controlled. Perhaps more
succinctly, the Wandjina are thought of as beings in the clouds.
They originally came out of the clouds, and now, as the
aborigines see it, they return in that form. In a similar vein,
certain tribesmen say the Wandjina have returned to the sky, and
can now be seen at night as lights moving high above the earth.

It appears that the cloud connection is the more dominant
belief. It is perhaps interesting to note that the cloud by day
and pillar of fire by night, featuring in Exodus , exhibit the
same religious myth . The superior being (or beings) is in the
cloud . The Bible takes the connection even further by
indicating that this superior being (God it seems) is humanoid
in appearance, speaking to Moses on a person to person basis.
The cloud is also capable of landing. The cloud and being are
distinctly separate.

Whether this same myth mechanism is operating as a stimuli for
the Wandjina legends is entirely speculative, but I.M. Crawford
indicates that the paintings of the Wandjina range from human
figures to stylised representation of clouds:

The sequence from human to cloud form evolves through the
following stages: Wandjina paintings usually show man like
figures complete with body, but in some cases the body is
omitted and only the head and shoulders retained, and in the
next stage the shoulders are omitted leaving us just the halo
surrounding the face. This is finally simplified until the halo
becomes a mass of concentric lines, with only the eyes peering
through & the eye of the storm .

W. Arndt, a senior research officer with the CSIRO, suggested
that the reverse may have been the stimuli for the Wandjina
figures. That is, that the paintings evolved from paintings of
clouds.

Of further interest is the association between the Wandjina
belief and the Rainbow-Serpent myth. The Rainbow Serpent is
called Galaru in the northern Kimberely and Ungud elsewhere.
According to legend, Galaru lives in a sacred pool near the
Wandjina cave, and is responsible for the spirits of babies
which it brings to the waterholes. These spirits are
incarnated, by the retouching of the Wandjina. The latter finds
an analogy of sorts with the fairy faith myths of child-napping.
The children, often as not returned, or they appear as
changelings . This belief in changelings was not restricted
to Europe. It can be found in regions as remote as Australia,
China and the American Pacific coast. F.W. Halliday speculated
about a dragon and the disc myth. With the Wandjina associated
with the cloud , the serpent and cloud mythic connection
resonates with Halliday s thesis.

In conclusion, the Wandjina myth exhibits a number of
mythological components common to those more directly ascribed
in other documented beliefs. The analogies with the biblical,
fairy and dragon myths have been noted, merely to demonstrate
the generality of myths of the superior being acting as a
cultural catalyst for primitive societies. The speculations
outlined are purely exploratory and should not be regarded as
evidence for supporting the idea that extraterrestrial beings
were the stimuli for the Wandjina myths. Indeed the arguments
are more suggestive of anomalous anthropomorphic incursions of
some type, which appear to have some similarities with other
documented sky myths. Just finding out who these beings were,
finds an interesting analogy in the contemporary UFO myths . As
such they are of particular interest to researchers.

The Art of the Wadjina by I.M. Crawford (Western Australian
Museum), 1968;
The journals of George Grey, "Expeditions of Discovery"
The Australian Aboriginal by A.P. Elkin (1954)
Australian Religions by M. Eliade (1973)
The Past is human by P. White (1974)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                       Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:36:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:36:47 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?


 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:39:41 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hale

Roy wrote:

 >Yes I can go along with this, but I would like a sceptic's
 >viewpoint on these objects which carry out such actions? I mean'
 >we are in agreement, when we say that if there isn't a being at
 >the controls then it must have some kind of pre-programmed
 >device - sensor call it what you will. I am looking to see what
 >kind of answer could also be given to such actions by UFOs in
 >these circumstances' from those who are more sceptical of such
 >cases so I am widening this debate.

Roy,

If you are asking how intelligently a computing device might
behave then you might be interested in "The Emperor's New Mind"
by mathematical physicist Roger Penrose. Posing the question,
can a computer have a mind, he writes "...is it necessary that
the relevant structures be biological in nature (brains), or
might minds equally well be associated with pieces of electronic
equipment?"

He goes on to describe the (Alan) Turing test, proposed in
1950, which essentially has a human interrogator trying to
decide which of two subjects is a computer and which a human,
simply by interacting with them in an impersonal way. If the
computer fools the interrogator it might be said to think.

Regarding your hypothetical UFO, it wouldn't be too surprising
if it behaved intelligently, would it? Even if it didn't get
here from there entirely on its own your "unmanned" craft would
still have to navigate using some programmed guidance system.
Not to say I'm not skeptical, but if it could fly around all by
itself its already pretty "smart".

To widen the debate... In "UFO-FBI Connection" Bruce Maccabee
covers a reported sighting in which a flying disc was seen
"...about seventy-five feet above the floor of the canyon and
moving up and down as it flew." That sounds like a pretty bumpy
ride for the occupants doesn't it? On the other hand, its
precisely how you might expect a programmed craft to operate.

Kurt Jonach (eWarrior)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

              'Rendlesham' Images [was: Orford Ness Lighthouse

From: Neil Morris <neil@adm1.ph.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 12:47:18 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:41:55 -0400
Subject: 'Rendlesham' Images [was: Orford Ness Lighthouse


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'
 >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:27:22 +0100

 >>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:06:31 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

 >>Could you perhaps name some of the 'genuine' sceptics, as
 >>opposed to the closed-minded pelicanists?

 >>John Rimmer
 >>Magonia Magazine
 >>www.magonia.demon.co.uk

 >John

 >I consider Barry Greenwood a healthy sceptic. I read some of his
 >recent work and noticed that he addresses the subject from all
 >sides. Contrary to what some researchers think, Barry was not
 >actually on the Rendlesham case, it was his colleague Larry
 >Fawcet.

<snip>

Georgina and others interested in Rendlesham.

I have just returned from the International UFO Conference held
this past weekend at the University of Leeds where two of the
invited speakers were Larry Warren and Peter Robbins.

Other than making a number of very complimentary comments
regarding Georgina's forthcoming book the majority of both
Peter's and Larry's presentation was as I had seen a few years
previously just prior to their publication of "Left at East
Gate". But at the end of Larry's presentation he did throw in a
couple of "gems".

Firstly, since he came out with his story a number of his fellow
servicemen who took part in the events have been in touch with
him here in the UK where he now lives to lend support his
actions and confirm their parts in the events back in 1980. But
further to this he disclosed that a few weeks ago he received a
package of photographs allegedly taken in Rendlesham Forest at
the time of the "chase". He knows the serviceman who supplied
the photographs and has no reason to question his story of how
he came to retain the film he shot that night and actually
handed in a roll of film shot at the forest floor in it's place.
It seem the comments that the photographs taken that night
didn't come out were quite correct.

Although we only got to see 3 of these images of the coloured
lights in the distance through the trees, and of the crescent
shaped craft seen overhead, it's pretty obvious _if_ these
images are genuine, there is no way these lights were the Ness
Lighthouse, the vertical spacing of the Red/Blue lights seen are
way too far apart and appear far too elevated for them to have
been the lighthouse as it would have been on the horizon
and even if it were visible at that point and had a blue light.

This looks like a development in this case to keep an eye on.

Neil.



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


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

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

*        *         *         *         *         *         *         *








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:26:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:46:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


Lest anyone should forget a significant claim made by Brenda
Butler, who apparently attended a talk which Col. Halt gave in
the UK, the following was published some years ago (possibly
1994 - maybe someone can confirm):

[Start]
This article may be reproduced as long as it is not altered in
any way and includes the original source details.

Taken from SKYLINK Magazine Issue 10. SKYLINK is the magazine of
LONDON UFO STUDIES (LUFOS). Full details of LUFOS & SKYLINK are
available from:

MR ROY LAKE
10a TUDOR ROAD
BARKING
ESSEX
IG11 9RX
ENGLAND


Rendlesham Forest
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Truth as we Know it
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By Brenda M. Butler

Will the Rendlesham UFO ever go away? The answer has to be no,
not whilst the truth is being withheld by the government. By now
most people who know of this case must have gathered it was not
a space craft from another dimension, but could have been
man-made. One question most people keep asking is why does Col.
Halt a man still bound by his high security clearance keep going
round doing lectures on the incident, why does he keep coming
back to Britain? Over the past few years, he has been back
several times last year. He came over in July to do a T.V.
Programme also three lectures in the Manchester area. Why do the
government want to keep this incident going as a UFO? A big
cover up yes, but why? We have had UFO sightings over and around
two bases Woodbridge/Bentwaters in November 1979, these were not
covered up and the American serviceman were not told to keep
quiet about the sightings, so why were things different in 1980.

The RENDLESHAM case is a well guarded secret and probably always
will be. Only a few men know the real truth and I do not think
Col. Halt is one of them. We do know there are seven documents
never to be released, I wonder what these documents would
reveal.

Why did Steve Roberts come and tell me in January 1981 that an
incident happened in Tangham Woods - Rendlesham just outside of
Woodbridge air base. He said a craft of some kind had come down
in the woods on December 27th 1980. Repair had to be made as the
craft was slightly damaged, there were little men trying to
repair the craft, this was the original story right through till
August 1987. When Steve Roberts suddenly turned up on my
doorstep, he had come over from Germany to tell me he had been
told along with others to tell UFO investigators about the
incident of December 1980. He said "It was not a Space Craft and
that there were no aliens" and that He was told to go out and
start the UFO rumours.

I was about to leave to go to London to attend a lecture which
Col. Halt was supposed to be attending when Steve Roberts told
me not to go as I would be wasting my time as Col. Halt would
not appear as he was at Greenham Common. He also Said Col. Halt
was not allowed to say anything about the incident.

Well I went anyway, of course Col. Halt did not appear. I told
Harry Harris and the others about what Steve had said, But Harry
was so sure that Halt would turn up, as he had been advertised.
I found out later that he had no intention of turning up and
that he was actually at Greenham Common, Now how did Steve
Roberts know of all this and why come and tell me? Seven years
after the incident.

I asked him why he had told me about the incident in the first
place?, he said "Because he was ordered to" I asked why he had
now changed his mind and told me it was not a space craft? He
said "Because we are friends and you are wasting your time
chasing shadows", "one day I will tell you what really happened,
but it was of no interest to anyone really", so where does this
leave us?

i) We know Col. Halt's cassette tape he made was done inside of
a building, not outside in the woods.

ii) We know that no one who was involved can agree on the dates
of the incident, you would think some one involved could
remember the right dates.

iii) We have documents from the M.O.D. stating, "There was no
contact with alien beings and that no UFO was seen on radar",
"The lights were of no defence interest and nothing intruded
into British airspace and landed near R.A.F. Woodbridge."

iv) No one has actually come out and said "It was a space craft
from outer space" we have no evidence to support that it was.

v) Why over the period of 24th-30th December 1980 was H.M.S.
Norfolk anchored off Orford ness and the crew were ordered to
remain below decks at all times, all forms of power had to be
stopped or turned off. When the ship returned to Portsmouth all
the ship's company were taken off and debriefed, they were asked
if they were anchored off Orford ness. The men were never told
what this exercise was about.

vi) Fisherman were told to stay away from the area between
Bawkey and Orford ness around the time of the 27th-30th December
1980 at the time there was a Russian Turpolev TU 142 (BEAR) was
reported to have been flying off the coast just in international
airspace.

vii) There ware also green fluorescent lights coming from out of
the sky and going down under the sea between Bawkey and Orford
ness, there were several witnesses to this, couldn't this be
seen to imply that the 67th aerospace rescue and recovery
squadron based at Woodbridge Air Force Base and connected to the
NASA space programme have been involved in some way.

viii) Great speculation about the re-entry of Cosmos 749 has
been made. I feel this could be getting towards the most likely
explanation, as it is known that the Americans and Russians were
working together on space exploration at the time of the launch
of Cosmos 749 in 1975. The shape of the craft rumoured to be
involved on the night in December 1980 was said to have been
triangular and carrying 'people', please note that the shape of
the re-entry vehicles would from most angles look triangular and
certainly carry two or three people.

ix) RADIATION - Had any bomb or any ordnance dropped off an
aeroplane or been in an aircraft had it crashed in the woods, in
my opinion there would have been no chance of any radiation
leakage, because of the way they are designed the explanation of
the high radiation factor about 25 times that of normal
background radiation is likely to have come from some form of
power plant. It is certainly the case that this type of
propellant is commonly used in space.

I went up and met Col. Halt in Manchester on July 30th to do a
lecture with him. On hearing his lecture, there were several
contradictions, improbabilities and impossible statements made
by him below are just a few of these:

i) Within about ten minutes of the lecture Col. Halt had given
the date of the incident as the 25th December 1980, but later
changed the date to the 27th/28th/29th. He also says Sgt.
Boroughs and a Staff Sgt. were suffering from having been up a
long time and having a 'very good Xmas day' can we assume they
were drowsy or merry?

ii) Col. Halt stated "Boroughs walked up to the gate took a look
and saw an object in the forest through the trees. THE site in
question is 3/4 of a mile from the eats gate, there is no way
you can see through all those trees into the forest. So there is
no way Boroughs could have seen an object in the forest from
where he was.

iii) Col. Halt got the directions from the east gate to the UFO
site (WRONG) He said "THE patrolman could see into the forest
from the perimeter fence, you cannot see into the forest from
there as the trees are too thick.

iv) According to Col. Halt, he was at a combat support group
dinner for officers with forty other people at RAF Woodbridge on
the 27th of December, when this was interrupted by Lt. England,
informing him of the sighting in the forest. THE thing I find
unbelievable about this explanation is the seemingly in-urgency
of what took place from that time on especially as Col. Halt
gave orders that he should be notified immediately, should any
thing like a reoccurence of the first nights incident happened.

Let's take it step by step:-

Lt. England [should be Englund - James] contacted Col. Halt, at
the dinner, they went into the gents cloakroom to discuss the
matter, where England said "It's a fact", Col. Halt said "What's
a fact?", England said "The UFO is a fact".

With that Col. Halt obviously started to think in terms of
getting a team together to investigate as he went back to the
dinner hall, he spoke to the officer in charge of the Disaster
Preparedness and asked who was on duty that night, he was told,
Sgt. Nevilles. Col. Halt made arrangements to meet him at the
Disaster Preparedness office, from there Col. Halt made his way
back to his home to get changed.

That meant he would have to leave Woodbridge Air Force Base, via
one of two routes. He would either leave the base on the
Hollesly-Woodbridge Rd going nearly into Woodbridge before
making his way home to Bentwater base, probably six miles. Or he
could cut through both bases via the East gate!, which by the
time he got from the domestic site on Woodbridge to his office
or home also would be about six miles.

We must assume he took the first route otherwise when he got to
the East Gate, he would never have made it home to change. We
know by his talk that he firstly stopped off at his office to
collect his tape recorder, batteries and tapes, he then
proceeded to go to his home (about 3/4 of a mile form his
office) he got changed and awaited the arrival of England to
pick him up, he then proceeded back onto Bentwaters base to the
P.D.O to pick up Nevilles and his equipment. They then went from
three across the airfield, out of the back gate towards
Woodbridge airfield and onto the service road beside the forest,
which is some 3 1/2 miles from the D.P.O and at that point said
"he saw a lot of activity in the woods".

There has been no mention of the time factor since the incident
was reported to him and the time he arrived at the forest
service road, by all of his stated activities I would say it
must have been 1 hour at the very least, possibly much more.
Every UFO that I have heard of has 'up and gone' as quickly as
it appeared, so how did Col. Halt feel he had all the time in
the world and confidence the UFO would still be there, when he
got to the forest.

I think I would have gone straight to the forest suit or no
suit, he also said when he entered the forest service road, he
saw a lot of activity in the forest. THE service road is a good
3/4 of a mile from the incident site and the trees in this dense
forest were approximately 40ft high, so it was quite impossible
to have seen anything. THERE has been a lot written by a lot of
people about this incident, but very few of these people seem to
have any knowledge of the proximity of the two bases or the
surrounding area or what the forestry was like at that time.

I have been on this case from day one and am amazed at the
inaccuracies I have read I cannot for the life of me understand
why so few people have approached me about my investigations
into an incident which happened in a area I know like the 'back
of my hand'. This is only a brief summary of the activities over
those nights in December 1980, but I have all my notes and
diaries going back to January 2nd 1980. so I can tell the
original story as it unfolded and not the story of 'the fish
that got away' and got bigger and bigger. [END]


I believe Brenda Butler is being cited as a major source of
credible information in a forthcoming book.

We can only hope this isn't indicative of the abject nonsense
yet to follow. It would be a pity to see ufology in the UK
become the focus of media ridicule and a public 'laughing
stock'.

Significantly in this respect, the one thing of note is Brenda
Butler's claim that Burroughs and a Staff Sgt, which must be
Penniston, had possibly been enjoying considerable Christmas
spirit and were perhaps 'tired and emotional' at the time they
investigated some unidentified lights at 0300 on the morning of
26 December.

Perhaps that explains why Ed Cabansag portrays a more mundane,
non-eventful episode than Burroughs and Penniston.

Who knows...

With the lighthouse being proven to have deceived all three
participants on the first night and that there was in fact no
UFO the second night - not until Halt coincidentally found a
'UFO' where the lighthouse was and some "star-like" objects
which stayed there for hours before fading in the twilight - it
defies description as a 'UFO' case at all.

Incidentally, when Halt was viewing the "star like" objects, he
used, according to his memo, an "8-12 power lens".

Either this was the Starlight scope, or a small magnification
binoculars/monocular.

 From those I've asked, the opinion is that Halt is simply
referring to the Starlight scope. As he claims to have been
watching 'pencil thin beams' coming from one of the stars/UFOs
for about 45 minutes and ultimately did so from a considerable
distance, he must surely have been using some kind of visual aid
throughout this time.

It would be interesting to know if he was always using the
'power lens' when he saw 'lightbeams'.

Certainly, from those I've spoken to, including many members of
the 81st Security Police Squadron who either participated in
events that night or knew about them, no-one ever saw or ever
heard about 'beams of light'.

Impossible that such an extraordinary event would be unknown
about.

Even more unbelievable is Halt's claim, as he told Salley Rayl:

At around 4:30 a.m., Halt called the investigation off. "It was
a cold winter night," he says. "The wind was blowing, we were
wet, and I just ordered everybody back to the base. I saw no
reason to stay out there any longer. We left those objects up
there."[End]

It's a major NATO base with nuclear ordnance, Halt believes
there are unidentified aerial intruders beaming down lasers,
including, as he confirmed, near the weapons storage area and
not only is there no obvious concern, eventually they all just
go to bed!

We can perhaps understand how former base personnel, stationed
there at the time, have expressed how 'embarrassed' and angry
they are by the entire, farcical story.

Perhaps that should equally apply to any self-respecting
ufologists.

I suppose it depends on your standards (shrug...).


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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                      Date Of Grey's Wandjina Discovery

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 23:15:16 +1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:49:49 -0400
Subject: Date Of Grey's Wandjina Discovery

My earlier message dates the Grey expedition discovery of the
Wandjina paintings as March, 1837. It should in fact be 1838.
One of the primary Wandjina references, Crawford's otherwise
excellent book "The Art of the Wandjina" dates it erroneously as
1837. The paintings were first discovered by Grey's expedition
late in March 1838. The expedition arrived in the region during
December 1837 but did not start its inland treks until late
January 1838.

The Kimberley area of western Australia is a spectacular area of
natural and rugges beauty. The book 'The Kimberley - Horizons of
Stone' by Alasdair McGregor & Quentin Chester (1992) captures
the areas particularly well. Not for faint hearted but an area
well worth the visit for its natural features, rock paintings
and its native peoples.

Regards,

Bill Chalker









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                        Re: A Carpenter Note - Velez

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:11:32 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:58:31 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Velez


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >>>Friends,

 >>>I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >>>regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >>>I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >>>just a comment or two:

 >><snip>

 >>>And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

 >>The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
 >>me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
 >>because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
 >>in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
 >>whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
 >>data and received money.

 >Dear Kind and gentle List Folk... and EBK,

 >MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.
 >Note that in a previous post, it was indicated that Carpenter
 >wrote his version of the events surrounding the "What If"
 >scenario. It was also indicated (by moi) that this version
 >would be published in the MUFON Journal.

According to this last posting from Robert Gates "Carpenter's
version" is that; the reason for the uproar on the Internet is
because of people that he "doesn't know" who are trying to
discredit his "watchman in the beam of light" video. No mention
at all about the sale of the abductee files or the fact that
many abductees are outraged about it. I don't think there has
been one bloody post written by anyone about his videotape the
whole time.

He _knows_ 'what' this is all about and yet he chooses to
deceive people (and sanitize himself and the issue) by telling
them that it is a "conspiracy to keep him quiet about that
video." Horse hockey. He has absolutely no qualms about trying
to convince folks that we are seeing an apple not an orange. In
some circles that would be considered blatant lying in order to
protect ones own ass. I don't know what we'd call this
particular example.

He can't be so out of touch with reality that he actually
believes this was all over that video. After all, he himself
acknowledged (in writing on this list) that he was wrong. He
_participated_ in the thread for keerists sake. Now he claims it
was all just an attempt to discredit his video. That is a
blatant lie and _he_ knows_it.

Yet here you are; a. ignoring his fabrications and b. pretending
to be a spokesman for MUFON. You yourself know that _he knows_
what the fuss is really all about. (the sale of the files, not
any GD video.) You have nothing to say however about how he is
attempting to _distort the truth_ about this situation though do
you. This new lie about how all this is really about debunking
the video doesn't seem to register with you at all. At best you
are conveniently choosing to ignore the point because defending
it would prove impossible.

You also proclaim:

 >I said that this investigation (MUFON's) is none of anyone's
 >business. It ain't.

Are you the new "Official" MUFON spokesman? Who are you tell the
public to "mind their own business" as if you actually spoke for
(represented) MUFON?! Should we expect yet another addition to
your long list of formal apology posts to the List for running
your mouth _before_ putting your brain in gear?

You tell the public that the investigation into this matter by
MUFON is "none of our business" and that we'll be informed of
the results if and when MUFON is ready to do so. I'm not going
to touch on how very pompous and presumptuous you are to tell us
all to mind our own business about this sale of abductee files
and MUFON's investigation into it. I will say that unless you
have been made MUFON's new public relations man or an official
spokesman for MUFON that you are speaking out of turn. Your
statements do not carry any genuine authority from MUFON or
anybody else for that matter.

You are assuming an awful lot by issuing public statements of
this nature on MUFON's behalf. I'm sure that the officials of
MUFON wouldn't be too choked up about your presumption to speak
on their behalf. Especially in consideration of how
diplomatically you tell the public to "mind its own business" in
regard to making any inquiries about their investigation into
the sale of abductee files.

I'm willing to wager the ranch that MUFON has not authorized you
to make _any_ such public statements/proclamations on their
behalf. I'll further wager that MUFON officials don't even know
who you are much less that you are telling members of the public
to "mind their own business" regarding a MUFON investigation.
(Internal or not) I can't imagine a scenario where MUFON would
tell the public to "mind their own business" about anything! Yet
you do so on a very public list and you do it with complete
impunity. Worse still is that you make yourself 'sound like' you
are doing it on their behalf.

Personally I'd rather hear from someone who _actually_
represents MUFON on this matter. Not someone who has 'appointed
himself' a MUFON spokesman. You ought to get together with
Dr. Greer. He has appointed himself ufology's representative in
Washington. You guys would hit it off great. Together you can
start a club for self appointed what-have-you's!

How about me! You tell people I don't know that I think I'm the
"King of the abductees." Can I join your club of self-appointed
representatives? If so, I'd rather be the King of Tahiti if the
title isn't taken. <LMAO>

 >>Again the silence has been deafening.
 >
 >Not to me it ain't. What's deafening is the noise.

What amuses me most about your jibes is how all the "noise" on
this thread in particular has been (all along) coming
from/introduced by, you and you alone. ;)

"Cheers"

John Velez, Speaking strictly for myself. Not MUFON or anybody else.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch


 >From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:36:47 -0700

 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:39:41 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hale

 >Roy wrote:

 >>Yes I can go along with this, but I would like a sceptic's
 >>viewpoint on these objects which carry out such actions? I mean'
 >>we are in agreement, when we say that if there isn't a being at
 >>the controls then it must have some kind of pre-programmed
 >>device - sensor call it what you will. I am looking to see what
 >>kind of answer could also be given to such actions by UFOs in
 >>these circumstances' from those who are more sceptical of such
 >>cases so I am widening this debate.

 >Roy,

 >If you are asking how intelligently a computing device might
 >behave then you might be interested in "The Emperor's New Mind"
 >by mathematical physicist Roger Penrose. Posing the question,
 >can a computer have a mind, he writes "...is it necessary that
 >the relevant structures be biological in nature (brains), or
 >might minds equally well be associated with pieces of electronic
 >equipment?"

 >He goes on to describe the (Alan) Turing test, proposed in
 >1950, which essentially has a human interrogator trying to
 >decide which of two subjects is a computer and which a human,
 >simply by interacting with them in an impersonal way. If the
 >computer fools the interrogator it might be said to think.

 >Regarding your hypothetical UFO, it wouldn't be too surprising
 >if it behaved intelligently, would it? Even if it didn't get
 >here from there entirely on its own your "unmanned" craft would
 >still have to navigate using some programmed guidance system.
 >Not to say I'm not skeptical, but if it could fly around all by
 >itself its already pretty "smart".

 >To widen the debate... In "UFO-FBI Connection" Bruce Maccabee
 >covers a reported sighting in which a flying disc was seen
 >"...about seventy-five feet above the floor of the canyon and
 >moving up and down as it flew." That sounds like a pretty bumpy
 >ride for the occupants doesn't it? On the other hand, its
 >precisely how you might expect a programmed craft to operate.

 >Kurt Jonach (eWarrior)

Hello Kurt and Roy:

I cannot understand how anyone today would posit that to be
highly intelligent, a computer must be biological in nature.

Every so many months, computers double in power, memory, what
have you. That rate of advance cannot go on forever of course,
but imagine the automata available to societies thousands or
millions of years in advance of Earth!

At one time computers were little more than glorified adding
machines; huge, inefficient and slow. Perhaps Penrose wrote from
that era.

Later on, it was commonly said that computers would never beat a
chess-master at chess. That barrier was broken, so the
nay-sayers simply keep raising the bar. Mine can play music
while waiting for my next keystroke, and that's considered
mundane now.

Frankly, I have no idea what limits there are to such
technology, and it may well be that self replicating ( partly
biological ) memory and processing units will be incorporated in
the future.

I find the concept of fully automated probes, extremely
intelligent by our standards, to be intriguing. If nothing else,
it answers the common objections raised by some, that the
lengthy journeys required to study Earth from afar rule out any
such devices reaching this planet.

A fleet of such devices, self repairing and perhaps self-
replicating could study planets at stellar distances, all
without inconveniencing a single living soul. All of this is
provided "they" are more patient, or have a longer term outlook
consistent with longer life-spans.

Humans usually tend to plan ahead for a few decades at most, the
term of a mortgage or the useful lifetime of a big dam.

I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
about other planets for a century or more.

The time will pass whether they send them or not after all. The
costs may well be trivial given similar automata doing most of
the work. Even the tabloid "grey-alien", if any such exist,
could be an entirely artificial construct.

Motives? How about simple scientific curiosity? This would
prohibit significant interference/interaction with the test
subjects, be they animal, vegetable, mineral or human.

I have no way to support such speculation, but find it
intriguing. It might address certain other questions as to the
nature and behavior of certain UFOs, the ones otherwise hardest
to explain in prosaic terms.



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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                    Re: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.18.00

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:14:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:54:22 -0400
Subject: Re: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.18.00

TMP NEWS
The E-News Service of The Millennium Project

http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews
http://persweb.direct.ca/psa

September 18, 2000

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports

9.18.00



UN BUILDS GIANT TELESCOPE TO LOOK FOR ALIEN LIFE

The United Nations is drawing up plans for a giant radio
telescope that will scan more than a million stars for signs of
intelligent life. The �800m machine, called the Square Kilometre
Array (SKA), will be the most sensitive astronomical instrument
yet built...

http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/09/10/stifgnnws01001.html


NEBULOUS 'SPIROGRAPH' ASTOUNDS HUBBLE ASTRONOMERS

A young nebula offers a brilliant display of textures and
colors, but its shape mystifies astronomers who have used the
Hubble Space Telescope to take clear pictures of the once
sun-like star...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/11/hubble.spirograph/index.html


DIG FOR LIFE ON MARS

Find liquid water on Mars, and life may not be far behind. Many
scientists believe that this water can only exist thousands of
metres beneath the planet's surface. So a team of engineers at
NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, is
developing a robotic mole that can drill deep into Mars and
return samples to the surface through a tube that it constructs
as it digs.

http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/ns-dfl091300.html


COMET-LIKE OBJECT DISPLAYS UNEXPECTED CRATER, MYSTERIOUS ICE

A comet-like object with a mysterious crater could offer
insights into the violent past of ghostly objects hovering in
the far reaches of the solar system, Hubble scientists said
Thursday. A chunk of ice and debris called Asbolus, which orbits
the sun between Saturn and Uranus, surprised astronomers when
they discovered it had what looked like a fresh crater...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/14/hubble.centaur/index.html


NEW X-RAY TELESCOPE COULD PEER INSIDE BLACK HOLES

Astronomers have developed a design for an X-ray telescope so
staggeringly powerful that it could see black holes gulping
matter in distant galaxies. Government and university scientists
successfully tested a small prototype at NASA's Marshall Space
Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. A full-size instrument
based on the new design would be a million times more powerful
than today's observatories, the researchers said...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/14/blackholetelescope.ap/index.html


ASTRONAUTS, COSMONAUTS BEGIN WORKING INSIDE SPACE
STATION

Officials today described the mission as "flawless" after
astronauts and cosmonauts swung open the doors of the
international space station and floated inside following six
hours of exterior work. The crew of space shuttle Atlantis late
Monday opened the first of 12 hatches leading into the 140-foot-
long station a little early, entering the outermost vestibule
and then the American module, Unity...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/12/space.shuttle.02/index.html


THE PURPOSE OF CHEMTRAILS - GLOBAL WARMING/OZONE MODIFICATION?

Some interesting views on one of the current theories regarding
the purpose of the 'chemtrails', that they may be linked, at
least in part, to military projects relating to global warming
and / or the thinning ozone layer, an explanation which has been
gaining much attention and support in recent months...

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/chemtrailpurpose.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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                        ETI Signal From The Pleiades?

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:33:13 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:56:45 -0400
Subject: ETI Signal From The Pleiades?


Hi Everyone,

Below is an article by Jeff Faust that I found in the lastest
issue of Spaceviews which I think will be of special interest to
readers of this list, particularly the reference to astronomer
Frank Drake's "hair-raising experience" while doing early radio
observations of the Pleiades. Anyone know more about this?

Nick Balaskas

-----

S P A C E V I E W S
Issue 2000.38
2000 September 18
http://www.spaceviews.com/2000/0918/

<snip>

Recalling Drake's Voyages
by Jeff Foust

When many of the world's leading figures in the Search for
Extraterrestial Intelligence (SETI) gathered in Boston in May,
they did so for two reasons. One was to mark the fortieth
anniversary of the first SETI search, Project Ozma. The second
was to honor the man who led that initial SETI search, Frank
Drake, on the occasion of his 70th birthday.

Most people associate Drake with that initial SETI search as
well as the famous equation drafted shortly thereafter that now
carries his name which assesses the prospects for
extraterrestrial intelligence. Few though, realize that his
contributions to SETI and astronomy in general started well
before Project Ozma and continue to his day. Those who spoke at
the "Drake's Voyages" symposium at Harvard University, though,
were eager to discuss Drake's influence and express their
admiration for the man.

Drake's Start in SETI

Frank Drake's interest in the search for extraterrestial
intelligence can be traced back to his childhood, according to
professional astronomer and historian Woody Sullivan. That
interest was stoked as he was an undergrad at Cornell, when
famed astronomer Otto Struve gave a lecture there about low mass
stars with slow rotation rates. Such stars had "missing" angular
momentum that had to reside someplace else: planets, according
to Struve.

After a short stint in the Navy, Drake went to graduate school
at Harvard, which, at the time (the 1950s), had the only radio
astronomy program in the country. Drake did his thesis work
studying hydrogen in the galactic center in an era when most of
the radio astronomy taking place dealt with the Sun.

It was doing observations of the Pleiades during his time at
Harvard, though, that raised his attention about the
possibilities of SETI. During those radio observations he
detected a strong, narrow signal: a "hair-raising experience",
Sullivan explained, that convinced Drake that he wanted to do
SETI.

Drake would get his chance to do SETI once he graduated from
Harvard and went to the Green Bank, West Virginia facility of
the new National Radio Astronomy Observatory. Initially there
were no radio telescopes at Green Bank at all, but by 1959 a
26-meter (86-foot) dish was in place. Drake proposed to use that
telescope to look at nearby stars in an effort to detect any
signals coming from extraterrestrials there.

While Drake's colleagues were less interested in SETI than
Drake, the proposal did attract the attention of NRAO's new
director, Otto Struve, the astronomer who raised Drake's
awareness about the potential for extraterrestrial worlds as a
Cornell undergrad. While Struve was ambivalent about radio
astronomy in general, he was interested and supportive of
Project Ozma, and pushed the project ahead, particularly after a
paper by Phillip Morrison and Giuseppe Cocconi published in
Nature independently suggested that radio waves would be an
ideal way to communicate over extraterrestrial distances.

So with the blessing, and even urging, of Struve, Drake started
Project Ozma in April of 1960, using Green Bank's 26-meter
telescope to look at Epsilon Eridani and Tau Ceti, two nearby
Sun-like stars. Almost immediately Drake detected a signal. "At
the time we were very excited," recalled Drake. "We couldn't
believe our luck."

However, the signal turned out to be from a secret military
project, the first of many false alarms detected by SETI
projects in the last 40 years. Project Ozma continued searching
for 200 hours over the course of two months, but failed to
detect any signals of an extraterrestrial origin. It did,
though, prove that SETI was feasible, and set the stage for more
powerful searches to come.

Beyond Ozma: The Drake Equation and Arecibo

While Project Ozma failed to detect any signals from
extraterrestrial civilizations, it was a success in the sense
that it attracted the scientific community's attention to the
prospects for SETI. Drake helped organize the first SETI
meeting, held at Green Bank in November 1961, that brought
together experts from a wide range of disciplines to talk about
how likely such civilizations were and how to communicate with
them.

Out of this conference came what is now known as the Drake
Equation (also known as the Green Bank Equation), the number of
extraterrestrial civilizations in the galaxy based on a number
of probabilities, such as the fraction of stars with planets,
the fraction of planets that develop life, and the fraction of
planets with life that develop technological civilizations.
Since most of the factors in the Drake Equation are unknown, the
equation is something of Rorschach test, with various people
using it determine that either such civilizations are
commonplace or nonexistent.

Phillip Morrison said that the Drake Equation was perhaps the
second most influential equation of the 20th century, after
Einstein's E=mc^2. "Don't think of it as a probability," he
advised, "think of it as an agenda that leads you up a great
ladder of thought."

Drake's career, though, was more than just SETI. In the 1960s he
returned to his alma mater, Cornell, because of the opportunity
the university provided to work with the Arecibo radio telescope
in Puerto Rico. Arecibo had been set up by DARPA, part of the
U.S. military, in part to track satellites, but the huge dish
was also useful for radio astronomy.

There were problems with Arecibo, though. The telescope wasn't
useful at high radio frequencies because of the coarseness of
the wire mesh surface of the dish as well as the quality of the
feed system. Moreover, its military usefulness waning, DARPA was
ready to pull the plug on the facility. Drake proposed to the
National Science Foundation a project to replace the wire mesh
with a smoother surface that worked better at higher
frequencies, and add larger, better feeds.

As a result, Arecibo became one of the premier radio astronomy
facilities on Earth, a distinction that it holds to this day.
"Frank Drake made Arecibo what it is today," said Nathan Cohen
of Boston University. "He did a tremendous engineering job."

Mike Davis, who recently left Arecibo to join the SETI
Institute, noted that Drake's work, as well as another upgrade
to the telescope performed in the 1990s, have kept Arecibo on
the forefront of science for decades. "It's unique that a
scientific instrument has lasted on the cutting edge for so
long," he said.

Drake used Arecibo for SETI work, as one would imagine, but also
for other research, including early investigations into pulsars.
In 1968 he published a paper in Science about a pulsar in
Vulpecula, only the sixth pulsar yet discovered.

Still At Work

ge of 70, one would think that Frank Drake would be ready to
begin a well-deserved retirement. Not so. Drake is At the astill
hard at work, both discussing SETI to general and scientific
audiences and doing SETI research as well. At a technical
symposium during the Boston meeting Drake outlined what he
called the "SETI efficiency", a measure of how efficient an
array of radio telescopes is at collecting the radio signals
that fall on the area it covers. While it would appear ideal to
space individual dishes closely together, the dishes then begin
to shadow one another as they track objects, reducing their
effectiveness. The solution, he said, may be to space dishes
more in the north-south direction than east-west, to maximize
the effectiveness of a radio telescope array.

His current work adds to a body of accomplishments that makes
him the leading pioneer of this still-young field. "SETI
scientists have largely elaborated on Frank Drake's work," said
Seth Shostak of the SETI Institute. Given the depth and breadth
of Drake's legacy, that's likely to be the case for many years
to come.

<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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                      Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 20:01:49 -0400
Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo


My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"... although
he believes it to be a huge plasma/ball lightning. This photo
appears on the front cver of his first book. This case was
presented at the "Sturrock Panel" discussion in Tarrytown, NY,
several years ago and has been mentioned by Jacques Vallee as an
example of the optical power radiated by some 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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                          Filer's Files #37 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:59:55 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 20:06:51 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #37 -- 2000


Filer's Files #37 -- 2000, MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer, Director, Mutual UFO Network Eastern
September 18, 2000, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, C. Warren
Webmaster site http://www.filersfiles.com. - Majorstar@aol.com.

A BIG SALUTE TO THE AUSTRALIAN'S AND A GREAT OLYMPICS

During the opening ceremony of the Australian Olympics, at
around 8:35 PM EST, a giant cloth was raised slowly from the
floor of the arena. On it was one of the most important Windjina
icons in the 100,000 year old Aboriginal culture. The Australian
Aborigines history seems to indicate that extraterrestrials
visited Australia in the distant past. Sir George Grey
discovered in 1847, ancient Aborigine writings and Wandjina
hieroglyphics that depict a ten foot giant wearing a helmet and
space suit. Thanks to John W. Auchettl and Phenomena Research
Australia [PRA]
http://hometown.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/wandjinahome.htm


ARE UFOs STUDYING OUR WEATHER, FLOODS AND EARTHQUAKES?

UFO activity has started to pickup as the weather cools north of
the equator. I have noticed that the watchers take interest in
various natural occurrences and disasters. They almost seem to
know what is going to happen and move into position for
observation. For example, UFOs are often reported near
Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and hurricanes. Our
satellites often pick up uncorrelated targets not in the
computer data base indicating UFOs operate in space. We can
assume the watchers advanced technology understands the
intricacies of the world around us, By keeping an eye on their
activities we may be able to predict future events. On September
12, 2000, the Sun unleashed a surprising powerful full-halo
coronal mass ejection (CME). The leading edge of the CME reached
the Earth on Thursday, Sept 14, 2000. Three more coronal mass
ejections are heading toward Earth following solar eruptions on
Friday and Saturday. The CMEs could trigger aurora at
middle-latitudes when they arrive tonight and tomorrow. A severe
geomagnetic disturbances including aurora at middle latitudes
when the shock front arrives.

Over two hundred Near Earth Orbit asteroids detected have also
been detected in the last five years. Some asteroids have been
reported hitting the sun. In addition, after a long period of
low seismic activity our Earth has been hit by a sharp increase
in earthquakes in the last two weeks hitting the Pacific Rim
locations of Taiwan, Indonesia, Tonga Islands, and Qinghai,
China. These earthquakes are often followed by earthquakes in
North and South America. For those readers who live in
California you may have major Earthquake activity. Often animals
pick up trouble beneath their feet and try to run away when an
earthquake is imminent. So watch your animals and the UFOs for
predictions of trouble. It is reasonable to assume that all
these factors may be related to what goes on in the world around
us. For example, the sun's activity appears to be related to
snow storms and other weather patterns. Heavy flooding has been
reported in Japan and the United Kingdom. Some researchers have
even suggested the UFOs may be manipulating the weather. This
cycle of activity may be more closely related than any of us
suspect. I once studied cycles in relationship to the stock
market. Many strange cycles are repeated every few years that
seem to effect the stock market. I don't know what it might
mean, but mankind may also be influenced. We're having elections
in Yugoslavia, depending who wins we may have further invasions.
To add to our woes many large animals are becoming extinct at a
high rate. This week Time Magazine declared in major coverage
that it may be "too late" to save the planet. Space Weather is
at http://spaceweather.com. Potentially Hazardous Asteroids
(PHAs) are listed on Harvard's College of Astronomy website
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/ps/lists/Dangerous.html


RELATIONSHIPS IN UFO DATA

Dan Reichel, who has a PhD in physics from Caltech and Michigan
writes, "I owe it to myself to stand up for what I believe to be
true, rather than be bandied about by the opinions my peers
might subsequently have of me." Their opinions on such matters
are unfortunately the result of prejudices and lack of
information. I am certainly not the first PhD educated physicist
to come out in support of the UFO phenomenon, and I have no
doubt that I will not be the last! "I think one of the biggest
problems these days is that everyone seems to be content in
treating UFOs, crop circles, transient lunar phenomena,
extraterrestrial sightings, alien abductions, the Cydonia region
of Mars, ancient astronauts, pyramids, etc., as many unrelated
phenomena." Author Zecharia Sitchin certainly went a long way
toward tying many of these together with his book, "Genesis
Revisited." Unfortunately for the readers of Krapf's book, "The
Contact Has Begun," it sits rather like the District of
Columbia, and most readers may not realize that it is surrounded
by a whole continent of additional, related information -- that
tells a much larger story than many might be willing to put in
print (lest they end up with burning crosses on their front
lawns with suggestions like "the Anunnaki created Adam and Eve",
or, as Timothy Good alleged in one of his books, they
genetically engineered the personality of an embryo implanted in
a woman 2000 years ago -- whoever that might be (?), to teach us
to be good and kind to each other -- a lesson many of us have
yet to learn). How many are ready to understand that the
underlying meaning behind what Krapf has written is that the
Nephilim of the Old Testament will be returning in 2002? How
many know that the true meaning of "apocalypse" is "unveiling"
-- not at all anything like "Armageddon"? Most movies and
movie-preview-hype I have seen seem to use "apocalypse" and
"Armageddon" as if they are synonyms, while an end to US
government secrecy surrounding UFOs and EBEs is, in fact, an
apocalypse, as is a formalized return of the Nephilim/Anunnaki
after many centuries of "remaining hidden in the background."
I'll be meeting with one of the priests of my Roman Catholic
parish to discuss such matters this Thursday evening. Hope I
don't end up excommunicated! Thanks to: Dan Reichel PhD.


LOUISIANA CHEMTRAILS AND UFOS

Greg Avery the MUFON State Director who obtained his Juris
Doctor (JD) from Tulane University in 1976, sent me a video
taken mostly near his home. The video shows what appear to be
commercial aircraft making contrails that crisscross over his
home. The aircraft appear indistinct but this may be do the
distance. The contrails appear much thicker and heavier than
normal. Has the camera zooms into the contrail dark disc shaped
objects can be viewed flying in the vicinity of the contrails.
These dark objects or hockey puck like objects may be changing
the contrails in some way. Later in the day a pattern of hazy
clouds followed by cloud cover develops. Thanks to Greg Avery JD
storm@communique.net.


SOUTH CAROLINA CONTRAILS

SUMTER -- An Air Force Senior Master Sergeant writes that he has
noticed essentially the same set of circumstances as Filmed by
Greg Avery. Actually similar reports are coming in from various
places in the US followed by cloudy skies and heavy rains. These
may simply be coincidental occurrences but again a pattern seems
to be developing.


UFOs IN HISTORY

In Jacques Vallee, "Passport to Magonia" there is a famous UFO
sighting that took place in Japan in 1235, which represents one
of the first scientific investigations of a sighting. General
Yoritsume and his army observed mysterious lights in the
heavens. The lights were seen by large numbers of the Japanese
Army causing excitement as the UFOs circled, swinging, and
moving in loops above the encampment. The General ordered a full
scale scientific investigation and the key scientists of Japan
gathered together to provide an explanation. Their answer seems
very similar to ones we observe today. The answer read that the
scientists had agreed that the UFOs were completely natural, it
is only the wind causing the stars to sway."  In 1361, a flying
object about twenty feet in diameter emerged from the inland sea
off western Japan.

The painting of the Madonna and Saint Giovannino, in the Palazzo
Vecchio in Florence is attributed to the 15th Century school of
Filippo Lippi. The craft is hovering over the Madonna and child
with a small angel apparently holding the baby Jesus. The craft
is an oval or discoid shape with radiating gold spikes of light
are painted around the perimeter. It's a fine painting of the
UFOs seen today.

Berne Bennett from Tampa MUFON writes that a painting by the
Italian master Carlo Crivelli adorns the Church of the Annuziata
in Ascoli, Italy. The work, painted in the year 1486, clearly
shows a hovering craft, appearing much the same as modern
depictions of UFOs, emitting rays of light. The painting, called
"The Annunciation," is only one of many medieval and Renaissance
masterpieces that depict a UFO. All of these paintings depict
aircraft that cannot be explained in terms of the technology of
that era. We may, therefore, consider the possibility that the
masters were depicting craft from an alien civilization.


NEW HAMPSHIRE DAYLIGHT DISC

KEENE -- Brian Crystal reports a good friend sighted a disk
flying above Marlboro Street on September 5, 2000, It was a
clear daylight sighting of a craft moving towards the southeast
at 12:30 PM. It was flying in a straight line faster than an
airplane at only a thousand feet up. There was no contrail and
no sound. The UFO was quite bright and could possibly have been
a reflection of the bright sun during this particular time. The
disc appeared white, not silver-white like airplanes, and
suddenly disappeared.. I told the local Keene Sentinel Newspaper
about the sighting the day after, but was told by reporter there
needs to be more than one sighting. Please feel free to share
this sighting and let me know if anyone else has had a similar
one. Thank You and God bless. Thanks to Brian Crystal
poetsloft@netzero.net


PENNSYLVANIA LIGHT SHOW PROBABLY A METEOR

LEHIGH VALLEY -- Dan Shope, "Of The Morning Call" Newspaper
reports, "A bright streak across area skies early Saturday
September 11, 2000 prompted calls to dispatch center. Maybe it
wasn't "War of the Worlds" or "Mars Attack," but there was
something a little creepy about the sky on Saturday morning
about 3:30 AM. Reports came from Northampton County to Lancaster
County that something unusual was seen. It wasn't a plane, or
even a saucer. It was probably a meteor or space junk, according
to an official of Lehigh Valley Amateur Astronomical Society. "I
didn't see it myself,'' society secretary Ray Hannis of Macungie
said. "But someone who did see it gave me a call. "The way it
was described, it was probably either a meteor or space debris.
This light moved from north to south, into Lancaster County.
That's the direction most meteors move. Usually, if the movement
is west to east, it's space debris." A Northampton County
dispatcher late Saturday confirmed the office received reports
about the lights. A man who identified himself as a police
officer in the Northampton area called to report that the object
was huge with a color like a welding arc.

A meteor is a bright streak of light that appears briefly in the
sky, Hannis explained. People sometimes call the brightest
meteors "fireballs." One appears when a particle or chunk of
metallic or stony matter called a meteoroid enters the Earth's
atmosphere from outer space. Friction generated by its passage
through the air heats the meteoroid so that it glows and creates
a shining trail of gases and melted meteoroid particles. Visible
about 30 to 60 miles above the Earth, most meteoroids
disintegrate before hitting the ground. Meteoroids can be
traveling as fast as 60 miles per second when they hit the
Earth's atmosphere. Most glow for about a second. Harris' other
theory was that debris from man-made spaceships or satellites
had re-entered the atmosphere, causing the bright light. But he
was leaning toward a more natural event, a meteor. "They go
across the sky, and then they just wink out,'' Harris said.
"They just burn out or explode." ? Contact Dan Shope,
http://www.mcall.com/html/news/regional/b_pg002b2_meteor.htm
Editor's Note: Unfortunately the story didn't tell us how long
the welding torch lasted, but we find most UFO reports last from
two to five minutes.


NORTH CAROLINA UFO

FAYETTEVILLE - A 16 year old was talking on the phone to his
girlfriend on August 21, 2000, when he looked out the window at
11:00 PM, and saw a bright light. He says, "I couldn't make out
the object but it seemed pretty advanced to travel so fast and
then slow down and stop. It speedup and slowed again. It stayed
bright and moving fast for about 30 seconds but didn't make a
sound.. It was moving at a fast speed and then just disappeared
or faded out like a star or a light dimming. My girlfriend said,
maybe the secret base nearby may be doing some kind of test
flight. There are two military bases nearby one everyone knows
and one is secret. Others in the family reported a bright light
not too far from our house in 1997. My grand uncle had the same
incident before just like what I saw South Carolina near
Summerton. Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC www.ufocenter.com.


GEORGIA SIGHTING LIKE ONE IN TEXAS

John E. Combest, Director Houston UFO Network writes, "I read
with considerable interest the report from Mauk, Georgia where
the two witnesses observed the high-flying UFO in near proximity
to a fighter jet aircraft." The UFO was thought to be connected
to the "loud explosion" heard just immediately prior to the
sighting. What I find fascinating about the description of the
UFO is its "pulsing" motion as it "contracted and elongated" in
the direction of motion. I have seen a short segment of color
film footage taken perhaps twenty yeas ago of a UFO as it moves
right to left at a slightly ascending angle and passes over a
hilly area. That UFO also appeared to pulse from point to point
wherein it had a certain around shape at each of those points
(perhaps 1,000 feet apart), but when moving from one point to
another along a straight line it seemed to shrink to a
small-diameter elongated shape. This is to inquire if the couple
in Georgia captured any of the scene on video, and whether any
other UFOs moved in a similar manner. Very few UFOs are reported
to have such motion, and I suspect the apparent motion and
change of shape are only illusions caused by the force field
propelling the UFO. Thanks John E. Combest
jecombest@worldnet.att.net.


OREGON MORE UFOs OVER TROUT LAKE

TROUT LAKE -- James A Gilliland reports that on September 13,
2000, a very large golden object flew in from the west going
east. It was below Mt Adams about two thirds from the top. As
usual there were no running lights, no sound and it was
brilliant golden white. It was much too close and low to fit any
other category other than a UFO. There was another overhead
sighting as well later that evening. Thanks to James Gilliland
james@cazekiel.org , http://www.cazekiel.org

CANADA UFO SIGHTINGS AND CROP CIRCLES

ANTIGONISH, NOVA SCOTIA -- Today, I received an e-mail message
from MUFON's former Provincial Director for Nova Scotia (Steve
MacLean) advising me of a very recent sighting that he is
looking into. On September 11, 2000, at about 12:00 midnight a
single witness saw a large white and amber orb with two red
lights hovered for one minute 200 feet above the ground right in
town. He called the police and Coast Guard that night. It moved
slowly to the north and went below trees. It made no sound, had
no wings, and did not revolve. My source is investigating.
Thanks to Eugene H. Frison Alian10094

SUDBURY, ONTARIO -- Michel Deschamps reports that between March
and June he received nine UFO reports, but four were the direct
result of projector-type lights being reflected off the clouds
at Sudbury Downs racing track and casino.

DOWLING, ONTARIO -- Vincent Hickey reported on July 20, 2000,
that at around 10:20 p.m., he saw a blue light that exploded
within seconds of being seen. Half a second later, a large,
bright ball of light appeared from nowhere and hung there for a
few seconds before vanishing. On August 21, at around 9:30 p.m.,
a Sudbury resident saw two white lights, side by side, that
would flash on and off like the lights at a railroad crossing.
The lights would also go up and down several times, and also
move side to side before eventually disappearing from view. At
around 10:25 p.m., my buddy and I were taking a long walk along
Lake Ramsey on August 25, 2000, watching a freight train and
noticed a red light which looked to be at the water's edge. As
we walked a few more yards, we watched in amazement as the red
light suddenly zipped across Ramsey Lake, from west to east and
disappeared. It traveled at level flight with a speed of a jet
fighter. The basketball size light remained bright red flew 5 or
10 feet high.

ALBERTA, GUNN - My cousin and I were driving on August 25, 2000,
when we saw a bright light towards the town of Onoway. We saw
two lights one greenish-blue one red at the front of the craft
at 10:05 PM. As it got closer we saw a third yellow-orange
light. The craft was triangular shaped but was square on the
corners. It hovered at 400 meters in altitude, and started to
move westward and flew directly above us. It stayed in the area
for awhile before there was a flash like lightning that lit up
the sky and the craft was gone.

MATTAWA , ONTARIO - On August 26 and 27, thirteen miles of north
of Mattawa a Sudbury resident reported that he and his cousin
watched as a large white ball of light floated across the sky at
9:00 PM. It was ten times bigger than the brightest star. A
camper who wasn't much of a believer in UFOs, said: "Look at
that star! How come it's zigzagging like that?" They all stepped
away from the fire and looked up in the sky. The white light was
pulsating with different colors. It started to go up and down,
then move from side to side. It would shoot straight up and come
right down again. They were amazed by what it did and watched it
for almost 20 minutes before it disappeared behind the tree
line, over another mountain. Ten minutes later, as they were
talking about a second flash, a third one appeared in the
southern sky. It wasn't high in the sky, but was doing the same
thing as the second one, dancing up and down, zigzagging all
over. They watched it for almost an hour before they got tired
of looking at it. Thanks to Michel M. Deschamps ufoman@ican.net
MUFON Provincial Section Director for Sudbury, Ontario (705)
670-2759

VISCOUNT, SASKATCHEWAN -- Two crop circles measuring 45' and 43'
diameter, about 100' apart, were found by a farmer in wheat
field September 12, 2000,while combining. He reports no tracks
when first found, and very neat lay, with plants pressed down
fairly hard to the ground, but not damaged. The circles are
located well into the field with no nearby roads, etc. in a
relatively remote area of the country, just south of Viscount.
Two similar circles were found at Viscount last year. Thanks to
Paul Anderson

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada


SCOTLAND TRIANGLES CAPTURED ON FILM

GLENROTHES, FIFE -- Thought you might like a look at this photo
I took September 7, 2000, on my Kodak DC215 Digital camera. I
was taking photos out back of my house and did not notice
anything unusual. But after I transferred it from my camera, I
couldn't help but notice the 2 bright lights on it. The Original
picture is paint shop pro format. For which I will keep. If you
wish it, it is 3.6 meg in size. Thanks to Mr_Honestt at yahoo
(john) Editors' Note: It appears that two triangle shaped craft
are flying in close formation almost directly behind the other.
It is possible that it is one craft, but we are only seeing part
of the object. The brightness is very typical of many sightings
and may represent ionization of the air similar to plasma or
ball lightning. The pixels around the craft do not appear the
same as pixels in the sky around it suggesting that the craft
were placed in the picture from some other photos. Analysis of
the photo continues.


ARE WE ALONE IN THE UNIVERSE?

UFO Scotland Online reports that an article out of the October
Issue of Popular Mechanics "Science's Greatest Unsolved
Mysteries" says: Two recent discoveries in deep space have
dramatically changed the odds that we are not alone. One
involves a mysterious cloud near the center of the Milky Way.
The other involves emissions from pulsars. Using the National
Science Foundation's 12-Meter Telescope atop Kitt Peak in
Arizona, astronomers have discovered sugar in a cloud from which
new stars are forming. "It means it is increasingly likely that
the chemical precursors to life are formed in such clouds long
before planets develop around the stars," says Jan M. Hollis of
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. The sugar in question is
glycolaldehyde a simpler molecular cousin to table sugar. Its
discovery 26,000 light-years away from earth is exiting to
astrobiologists because this 8-atom molecule of carbon, oxygen
and hydrogen readily combines with other molecules to form
ribose. Ribose is a building block of the nucleic acid DNA, the
chemical carriers of the genetic code found in all living
organisms.


At this year's meeting of the American Astronomical Society,
Paul LaViolette offered evidence that pulsars are located and
send signals in precisely timed radio pulses that appear to be
some sort of intelligent message, exactly what remains to be
seen. Finding the molecules that form the genetic backbone for
intelligent life on Earth and signals too organized to be
random, strengthens the argument that we are not alone. Thanks
to UFO Scotland http://www.ufoscotland.co.uk


DID RUSSIAN SUB SINKING 'ALMOST START WORLD WAR III?

BARENTS SEA -- Based on various intelligence reports I have been
able to obtain I have attempted to reconstruct the August 12,
2000, sinking of the K-141 nuclear attack submarine Krusk the
pride of the Russian Sub Fleet. The Krusk, commissioned in 1995,
was one of eight active Oscar II class submarines of the new
Northern Fleet. It was one the most powerful weapons system in
the World that the Chinese wanted to purchase. The Russians were
involved in military naval exercises, that likely included
Chinese observers. Two U.S. Los Angeles attack submarines, the
U.S. Memphis and Toledo and the British Splendid submarines were
conducting surveillance of the exercise. The submarine Kursk
carries 24 Granit missiles code-named SS-N-19 Shipwreck that
have a 1,600-pound conventional warhead. They can also be armed
with an H-bomb warhead equal to one half million tons of TNT,
enough to destroy a city or a carrier fleet. Shipwreck missiles
are stored in launching tubes external to the inner pressure
hull. It may have also carried a newer Stallion missile. The
Kursk reportedly completed a successful firing of SS-N-19
Shipwreck missile and was reportedly given permission to fire
again. The Russian Naval forces believe they tracked a foreign
submarine near the Kursk. This may have been a sub decoy similar
to our unmanned aircraft or a unidentified submerged object
(USO) that our sonar's often track near submarines. There may
have been some confusion on the identity of the underwater
objects , but apparently multiple underwater targets were
tracked by the Russians.

One version of the story is that permission was given to fire an
anti-submarine missile against the intruder. The German
newspaper Berliner Zeitung claims the nuclear-powered cruiser
Peter the Great fired a new Granit missile that accidentally hit
their own sub rather than the intruder. The Russians have
strongly denied this version of the story. Allegedly, the
weapon, armed with only a target-seeking head, flew 12 miles
before diving into the sea near the two underwater objects.
Anti-submarine missiles are designed to identify and ignore
their own Russian vessels and track the engine noise and
magnetic anomalies radiating from enemy subs. The missile it was
thought operated flawlessly and a short time later a small
underwater explosion was detected.

The second version according to General Valery Manilov is that
Kursk was attempting to surface when a foreign submarine with
its reinforced keel traveling in the opposite direction at the
depth of about 18 meters ripped through the Kirks's light
external hull and punctured its hard interior hull. Russian
divers found characteristic marks formed during a dynamic
collision of two objects. The edges of the internal hull near
the point of impact are bent inward. It is clear that there was
an impact from the outside. Further, the elements of the
superstructure atop the fin of the Kursk have been shaved off
and the release mechanism of the detachable rescue vehicle has
been jammed. The Russians also claim to have found what looks
like the tail of another sub on the seabed.

We know that at 11.39 AM, a tremendous explosion was detected by
the Norwegian Seismic Institute measuring 3.5 on the Richter
scale. Estimates of an explosion of 5 tons of TNT have been
announced, but this seems much too small of an explosion to
cause such a large Richter reading. The conventional weapons
aboard the Kursk were only a three quarters of a ton of TNT
making an explosion of this size doubtful from within. The
Russians also claim there were no nuclear weapons aboard their
sub. The Richter scale reading of 3.5 indicates a nuclear
tactical weapon size explosion. A particularly large explosion
may have led the Russians to believe that an enemy weapon had
deliberately destroyed the Kursk killing their 118 sailors.

The Russians have requested permission to examine the two US
submarines known to be in the area. A collision or even the
explosion of the several torpedoes could not account for
exceptional size of the recorded explosion. The Russians were
very angry and apparently considered a response such has
destroying the US and British subs. A retaliation may have led
to World War III. Although, the US news media has never picked
up the story, Pravada claims war was only averted when Putin and
Clinton had a 22 minute telephone conversation calming emotions.
Allegedly, the USS Memphis submarine was tracked by Soviet
satellites to Bergan, Norway where it was given repairs.
According to Agence France Presse U.S. Defence Secretary William
Cohen's rejection of the request from his Russian counterpart
Igor Sergeyev " has only strengthened the case that the Kursk
clashed with another underwater vessel." Cohen refused the
inspection request explaining that "he did not think it was
important or appropriate for the inspection to take place.
"Obviously the Russians do not want to conclude they destroyed
there own sub with their own missile. Therefore, they are
concluding it was hit by the US Memphis. Other reports indicate
the front of the Kursk is gone indicating a tremendous explosion
either from within or from the outside. Some reports list that
two powerful explosions were recorded. The Russians certainly
must have considered the possibility that the foreign submarine
had then attacked and destroyed their submarine possibly in
retaliation to the missile firing. The Russians were very upset
about the loss of one of their newest and finest boats and were
considering a massive response. Allegedly, President Clinton
assured the Russians that the US was not involved. One report
claims the Russians have found part of a foreign submarine. Like
most of these incidents it is difficult to sort out what
actually happened.


THE 11TH GREAT UFO CONGRESS will be held at the Days Inn in
Bordentown, NJ on October 7 and *, 2000. Scheduled speakers are
Tom Carey -Roswell Crash, Hans Holzer, Life After Death, Antonio
Huneeus UFO Briefing Document, Don Ecker The Dark side of the
Moon, Vicki Ecker - In search f the Secret Keepers, Mike Mannion
-Project Mind Shift, Pat Marcattilio -The Origeins of
Civilizations, James Mosely - A Skeptical Ufologist Sam Sherman
- Edwards AFB Encounter

MUFON BY LAWS VOTE?

I am contacting all of you to ask for your assistance in urging
MUFON members to vote on the new MUFON Bylaws; either for or
against acceptance. This is the first time in many years that
the membership has had an opportunity to vote on a revision to
the Bylaws. The Bylaw committee worked very hard to arrive at a
modern set of Bylaws for your consideration. It is up to the
membership to determine whether or not we proceed to work under
the new or old Bylaws. Thank to John Schuessler MUFON
International Director

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 >
   Sep > Sep 18

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 23:30:26 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?


 >I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >about other planets for a century or more.


Hi, Larry!

I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

Roger









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 18

              Brazilian International Bulletin, Edition 3 2000

From: Thiago Luiz Ticchetti <thiagolt@opengate.com.br>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 22:12:55 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 23:40:17 -0400
Subject: Brazilian International Bulletin, Edition 3 2000

Brazilian International Bulletin, Edition 3 - September/October 2000

Brazilian Entity for Extraterrestrial Research - Brasilia/Brazil

UFOs Over the Brazilian Northeast

Edition 1 - January/February - 2000

EBE-ET Copyright by Thiago Luiz Ticchetti



EDITORIAL


Hello my friends.

Once more the Brazilian Entity of Extraterrestrial Research
brings you our bimonthly International Bulletin, edition 3 -
September/October 2000.

We tried to print the bulletin, but the costs would be very
expensive. We also tried to publish the bulletin in the ADOBE
PAGEMAKER format, but nor everybody have the program, so we are
going to send by e-mail, using .TXT format.

In this edition we are you to present you the incidents
regarding UFOs in our northeast region, and also some cases in
Santa Catarina, state of Parana, and in Rondonia, state of north
of Brazil.

We are now counting with the help of some friends that do the
translations to us. In this edition, you are going to see the
great job made by Marco Aurlio Gomes Veado.

Well, that is it. We hope that you enjoy our International Bulletin.

Our best regards,

Thiago Luiz Ticchetti

Publication Department and Specialized Translation Director -
EBE-ET


INDEX

Flying Saucers Sightings and Close Encounters of The Highest
Grades Are Still Disturbing the Brazilians Hinterlands

Incidents in the State of Rondonia

Archeological Sites Spread Throughout the Country; Ships
Drawings and Weird Creatures, suggest Alien Visitations in
Ancient Times

The Magic Island

Flying saucers sightings and close encounters of the highest
grades are still disturbing the Brazilian hinterlands

Jos Ccero da Silva

The Brazilian hinterland is a region which retains an unique
ufologic casuistic worldwide.

In that place, for some unknown reason, there is a great
incidence of ETs which attack, hurt and sometimes kill people.
Many from the news about UFOs are, in fact, much more fantastic
than we can even conceive ourselves - at least according to the
way we usually face them.

The UFOs potentiality seem to reveal an advanced technology
which we cannot imagine or dream of, in order to be, someday,
achieved. Behind it all, they're very misterious as well.

Adilson Targino do Nascimento Silva, 11; Joo Batista, 14; are
some of those sightings, witnesses which has occurred in "Serra
do Mel", a town located in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, in
the brazilian hinterlands.

Some night of March, 1998, kids went out, in order to buy ice
cream and candies in a grocery nearby. It was around 9:15 PM.
When they were going back home, still on the road, Adilson
called his friends' attention to see a kind of weird star up the
sky. Promptly, they all stared it. In a few seconds, a
lightning over upon the children, at the same time, making a
sound similar to a snap, while searchlights were turning on
simultaneously. Watching it, Adilson and Jobson ran out in order
to hide under a tree next to them. Meanwhile, Joo Batista stood
still, like he was hipnotized, under the unidentified object
which was 10 meters remaining above the ground. Few moments
later, Jobson ran towards the object and grabed Joo Batista's
arm, pulling him under the tree he was hiding at.

The object was approximately 4 meters lenght and shed lightnings
in blue color from its bottom, yellow from the edges and red
from the upper reflecting all over the UFO's circunference.
Suddenly, the object started to move, flying down towards the
ground and almost touching it. Righ away, changed its course
and climbed up to the sky. When flying close to the ground, it
made sort of a wind wave, which moved the low growing grass, as
well as a lemon tree remaining by the road. About 100 meters
from the sighting location, Mrs. Odete Macena, Adilson's mother,
and Mrs. Maria, Robson's grandmother, were talking to each other
in front of their houses. Suddenly, they saw a lightning up in
the sky. Just after that, an object crossed it, flying up to
the west. Moments later, the boy arrived home, very frightned,
reported to both ladies what had happened to his and his friends
back in the road.

Another area of great ufologic incidence is the "Cariri" region,
specifically in the "Vale do Ariri", located in the state of
Cear. The predominant place is the "Serra do Araripe", which
is an ecological area, preserved by federal laws. That site has
been often visited by extraterrestrial ships, considering many
reports and some expressive registrations detected all over the
region. Most of the incidences occurs in the location where the
"Rio Salgado" runs. Many of the residents suppose that it
happens because of the environment, since it is one of the
richest, abudant and diversified places in Cear.

One of the ufologic facts has happened in "Diamante" - located
about 22kms (~15 miles) from the "Aurora" town - in the mids of
the 70's. During that time, an incandescent metallic sphere,
little bigger than a soccer ball, which horizontally had
crossed a house, damaging four brick walls, fortunately with no
victims. This very case has been searched by the "Grupo
Ufolgico do Cariri" (GUC), which had attempted to get in touch
with the witnesses several times. Few statements were reported
by whom lived on the events, once they are afraid of their
bosses, priests or farmers' reprisal. Another reason that makes
those people refusing to divulge such phenomenons is to be
considered as crazy by the population who don't have enough
knowledgement to understand that subject's seriousness nor
accept as someting regarding the extraterrestrials.

Nevertheless, despite the adversities that involve the
extraterrestrial matter in the Brazilian northeast region, the
members of the GUG feel like there's progress regarding the
ufology, it happens mainly among the youngsters, because of the
modern means of communication nowadays. So it does contribute
itself as being more respectful by people who live in the
surroundings and, therefore could effectively redeem certain
happenings those which were still missing in time because of the
lack of a serious and sistematic work in that Region. The most
amazing occurrence of UFOs sightings that GUG has been reported
in the location called "Riacho do Bordo Velho", which links to
the county of "Santa Vitria". In that place, it's been often
registered pretty weird cases which are considered as ordinary
ones by the inhabitants. There are extraterrestrial ships
apparitions in different patterns, but the most seen ones is
similar to a cigar. The local ruralists use to called them as
"the wooden branches that fly".


TRIANGULAR UFOs - Those triangular shaped UFOs, usually happen
at the end of the day between 5 and 8 PM, coming up always to
south-north direction of the Region. According to the reports,
the UFOs generally have themselves great luminosity, plenty of
beautiful and different colors. They are even silent and,
sometimes gray colored. They've been seen in a triangular shape,
discoid and with variable speed, according to their types.
Others have the ability of being invisible just when they notice
they're observed. Some of those occurrences have been seen by
one of the GUC members, Professor Ronaldo Santos, who has
relatives living in that location. Another town, with a large
amount of ordinary ufologic events is "Misso Velha", next to
"Aurora", where the UFO researcher Jos Ferreira Neto lives in
and happens to be member of Group Cariri (GUC) as well.

Certain night in that very place, the Entity's President saw a
flying saucer crossing the sky. Many sightings have been
reported over there, as well as in the surroundings, like
"Caririau"; "Lavras da Mangueira"; "Ipamirim", "Brejo Santo";
"Abaiara"; "Milagres" and "Juazeiro do Norte". Their reports are
often sent from Ferreira Neto to GUC members. Unfortunately,
most of the cases are not divulged, nor scientifically analised
with the rigor it demands. Hopefully, other researchers may be
available in order to cooperate regarding the Region
investigations and hence give sequence to that activity, already
implemented in the Northeast Region in an intensive and full
way.

Jos Ccero da Silva is President of "Grupo Ufolgico do Cariri
(GUC)". His postal address is: Rua Clero Jos do Nascimento 167,
63360-000 - Aurora - CE

Incidents in the State of Rondonia

Currently, the State of Rondonia - with approximately one
million inhabitants, in 1995 - is considered as a place with
large ufologic incidences. Such occurrences were remarkable ever
since May and June of that mentioned year, when it could be
confirmed throughout the UFO sightings, which shows multicolor
lights as well as supposed alien ships landmarks on cottages,
located in the surroundings of the state's capital, Porto Velho.
Back in September, 1999, it has been reported two cases
envolving the people who live in the region (just like the other
cases which had happened all over the Amazon, according to
reports from other States).

The first case has happened to a team of fishers and had been
reported by Aurilene S., 28 years old at the time. She counted
that she was walking along with four other friends in order to
go fishing on the Rio Madeira. It was 2:00 PM, in the 14th of
the above mentioned month. Around 1:30 AM, Aurilene called the
others attention and they looked towards an yellow light,
similar to a Volkswagen's front light. It came from the margin
of the river. By the time, they stared such luminosity, those
who were on the boat guessed that it could be a plane, however
the girl noticed the light was standing still in the air, so she
was certain it couldn't be a plane. Suddenly the light started
to move in a manner like letter "J", vanishing afterwards.
According to her, the sky had no clouds at all, and they could
clearly see the stars.

Another similar case happened that very night. At that time it
was Beatriz T., who used to live nearby the town's airport.
Approximately 3:30 AM, in the 15th of September, she was still
awaken along with her husband. They decided going to the
backyard in order to watch the sky. Then they saw an intensive
white light just like the airplane's one before landing. "The
object did not alter its color during all the time and the
sighting last about 30 minutes long." she said.

Tower of Control - Knowing well the aerial routes over Porto
Velho, a place from where it happens several flights from
Manaus and from southern, Beatriz discarded the possibility of
being a plane nor an helicopter she and her husband had seen
that night, even though they didn't hear a sound from the
object.

According to few airport employees, who were working at the same
night, one of the regular planes attempted to land, and
communicated to the tower a sudden sighting of an object pretty
similar to the one Beatriz had described. That intriguing case
has been searched by the "Centro Rondoniense de Observaes
Ufolgicas" - CROU ("Rondonian Centre of Ufologic
Observations"), hold by that author, and who got this
statement from one of the plane's pilots. Rather not being
identified, that very pilot told he has seen various apparitions
of strange lights in Amazon Region and the large amount of these
cases may be just fantastic.

Ailton Lemos is the President of the "Centro Rondoniense de
Observaes Ufolgicas" -CROU. His postal address is: Rua
Joaquim Nabuco 1762, Centro,78900-850 - Porto Velho - RO


Archeological sites spread throughout the country, ships
drawings and weird creatures, suggest alien visitations in
ancient times

Willy Silva

Legends of ancient and extraterrestrial civilizations, dinosaurs
footsteps, megalitic monuments, indian cemeteries and so many
other mysteries upon Earth could be easier found on the very
rich archeology from Paraba, one of the smallest state of
Brazil (around 56,000 km�). Its ground is incredibly covered
with more than 500 catalogued archeological sites, where
pictographic inscriptions and rupestrian paintings have been
challeging, for decades, the scientific world. The "Itacoatiaras
de Ing" , an amount of gneiss blocks on which surfaces is
sculpted hundreds of low-prominent inscriptions and is either
one of the most intriguing monoliths of the planet, according to
researchers and scholars worldwide. The "Pedra de Ing" as it is
known, is such an amazing location that could be close to the
unreal. It is 23 meters length and 3 meters width and 3.8
meters high. That monolith is located in the "Piemonte da
Borborema" region, 84 kilometers far from Joo Pessoa and 30
kilometers far from Campina Grande. In the archeological site,
which is an area of approximately 2 "hectares" (~0,7 square
miles), cutted by the "Rio Ing", there are many interpretations
about the stone monument and its fantastic symbolisms, which
remain in perfect symetrical and polished furrows.

"The spheres, crosses, spins and flat lines drawings which
appear as an enigma on the stone block, could not be slitted by
human hands", says the swiss translator, Hans Jorge Kesselring,
that subject's researcher. According to the "Ancient Astronaut
Society", whose President is Erich von Dniken, author of "Were
Gods Astronauts?", the monolith is sculpted by laser rays,
probably by extraterrestrial civilizations, technologically much
more advanced than ours. The "Pedra de Ing" artisan - according
to astronomical studies hold by Federal University of Paraba
(UFPb), late the 70's decade - could be made by a very ancient
people, even before the indians that portuguese had found in
Brazil during the XVI and XVII centuries. Those arts expressed
themselves through pictograph drawings, in 11 stars from Orion
Constelation. That same theory, still is up to be more
discussed, and has been documented years later by the searcher
Gilvan de Brito, in "Trip to the Unknown: Secrets of Pedr do
Ing".

In the "Queimadas", located over "Dona Ins" county, 72km from
"Guarabira" (region of the Paraba swamp), inscriptions of
pictures on the rock of "Pedra do Letreiro" - more meaningful
than those from the Ing - has been object of intensive research
hold by the UEPb, in Campina Grande. In the vertical panel, in
red colored, some impressive figures are remarkable, that could
remind us of towers, flying ships, beings from other planets,
handprints and even signs of a possible unknown calendar.
Geographer Carlos Antnio Belarmino, UEPb's professor and
post-graduated in Environment, tell us that the marks from past
were printed from indians that had populated the region. "It is
supposed that indians had contacted evolved civilizations and
therefore transmitted signs of their communications through
pictures on the stones", spoke the researcher to UFO Magazine.
According to Belarmino, the "bugres" (savage indians) who's
inhabited the swamp from Paraba, used to paint from the
"jenipapo", "urucum" (native plants from which an ink can be
extracted) and animal blood in order to draw on the rock. It's
been more than 15,000 years ago. It is either supposed that the
location has been a kind of santuary, maybe a cult to the nature
forces. "However we still don't have much more material in
literature, which could help us to decipher such
hieroglyphics.", remark the professor, who still notices upon
the drawings some sort of sumerian and Phoenician alphabets.
The Police Clerk, Humberto Ferreira Santos, a rural property
owner in "Dona Ins", says that "Pedra do Letreiro" is pretty
much visited, mainly by foreign people. According to his
statements, there are several legends about those bizarre
pictographic drawings. Among them there's the one that is
associated to a fantastic apparition of a woman. "Neighborhood
speaks about a pretty young lady, long hair, who keeps seated on
the rocks. When someone gets closer, she disappears", he says.
In other hand, the housekeeper, Maria Nunes da Silva thinks
differently: "I suppose there is a big mine over. Beneath the
rock it's been hidden a big pot full of gold; a great fortune
indeed", she comments. She does believe in the version which
tells that beings from another planet, dressed up like
astronauts, would have buried a treasure in "Dona Ins" and
marked its localization through enchanted drawings from "Pedra
do Letreiro". "Our happiness is over there", she assures.

In the Paraba hinterlands, more than 420 kilometers far from
seashore, there is "Sousa", distinguished as one of the most
important archeologic sites of the world, with fossilized
footprints of megafauna ("Tiranossaurus Rex", "Iguanodonte
Mantel"), with approximately 130 million years old, stucked on
the "Rio do Peixe" basin. First reports that mention about those
footprints dated from 1897 and were discovered by a resident
from a location called "Passagem das Pedras", 4 kilometers from
downtown. At first, they believed that the strange tracks would
belong to domestic pets. Partly of the "Sousa" county as well as
from 30 other locations, there are records with plenty of
footprints and fossilized tracks of more than 80 species:
pre-historical beings from the Cretaceous period - in the
"Dinossaurs Valley", protected area from the National
Paleontologic Patrimony.

In that huge area which is part of the valley, either there are
- however in shorter amount - some other findings, like
petrified rain, primitive vegetation and a pile of the megafauna
bones. Due the rupestrian paintings, they appear in the "Serrote
do Letreiro" ("Sousa") and "Serrote da Mida" ("So Francisco"
and "Santa Cruz"). All over the region, there are many
archeologic sites, distinguishing the "Dinossaurs Valley",
"Pedra do Letreiro", "Itacoatiaras de Ing", "Botas do
Astronauta", "Pedra do Calendrio" and the "Relgio de Sol",
located in "Pilezinhos".

CAVE IN GOIS - Strange unidentified flying objects, similar to
the ordinary UFOs, which were recently reported, are also shown
throughout some rupestrian paintings located in a cave over
Gois. In the border of "Parana" and "Ivolndia" counties, in
southwest Goinia, monuments and signs of a very remote age are
recorded on huge red sandstones blocks which shape the "Caverna
das Incrveis Figuras" (i.e."Incredible Figures Cavern").
Destituted of any historical information or scientific
explanation, the rupestrian drawings which remain inside the
cave, could still be interpreted from a transcendental view of
a possible civilization that inhabited the region in the past. A
cartographer from Gois, Aldio Tovar, in the late 80's, has
written a book called, "The Parana Enigma - The Darkside of the
Nature", on which was reported his own perception about the cave
misterious symbols. According to him, hundreds of the tangled
figures, linked up in the "Painel Mgico" (i.e."Magic Panel") -
colored by white, red and other variations - still showing
abrasion from the time, area a synthesis of a esoteric symbology
created in approximately 10,000 years ago, which the author
decided to call as a fantastic realism.

Cabalistic figures, of labyrinths, demons, human faces and
antromorphic beings are archetypes, according to the author,
which have never been found in any other part of the world, and
they all can be found in one single archeologic site. Still in
his book, Tovar even compares the importance of the "Caverna das
Incrveis Figuras" to the uncommun geography of the drawings
from the "Nazca Plateau", in Peru, as well as with the singular
engravings in "Pedra de Ing", in Paraba. The environmentalist,
Antnio Carlos Volpone, searches the location of savagely
writings from Gois and explains the strange cave drawings
according to the swiss writer Erich Von Dniken's theory, who
stated that in the ancient times, planet Earth has been visited
by flying saucers from outerspace. "The 'Incredible Figures
Cavern' could have been inhabited by man's ancestors who's
retracted on its walls, sightings of beings and unidentified
objects", says Volpone. That cave is located next to "Marilda
Farm", ran by the householder Osvaldino Borges da Silva.
Concerned about the field's drudgery, he's never got closer to
the archeologic site. It is supposed that the cave has been
discovered in the 20's, when the "Prestes Column" passed by, and
when many farmers had to look for shelters in one of the
thousands sedimentary mounts which exist all around.

Willy Silva is Journalist of the Dirio da Manh and Consultant
of the UFO magazine. His postal address is: Rua 10/900, Apt.
1401, Edif. Paris, Setor Oeste, 74120-020 - Goinia - GO


The Magic Island

The Santa Catarina Island, located the city of Florianpolis, is
also called as "Ilha da Magia" (i.e."Magic Island"). There are
several ghost stories, whitches and bizarre things which enrich
its folkloric heritage - among them, there's a distinguished one
called "Luz de bota" ("Boot light"), which may has some relation
with the famous "Me do Ouro" ("Mother of Gold"), a phenomenon,
from the brazilian hinterlands folklore. Many people has seen
such a light, just like Mr. Non, who also called it as "Luz que
aparece" (i.e. "Light that shows off"). Generally, its
appearance is related to the nocturnal fishings activities, when
a small red luminosity, similar to a flaming cigarette, gets
closer to the fishermen and slowly runs while staring them out.

"It doesn't harm anyone...However, you cannot bother it", says
Mr. Non. "It is not a good manner lighting a match or a
cigarette, otherwise the light spins over the one's head,
sparking colorful flashes. In that particular case, it's useless
to get rid of it, since it may follow you until your house -
sometimes it may even burn the witness' skin." The "Luz que
aparece" or "Luz de botas" become small and when it lands over
the dunes or in some closer mountain, but its luminosity gets
bigger, just like a bonfire which allows to see everything
around. "Several times it keeps flickering in the air, and
afterwards, if anybody bothers it, flies up and disappears", Mr.
Non finishes. According to whom has seen that enigmatic
manifestation, the best protection against this mistery is to
pray - despite knowing that the light doesn't harm anyone.

Several times the phenomenon gets very close from the people -
about 10 meters. It always appears solitaire and with no exact
time to show up, sometimes keeping visible for 30 minutes,
moving from one to other place. Regarding the name's origin, it
came from the fact that light projects a shadow below, which
suggests a boot shape. And since it generally hovers for about
one meter high, the shadow seems to touch the ground, just like
a light over the walking boot on the sand of the beach.

Paulo Duarte is Professor of Astronomy in Federal Univerity of
Santa Catarina. His e-mail address is: pduarte@ambox1.ufsc.br







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Hatch

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 22:23:41 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:20:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Hatch


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
 >other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"... although
 >he believes it to be a huge plasma/ball lightning. This photo
 >appears on the front cver of his first book. This case was
 >presented at the "Sturrock Panel" discussion in Tarrytown, NY,
 >several years ago and has been mentioned by Jacques Vallee as an
 >example of the optical power radiated by some UFOs.

Hi Bruce,

Just to make others aware. There is a period at the end of the
URL which you supplied. Don't include it because it comes up not
found.

Don








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                        Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:56:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:40:11 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >>>Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >>>Friends,

 >>>I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >>>regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >>>I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >>>just a comment or two:

 >><snip>

 >>>And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

 >>The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
 >>me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
 >>because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
 >>in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
 >>whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
 >>data and received money.

 >Dear Kind and gentle List Folk... and EBK,

 >MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.

Since MUFON has known about the issues and sat on them for three
years who knows when we will hear anything. It's my
understanding that MUFON really wishes the whole issue would die
down and go away so they could move on to more important stuff.

<snip>

 >>The story from John C was that the files were all redacted, i.e.
 >>all the personal information deleted. I posted an email to this
 >>List and also sent a copy to NIDS asking two simple questions.
 >>Did the person receiving the email actually see the files with
 >>their eyes, and to avoid privacy issues, I asked if the files
 >>were in fact redacted. So far in the last month and a half NIDS
 >>has chosen to not confirm the fact the files were redacted.

 >>Again the silence has been deafening.

 >Not to me it ain't. What's deafening is the noise. By

I notice that in all your commentary about so called "noise" and
"filters" you avoided the issue, i.e. that Bigelow/NIDS have
thus far refused to confirm that Carpenter sent them redacted
files. If the files were in fact redacted, disclosing that they
were properly redacted would not hurt anybody's privacy and if
anything would help Carpenters claim that he redacted all the
files.

Tell you what Jim, why don't you email NIDS and ask them the
same question... but you will likely not get an answer. Like I
said, the silence is 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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:14:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:51:11 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >>sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >>about other planets for a century or more.

 >Hi, Larry!

 >I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

 >Roger

Hello Roger!

One thing it might explain, assuming this speculation is true,
is the lack of "contact". A scientific probe is supposed to
gather and return data or it is useless. If such probes disturb
the specimens too much, they send back buggered data! Lets say
you want to study primate behavior, how they really act in the
wild. What you _don't_ do is put them on a movie set with
cameras rolling, frightening klieg lights, studio technicians
running all over the place etc. No. You hide, and observe as
unobtrusively as possible.

A scientific probe is not going to land in Washington, DC and
sneer at the hors d'ouvres at the lawn party.

How many times have you heard the question: "Why don't they
just land on the White House lawn?"

One could answer that scientific probes are allergic to
pate-de-fois, a response no more idiotic than the question
itself.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

               Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference

From: Anthony Chippendale <anthonyc@ufon.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:37:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:01:42 -0400
Subject: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference


Here is my report on last weekend's UFO conference at Leeds
University in England.

Anthony Chippendale.
####################
19th Leeds International UFO Conference
15 � 17 September 2000
Leeds University, England

Friday Evening

Alan Godfrey (UK)

Alan Godfrey is a former West Yorkshire police officer, who,
whilst working at Todmorden police station in 1980, encountered
a UFO out on patrol. Several months before his sighting, which
was witnessed by other police officers from both his station and
from another force, Alan investigated the suspicious death of
retired coal miner Zigmund Adamski. Several months after his UFO
sighting it became clear to Alan that Zigmund's death and his
UFO sighting were linked, as he was asked by the police force to
sign a document stating that he would not discuss either case
with the media, which he found surprising.

Alan gave a very detailed account of both cases (the
non-disclosure agreement had been rescinded). His presentation,
which was in the format of an 'armchair forum' with UFO Magazine
editor Graham Birdsall, was fascinating. I had heard of his
case, but I had never heard the full details of his story.

Chris Martin (UK)

Having just finished reading Chris Martin's book 'Intruders In
The Night' I was really looking forward to his presentation.
Chris Martin has a unique ability to communicate with the aliens
through telepathy. He seems to be able to 'summon' UFOs and when
they appear he can sometimes ask them to move around! He showed
some fascinating footage of the UFOs that have visited him. Much
of the footage was recent, from this summer, and was shot in
London.


Saturday

Dr. Steven Greer (US)

Along with Martyn Stubbs & L L Wille, Dr. Steven Greer's
presentation was one of the best of the whole weekend. Dr. Greer
is head of CSETI (Centre for Studies of Extraterrestrial
Intelligence). One of the first things that Dr. Greer said was
'the only way for humanity to proceed is with peace' and that
really struck me. That was the essence of his presentation. Did
you know that since 1950 we have not needed to run cars on
petrol? A car will run quite happily on plain, ordinary (and to
a certain extent _free_) tap water! This along with anti-gravity
and teleportation technology has been suppressed by the
government. By the 1950s the US government had invested more
money in anti-gravity research, than they had invested in the
Manhattan Project. That just shows how much the government knows
about it.

Dr. Greer also discussed how in 1993 he briefed the CIA Director
on UFOs and alien contact and how CSETI are working hard to
complete 'Project Starlight'; a project to produce a report or
dossier of hard evidence of aliens, that will be presented to
governments and military leaders. Their target is to complete
the project by the end of President Clinton's term in office,
which ends on 20 January 2001.

Dr. Greer is a truly remarkable speaker. He put forward his
views and information in a straight forward, no-nonsense manner;
however, I am dubious about some of his claims. For example, he
claims that the 'greys' are being engineered in a lab in New
Mexico and that he has seen this lab!

Larry Warren & Peter Robbins (US)

In December 1980 Larry Warren was a USAF security patrolman at
the RAF base at Bentwaters, UK. I am not going to re-tell his
story as it is well known, but I would just like to make a few
comments about his and Peter Robbins (Larry's co-author of the
book 'Left at East Gate') presentation. Larry Warren, now living
in Liverpool, England with his new bride announced that this was
the last time he would be publicly speaking, after 18 years in
Ufology he is sort of 'retiring'. It's a pity as he is a great
speaker and a great bloke. Larry and Peter basically updated the
audience with recent events with Rendlesham. The most
fascinating happened just recently when Larry came into
possession of photographs taken of the UFO in Rendlesham forest!
These photographs have only just come to light and they are yet
to be fully authenticated.

David Cayton (UK)

David Cayton is a UK-based animal mutilation researcher, who,
last year, placed an advert in the journal 'Farmer's Weekly',
asking for farmers who have discovered mutilated animals to
contact him. This yielded him some excellent 'specimens' for his
research. So far, he has not come to any conclusive results, but
he has done a lot of research into the phenomenon. The majority
of his lecture was a very graphical presentation of the evidence
that he has collected during the past few years.

UFOs � The Challenge Ahead

The last part of day was a studio-type debate between Nick Pope,
Nick Redfern & Graham Birdsall. Graham introduced the 'two
Nicks' who then took about 15 minutes each just to updated us on
their current research and work. I was very surprised to hear
Nick Redfern condone computer hackers who have illegally
accessed US Govt computers. He appeared to encourage us to do
the same, 'if they [the government] can bed the rules, so can
we, and we should!'

Pope and Redfern then went on to discuss the upcoming British
Freedom of Information Act.


Sunday

Dr. Bob & Ryan Wood (US)

Father and son team Dr. Bob & Ryan Wood have spent the last
seven years studying the authenticity of the MJ-12 documents
that have come to light from several sources, including Timothy
Cooper. Their general belief is the documents are genuine and
they provided some very convincing & interesting evidence to
support their belief. Their presentation was the longest of the
weekend at nearly two hours, but it was worth it! After seeing
their evidence I know believe that the documents are genuine.
See for yourself at their website:

http://www.MajesticDocuments.com

Graham Birdsall (UK) & Russell Callaghan (UK)

Graham is the editor of UFO Magazine (UK) and the organiser of
the conference. Russell Callaghan is UFO Magazine's website
manager and their film/photo analyst. They provided a round up
of recent UFO footage and news. Graham re-visited some of the
topics that Dr. Greer discussed about suppressed technology,
such as the 'tap-water' cars. Russell discussed the recent video
footage of a UFO in Cheshire, England when he was wrongly quoted
in the tabloids as saying 'It's the best footage ever', he
actually said, 'its interesting footage'.

Martyn Stubbs (Canada)

Martyn Stubbs, as well as being the penultimate speaker of the
weekend, was also one of the best. Martyn travelled to England
to speak at the conference at extreme risk to his health.
Unfortunately, Martyn is suffering from a brain tumour; although
it was made clear whether or not it is terminal.

For those of you who are unaware of who Martyn Stubbs is, he is
a former cable TV station manager from Canada who, over a period
of five years, recorded over 2,500 hours of NASA footage from
space shuttle missions. This footage shows several 'phenomena'
in space, which, some people believe (including me), are
intelligently controlled spacecraft. For those of you who want
to find out more about the 'secret NASA transmissions' email
anthonyc@ufon.org and I will be happy to provide you with
background information to.

Martyn brought with him some new, unseen footage, which was
truly astounding. It is very hard to describe the footage in
words, you have to see it to understand and believe it! I
believe that within the next few years this will footage will
change Ufology for the better. I believe that it is the final
'proof' that people like myself have been searching for.

Leslie Wille (US)

For several years some footage, similar to Martyn Stubbs', has
been available on the Internet showing UFOs in space,
particularly the STS-48 mission. The cameraman has only ever
been identified as 'L. L. Wille'. Now, we know who he is! He is
Leslie L Wille from Minnesota, United States. Andy Ellis of the
UK's Yorkshire UFO Info group spent 18 months tracking him down,
and once found, he introduced him to UFO Magazine who invited
him to the conference. Leslie is a remarkable man; he has no
interest at all in UFOs except that he wants to know what those
objects in space are. Leslie was the last speaker of the day on
Sunday and he had so much to say that the conference over ran by
30 minutes! He truly was a great guy!


Conclusion

This year's conference has been great and I cannot wait till
next September's conference! Well, that is all I really have to
say, it is very difficult to describe such a great weekend in
words!!

Anthony Chippendale,
The UFO Network (UK),
http://www.ufon.org/ufonet/








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                Re: OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror

From: Auchettl & Barnett <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 08:05:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:37:53 -0400
Subject: Re: OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia


EBK & Researchers,

Although, the work on this subject has been going on without any
publicity for over a month, we received this E-mail from
researcher, Barry Taylor about the release of his most
interesting findings.

At present, we at PRA are unable to offer any simple explanation
and until further evidence presents, no conclusion has been
drawn. However, the research committee considers the data to be
valid and so resources have been channelled towards an ongoing
investigation.

The images are most interesting and we highly recommend that you
take some time and have a look!

Any criticism would be most valuable.

PRA may post some data on the subject at a later date.

The following is the "News Flash" compiled by and issued from
Barry.

MESSAGE FOLLOWS:

                             ***

Special thanks also to:
Researcher Mike Farrell
vidhunter@hotmail.com

                             ***

Subj:   Mystery Prints.

From:   Barry Taylor
         stingray@nor.com.au

Date:   Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:39:51 PM EDT


"MYSTERIOUS PRINTS ON BEDROOM MIRROR"

A local lady contacted me regarding a mysterious 'cross' that
had appeared on her arm during the night. Also, there were
mysterious 'finger' print marks on her bedroom mirror. The
question is, did the same 'entity' that scratched the cross on
her arm, leave these mysterious finger prints on her bedroom
mirror?

A full D.N.A. sampling of the prints was undertaken with the
assistance of the Scientific Research group "Phenomena Research
Australia".

The results showed NO Human D.N.A., in fact no D.N.A. at all of
what could have made these prints. There was an unusually high
density bacterial culture found in the prints. This is also
unexplainable.

The print images and details are now posted on my UFO
web site at;

IMAGES:
http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/latesite.htm

Please find the time to look at these print images. Are you able
to identify them?

Could this be the physical proof we are looking for that
'inter-dimensional beings ' are visiting Humans in their own
homes at night? Or does it have an 'Earthly' explanation, and
all we have to do is find it?

Regards,

Barry Taylor.
U.F.O. Researcher.
Australia.


Personal UFO Web Page

http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/

                             ***


Regards to all,

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director


PRA WEB:
http://members.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/Pra1.htm

THE SKY PEOPLE - WANDJINA
IMAGES
http://hometown.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/wandjinahome.htm

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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                  OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror

From: Auchettl & Barnett <Praufo@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 08:05:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:40:31 -0400
Subject: OZ - Mysterious Prints On Bedroom Mirror


              Oz & ASIA DATA RESEARCH
           Phenomena Research Australia


EBK & Researchers,

Although, the work on this subject has been going on without any
publicity for over a month, we received this E-mail from
researcher, Barry Taylor about the release of his most
interesting findings.

At present, we at PRA are unable to offer any simple explanation
and until further evidence presents, no conclusion has been
drawn. However, the research committee considers the data to be
valid and so resources have been channelled towards an ongoing
investigation.

The images are most interesting and we highly recommend that you
take some time and have a look!

Any criticism would be most valuable.

PRA may post some data on the subject at a later date.

The following is the "News Flash" compiled by and issued from
Barry.

MESSAGE FOLLOWS:

                             ***

Special thanks also to:
Researcher Mike Farrell
vidhunter@hotmail.com

                             ***

Subj:   Mystery Prints.

From:   Barry Taylor
         stingray@nor.com.au

Date:   Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:39:51 PM EDT


"MYSTERIOUS PRINTS ON BEDROOM MIRROR"

A local lady contacted me regarding a mysterious 'cross' that
had appeared on her arm during the night. Also, there were
mysterious 'finger' print marks on her bedroom mirror. The
question is, did the same 'entity' that scratched the cross on
her arm, leave these mysterious finger prints on her bedroom
mirror?

A full D.N.A. sampling of the prints was undertaken with the
assistance of the Scientific Research group "Phenomena Research
Australia".

The results showed NO Human D.N.A., in fact no D.N.A. at all of
what could have made these prints. There was an unusually high
density bacterial culture found in the prints. This is also
unexplainable.

The print images and details are now posted on my UFO
web site at;

IMAGES:
http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/latesite.htm

Please find the time to look at these print images. Are you able
to identify them?

Could this be the physical proof we are looking for that
'inter-dimensional beings ' are visiting Humans in their own
homes at night? Or does it have an 'Earthly' explanation, and
all we have to do is find it?

Regards,

Barry Taylor.
U.F.O. Researcher.
Australia.


Personal UFO Web Page

http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/

                             ***


Regards to all,

John W. AUCHETTL - Director PRA Research

DR Ron BARNETT   - Deputy Director


PRA WEB:
http://members.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/Pra1.htm

THE SKY PEOPLE - WANDJINA
IMAGES
http://hometown.aol.com/praufo/PRA1/wandjinahome.htm

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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 00:38:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:39:02 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Jonach


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

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

Larry wrote:

 >I cannot understand how anyone today would posit that to be
 >highly intelligent, a computer must be biological in nature.

 >Every so many months, computers double in power, memory, what
 >have you. That rate of advance cannot go on forever of course,
 >but imagine the automata available to societies thousands or
 >millions of years in advance of Earth!

 >At one time computers were little more than glorified adding
 >machines; huge, inefficient and slow. Perhaps Penrose wrote from
 >that era.

Larry,

Unfortunately I somehow mischaracterized what Penrose actually
said, which is closer to your point: Why couldn't a computer be
biological in nature? Penrose wrote in 1989, exploring the
concept of machine consciousness. He backed up is ideas with
such far ranging topics as chaos theory (still fairly new at the
time) quantum physics and the physiology of the human brain.

Roy had written:

 >>How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >>people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >>source?

The word cybernetics, as used today, describes experimental
techniques of merging the human nervous system with computer
networks. But, when the term cybernetics was coined in 1948 it
described information theory, feedback systems, and computer
control theory. Our best scientific minds have already described
how an object could "know it was being flashed", the idea of
machine intelligence being almost as old as the modern era of
ufology.

Larry wrote:

 >I find the concept of fully automated probes, extremely
 >intelligent by our standards, to be intriguing. If nothing else,
 >it answers the common objections raised by some, that the
 >lengthy journeys required to study Earth from afar rule out any
 >such devices reaching this planet.

Roger wrote:

 >I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

Agreed, I chimed-in because a lot of the data on UFOs would be
consistent with these kind of machine controlled devices. I must
be very out of the loop on some of the latest thinking on the
subject of ufology, because some of these ideas strike me as
being very new to the field.

- Kurt Jonach (eWarrior)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:39:02 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:44:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
 >other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"... although
 >he believes it to be a huge plasma/ball lightning. This photo
 >appears on the front cver of his first book. This case was
 >presented at the "Sturrock Panel" discussion in Tarrytown, NY,
 >several years ago and has been mentioned by Jacques Vallee as an
 >example of the optical power radiated by some UFOs >>

Bruce, List:

What are the chances that this could be a sprite, or one of the
other new kinds of lighting discharges recently discovered?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                      Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:22:42 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:21:43 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:56:11 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >>>>Friends,

 >>>>I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >>>>regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >>>>I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >>>>just a comment or two:

 >>><snip>

 >>>>And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

 >>>The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
 >>>me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
 >>>because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
 >>>in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
 >>>whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
 >>>data and received money.

 >>Dear Kind and gentle List Folk... and EBK,

 >>MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >>their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.

 >Since MUFON has known about the issues and sat on them for three
 >years who knows when we will hear anything. It's my
 >understanding that MUFON really wishes the whole issue would die
 >down and go away so they could move on to more important stuff.

We don't know that to be so. That is, MUFON having full
knowledge of the details of this affair since the beginning. And
if I were an organization such as MUFON, I would wish the whole
thing to go away. But the new MUFON is not likely to let it just
die, because something like this has a life of it's own, as we
both know. If they were to pass in this, I would be forced to
leave them for the second time in five years, this time never to
return.

 ><snip>

 >>>The story from John C was that the files were all redacted, i.e.
 >>>all the personal information deleted. I posted an email to this
 >>>List and also sent a copy to NIDS asking two simple questions.
 >>>Did the person receiving the email actually see the files with
 >>>their eyes, and to avoid privacy issues, I asked if the files
 >>>were in fact redacted. So far in the last month and a half NIDS
 >>>has chosen to not confirm the fact the files were redacted.

 >>>Again the silence has been deafening.

 >>Not to me it ain't. What's deafening is the noise. By

 >I notice that in all your commentary about so called "noise" and
 >"filters" you avoided the issue, i.e. that Bigelow/NIDS have
 >thus far refused to confirm that Carpenter sent them redacted
 >files. If the files were in fact redacted, disclosing that they
 >were properly redacted would not hurt anybody's privacy and if
 >anything would help Carpenters claim that he redacted all the
 >files.

The noise I made reference to was intended to point to people
making judgments before the facts in this case were proven.
Since NIDS is backed by the power of money, I suspect that they
are not commenting as a result of recommendations from their
consiglieri... read: lawyers. Just a guess.

 >Tell you what Jim, why don't you email NIDS and ask them the
 >same question... but you will likely not get an answer. Like I
 >said, the silence is deafening.

Because I realize I will not get an answer. Who the hell am I to
merit one anyway? And with all due respect, Bob, who are any of
us to ask for an answer? With all the noise made in the first
few months of this issue coming to light, there was so much
"noise" from so many sources and on so many venues, that to
continue from where we sit is (in my opinion) ludicrous. So many
silly accusations were made that the lawyers are gonna have a
field day for a long, long time. They may be the only ones
making money on Carpenter's sale. Lots and lots of money.

I believe that those involved, the partners in this matter, are
doing their due diligence. If nothing happens in a reasonable
period of time, I can assure that the noise will begin anew. You
know that as well as I. So, I am patiently waiting for the
results. Is all....

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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:44:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:23:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:39:02 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >>Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >>brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >What are the chances that this could be a sprite, or one of the
 >other new kinds of lighting discharges recently discovered?

Don't know much about sprites except that they appear to be very
brief discharges upward from the tops of clouds. Lightning
strikes are very brief (milliseconds to tenths of seconds
generally). The anomalous object seen by RJC was, according to
his reportm, stationary under the anvil of a T-storm for several
minutes at least.

Phil's guess a "bal lightning" is as good as any conventional
explanation... except that this object goes far beyond
"conventional" ball lightning (for which there is no real
explanation but at least there is general admission that it is a
real phenomenon). Conventional BL sizes are less than a meter
and generall less than 10 cm.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                Re: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Lehmberg

From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:54:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:26:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Lehmberg


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:14:19 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch
 >
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

Honored list folk;

<snip>

 >One thing it might explain, assuming this speculation is true,
 >is the lack of "contact". A scientific probe is supposed to
 >gather and return data or it is useless. If such probes disturb
 >the specimens too much, they send back buggered data! Lets say
 >you want to study primate behavior, how they really act in the
 >wild. What you _don't_ do is put them on a movie set with
 >cameras rolling, frightening klieg lights, studio technicians
 >running all over the place etc. No. You hide, and observe as
 >unobtrusively as possible.

 >A scientific probe is not going to land in Washington, DC and
 >sneer at the hors d'ouvres at the lawn party.

 >How many times have you heard the question: "Why don't they
 >just land on the White House lawn?"

This touches on the conjectured aliens themselves being the
bigger architects of the aggregate secrecy. I remarked the
following to a writer when he tried to discount the ET
Hypothesis based on the fact that the aliens have not,
themselves, ended the supposed secrecy.

"Think like an alien. Consider -- you've heard it said that it
is the aliens themselves that are the biggest engineers of the
total secrecy (Hopkins, Jacobs, Strieber et al (especially
me!))? One could write off ET UFO's on the basis of their
obvious reluctance to show themselves clearly. From the ET point
of view point, though (as they try to understand what the
leadership in the tradition bound institutional machines of
cultural convenience are doing), they can only perceive unending
_denial_ of their very obvious existence by these cultural
leaders and their set in (sub-standard) concrete support
structures. This puts human beings firmly back in the business
of being the master engineer of the aggregate secrecy if the
aliens are being respectful of that, even, _irrational_ denial."

They don't land on the white house lawn because the official
leadership's position is that the ET does not even EXIST to land
on the white house lawn. If ET _did_ land, the government (the
establishment) would have more questions to answer than the mere
ET question. Perhaps the ET respects that in good faith. Too
bad!

 >One could answer that scientific probes are allergic to
 >pate-de-fois, a response no more idiotic than the question
 >itself.

True enough _somewhere_ in the universe. The universe of time
and space is just that big, and it is a lot more likely that we
are nowhere _near_ the center of it, remember.

Lehmberg@snowhill.com

--
~~~~
EXPLORE Alfred Lehmberg's Alien View" at his Fortunecity URL.
http://www.alienview.com
                  **Updated All the TIME**
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/witches/237/lehmberg.html

JOHN FORD RESTORATION FUND -- John will be released eventually.
He'll need a tax free cash stake to get on his feet. Let's put
one together for him; the bigger it is -- the more attention
he gets. It could have been you. E-mail for detail.
$350.00 pledged -- $200.00 collected!

"I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from
afar, I leave far behind me." - Giordano Bruno, burned at a
skepti-feebroid stake.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 19

                 Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 14:16:20 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:28:46 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:14:19 -0700
 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>>I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >>>sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >>>about other planets for a century or more.

 >>I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >>seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >>our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >>span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >>sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >>and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

 >>Roger

 >Hello Roger!

 >One thing it might explain, assuming this speculation is true,
 >is the lack of "contact". A scientific probe is supposed to
 >gather and return data or it is useless. If such probes disturb
 >the specimens too much, they send back buggered data! Lets say
 >you want to study primate behavior, how they really act in the
 >wild. What you _don't_ do is put them on a movie set with
 >cameras rolling, frightening klieg lights, studio technicians
 >running all over the place etc. No. You hide, and observe as
 >unobtrusively as possible.

 >A scientific probe is not going to land in Washington, DC and
 >sneer at the hors d'ouvres at the lawn party.

 >How many times have you heard the question: "Why don't they
 >just land on the White House lawn?"

 >One could answer that scientific probes are allergic to
 >pate-de-fois, a response no more idiotic than the question
 >itself.

Dear Lawrence of Hatchdom, Lister Twisters and EBK,

Larry, damned good point. I mean that. I just got finished
reading the good parts, by the by, of L. Gordon Cooper's new
book, "A Simple Twist of Fate." No, wait, that was a Dylan song.
I meant, "Leap of Faith." In that book, Gordon reveals having
seen photos taken of a landed saucer sitting on it's tri gear.
He told of many more instances, some of his personal sightings
whilst flying in the 50's. He tells that he did see a flying
saucer in the fullest, most traditional definition of that term.
He flew with them for quite a while, or they flew with him.

If indeed the UFO conundrum is real, that is, these suckers are
from "out there," and they are abducting folks, etc., then
imagine not only the level of technology, but the level of
intellect required to keep this conundrum alive and yet dead,
simultaneously.

For those who have made the leap of faith, it's a no brainier.
For those who have not, it's the leapers what got no brains! In
their view, of course.

They are able to keep it a conundrum in the eyes of most of the
populace. In the memories of others, it's as real as the boil on
one's ass. I never had one there, but I recently had one, uh,
somewhere else. Boy was that sucker real!

Your point is, therefor, well taken. They show themselves just
enough to be able to observe us but not sufficiently to disturb
(most of) us. What a bunch of mensches, eh? I wonder what they
would do if we were finally able to capture one of their
machines? Maybe play let's make a deal with the local
government? Maybe?

Or just let nature take it's course. After a while, the same old
same old will preclude anyone remembering to remember what
happened. It's what the goobers in goobermint depend on. We
can't remember Clinton's cigar. Hiroshima. Bergen Belsen. Mi Ly.
We can't remember what's important. And what's not.

Gosh, Larry. I just came. To a conclusion. This UFO thingy is
nuttin at all. It's just a mass hysteria. Why? Because from what
I just wrote, we ain't worth studying or even lookin at, eh?

Now, that'd be two "eh's" in one post. That oughta be good for
one, maybe even two EBK Brownie points.

Well, it oughta!?!!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 19

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:55:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:31:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee


 >From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 22:23:41 -0300
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >>Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >>brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.


 >Just to make others aware. There is a period at the end of the
 >URL which you supplied. Don't include it because it comes up not
f>ound.

Hahaha... Sorry. It was the end of a sentence. Must use good
grammar, 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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                               UFOs & Schools

From: Daniel Muoz <Ovnimexico1@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:05:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:41:29 -0400
Subject: UFOs & Schools


Hi, Errol and all the list!

I'm Daniel Muoz, collaborator and assistant to Jaime Maussan,
and alongside with him and all of our staff, are performing now
a research regarding all those cases that involve UFO's and
schools worldwide.

We think this is a very important topic, 'cause it seems that
there could be a real interest in the UFO occupants over our
children and young people... Maybe there is sort of special
skill in them to understand these cousins from outer Space? Who
knows...

That is the reason we are trying to invite to all of you on the
List to join us in this very interesting investigation. We would
need from you all the possible data (names, cities, number of
persons involved, school's name, time, etc.) of every case, in
order to classify them carefully and with all the possible
precision. And, obviously, all your personal data, in order to
quote you properly when this research is finished (if this is
possible, due to the amount of cases registered) and when is
presented to the public, and to all of you, as it should be
done, always through the invaluable help of Errol.

One more thing I would like to ask you is permission to use your
info when sent to us, always thinking in the cleanness and
rightness of this research. If there are interviews, photos,
videos and so on, just E-mail us and we can talk about. This is
a research for all and everyone of us, you included.

Of course, if we can collaborate with you in any way, just let
us know. We will be more than glad to do it. Meanwhile, I would
like to thank you for your cooperation in advance, and wish you
a good work and a nice day.


Daniel Muoz


PD- Our data are as follows:

Basilio Badillo 40, 6�. Piso
Col. Tabacalera
06030; Mxico, D.F.
MXICO

Tel: (52-5) 228-8935
Fax: (52-5) 228-8937

Ovnimexico@hotmail.com
Ovnimexico1@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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                         Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:12:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:44:32 -0400
Subject: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie


A few weeks ago, Ed Dames appeared on Coast to Coast AM. During
this program, Dames alleged that he was contacted by the
Coquille, Oregon Police Department to assist them with their
investigation into a missing teenage girl.

Dames said that he had determined through remote viewing on
15-July-00 that the subject was deceased - this is two weeks
after the girl has been missing and her shoes are found along a
road. Tragically, the missing girl's body was found at a later
date.

I contacted the Coquille Police Department to inquire about
Dames' alleged involvement in this case. I received a response
from Michael Reaves of the Coquille Police Department.
Mr. Reaves stated in an e-mail, "Our department didn't hire, nor
officially request assistance from Dames or his company."

Mr. Reaves further stated that a detective had contacted Dames
via e-mail once about the case and that this detective did so
only once and did not do so in an official or department
sanctioned manner. Mr. Reaves further stated that Dames did
contact the detective with the results of his remote viewing and
"the results were far from accurate and the investigator didn't
bring it up again, until Dames started making public statements
about our case."

Ed Dames - caught in yet another long line of lies and endless
and inaccurate predictions that never come true. Let's not
forget to thank Mike Siegel for providing the soapbox that many
of these frauds stand upon...

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 (This may turn into just
UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded it...again!
Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                    Cydonian Imperative Update - 9-19-00

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:01:55 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative Update - 9-19-00


9-19-00

Feline Resemblance? "Mirrored" Versions of Mark Kelly's Image

Summary: New graphics based Mark Kelly's rectified image of the
"Face" suggest possible "double image" symbology.  Contains a
few "must-see" illustrations.

Visit:

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia

and select Page 8 from the Journal.

Mac Tonnies
The Cydonian Imperative








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

             Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories

From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:40:14 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:04:19 -0400
Subject: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories


September 19, 2000

Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories
By Sandra Blakeslee

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/19/science/19MEMO.html

Scientists may have found a biological reason to explain why two
people who witness the same event will, years later, often have
different memories of what happened.

It seems that every time an old memory is pulled into
consciousness, the brain takes it apart, updates it and then
makes new proteins in the process of putting the memory back
into long-term storage. The fact that new proteins are made
means that the memory has been transformed permanently to
reflect each person's life experiences � not the memory itself.

The finding is based on research involving a specific kind of
fear memory in animals, but many experts predict that it may
also hold true for other kinds of memories in humans. They also
say that the discovery could lead to ways of altering or erasing
people's memories.

The research, carried out at the Center for Neural Science at
New York University, was described in the Aug. 17 issue of the
journal Nature. This is the first good neurobiological
explanation of the way memories are updated, said Dr. Daniel
Schacter, a Harvard psychology professor and a memory expert.
"It's a mistake to think that once you record a memory, it is
forever fixed," he said.

Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who studies memory at the
University of Washington in Seattle, said: "This is very
interesting research. We're on the brink of being able to figure
out how you might accomplish something like memory engineering."

It may be possible to erase traumatic memories in people who are
plagued by them, she said, and to better understand how false
memories are implanted into people's minds when they are given
suggestions that they want to believe.

It has been known for at least 100 years that newly formed
memories are initially unstable, said Dr. Yadin Dudai, a
neurobiologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot,
Israel. A bump on the head, an electric shock or certain drugs
can disrupt the process that gradually turns short-term memories
into long-term memories through the production of new
connections and protein synthesis in memory circuits.

In the 1960's, researchers showed that certain drugs could
interfere with the recall of memories, he said, but the research
did not get very far because the drugs affected the entire brain
and could not be traced to cellular mechanisms in memory
networks.

Dr. Karim Nader and Dr. Glenn Shafe, research assistant
professors at N.Y.U., carried out the new experiments on memory
recall in ways that reveal those cellular mechanisms with much
greater precision. In a process called fear conditioning, they
simultaneously played a tone and delivered an electric shock to
the feet of caged rats. Later, when the rats heard just the
tone, they froze; they had learned to be afraid.

Researchers know exactly how and where this fear memory is
hardwired in the rat's amygdala, a part of the brain that
processes emotions.

If the rat's amygdala is injected with a drug that blocks
protein synthesis shortly after fear conditioning, it does not
acquire long-term memory of the fear, Dr. Shafe said.

But if the drug is injected six or more hours later, the memory
is not blocked; the brain has made new proteins to consolidate
and store the memory.

For six hours or so the memory is what scientists term "labile"
- open or sensitive to some kind of manipulation. After this
period, the memory is firmly in place.

"I was bored with these experiments," Dr. Nader said. "I began
thinking, what happens to a memory when you remember it? It
would be so cool if it became labile again." He proposed a new
experiment: animals would be trained to associate the tone with
the electric shock. The researchers would wait a day or more for
the fear memory to consolidate. Then they would present the
animal with the tone (to retrieve the memory) and a drug that
blocks protein synthesis.

"I said the drug would have no effect" on past learning, Dr.
Shafe said. If anything, the animal's fear memory should be
stronger because the drug could deter the animal from learning
that a tone was not necessarily associated with a shock � and
that would reinforce the original fear memory. The two
scientists bet a cocktail on the outcome. A few weeks later, Dr.
Nader won a cosmopolitan.

"My jaw just hit the floor when I saw the result," he said.
Instead of freezing at the tone, the rats scarcely reacted. It
means memories become labile and open to revision every time
they are recalled, Dr. Nader said. And new proteins have to be
made before the memories are put back into storage.

Both researchers emphasized that this finding was only a first
step in exploring the biology of how the brain consolidates and
manipulates memories. It is not known if much older and more
established memories are open to editing or if this mechanism is
restricted to fear memories alone.

Why evolution would choose a strategy that permits memories to
be highly malleable is an interesting question. Memories need to
be reliable to guide behavior, but they also need to be open to
new information.

In the long run, these findings may be used clinically to erase
traumatic memories, Dr. Loftus said. A patient would recall the
troubling event and be given a drug or other agent to disrupt
the memory from being reconsolidated.

The research also sheds light on false memories, she said. If a
recalled memory is open to revision, incorrect as well as
correct information can be woven into the fabric of a memory.
Once that happens, a person has no way of knowing what is true
or not true. Yet people put faith in their memories to guide
their decisions, she said.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                              Can You Moo Too?

From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:02:08 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:06:20 -0400
Subject: Can You Moo Too?


Gentle List Folk,

Here is a genuine scientific factoid, source cited below.

Those following "cattle mutilations" may find the parallels in
the genetic map of cows and humans of some interest.

Cattle mutilations began to be reported many years ago. Makes
one wonder about the state of knowledge of comparative human and
cattle genetics at that time.

There are several hypotheses as to what these mutilations
represent list readers will no doubt be aware of claims that
they represent alien activity; an alternative hypothesis was
proferred by a recent UK documentary shown on American
television. The producers of the documentary felt that the
mutilations represent a covert US "black operation" which
samples cattle in a wide geographic area. The purpose of the
operation being the assessment of radiation damage and long term
radioactive fallout effects from above ground American nuclear
testing which contaminated vast areas of many states with long
lived radionuclides i.e. stronium 90 and plutonium which have
biological effects. States such as New Mexico and adjacent
states as well as others to which radioactive fallout was
carried to by the jetstream, New York for example. In the 1950's
dairy farms in upstate New York were contaminated with fallout
and there were even fallout "rains" in New York City.


Good background books on this issue are:

        Under The Cloud: The Decades of Nuclear Testing
     Richard L. Miller
     Paperback - 548 pages (July 1, 1999)
     Two-Sixty Press; ISBN: 1881043053

        Has great maps which allow one to examine radioactive
        fallout contamination in one's own state!

        The Plutonium Files : America's Secret Medical
     Experiments in the Cold War
     by Eileen Welsome
        Hardcover - 580 pages (October 19, 1999)
     Dial Pr; ISBN: 0385314027


If any one has Linda Moulton-Howe's email address pass this
press release on to her.

Gary Alevy

Here is the release:

Source: University Of Illinois At Urbana-Champaign
        (http://www.uiuc.edu/)

Date:  Posted 9/12/2000

Cattle, Human Genomes Contain Many Identical Genes

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. -- The most detailed map ever produced of cattle
genes and the first comparison map of cattle and human genomes
show that many genes, and even whole chromosomes, are configured
in the same way in the two species, scientists report.

"The comparative map has enormous predictive power," said lead
researcher Harris Lewin, director of the W.M. Keck Center for
Comparative and Functional Genomics at the University of
Illinois.

"For the first time, we can move from a point on the human
genome to the equivalent point on the cattle genome. That will
allow us to use the map of one species to identify genes
controlling important traits in the other, such as those
influencing lactation, reproduction and resistance to infectious
diseases."

The maps appear in the September issue of the journal Genome
Research by scientists at two universities after a three-year
collaboration led by Lewin, a professor of animal sciences,
holder of the Gutgsell Endowed Chair and director of the UI
Biotechnology Center. Among the major contributors to the
research were co-authors Mark R. Band, a postdoctoral research
associate; Joshua H. Larson, a graduate student in the UI
department of animal sciences; and James E. Womack, the W.P.
Luse Endowed Professor at Texas A&M University.

A pullout poster of the comparative map is included in the
journal, courtesy of AniGenics Inc., an animal genomics company,
and Research Genetics, a major supplier of tools and reagents
for genome research and subsidiary of Invitrogen Corp.

The research -- funded by the USDA National Research Initiative
-- combined the sequencing of small segments of genes, known as
expressed sequence tags, and sophisticated bioinformatics tools
developed at the UI with a radiation hybrid cell panel, a unique
resource for gene mapping developed by Womack�s laboratory.

A total of 1,087 genetic markers were placed on the radiation
hybrid map, which includes 768 known genes. About 92 percent of
all cattle chromosomal DNA is included on the map. This
represents a four-fold increase in the total number of all
cattle genes mapped previously, Lewin said.

Among the known genes, 638 (83 percent) could be identified as
identical to human genes that also have positional information
on human chromosomes, the researchers reported. Knowing the
order of the same genes on the chromosomes of humans and cattle
permitted the construction of the first "whole-genome
comparative map" and revealed large regions of conservation of
gene order in the two genomes. An examination of the comparative
map revealed up to 149 conserved chromosome segments in humans
and cattle, including four whole chromosomes that appear to have
the same genes in both species, despite the two species being
separated by more than 60 million years of evolution.

Among other firsts in the report were the identification of up
to 48 novel genes, predicted mapping of 48 unmapped human genes
on the basis of the cattle-map position, and the number of
chromosome rearrangements during evolution resulting in the
present organization of the cattle and human genomes.

Eventually, Lewin said, the cattle genome will be completely
sequenced,ultimately leading to a more detailed picture of the
evolutionary events that distinguish the different mammals. "In
the end" he said, "we will understand the molecular genetic
basis for the major phenotypic differences among the mammals.
This will have enormous scientific and practical significance,
particularly in the area of food safety, animal health, and the
competitiveness of our domestic beef and dairy industries."


Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by
University Of Illinois At Urbana-Champaign for journalists and
other members of the public. If you wish to quote from any part
of this story, please credit University Of Illinois At
Urbana-Champaign as the original source. You may also wish to
include the following link in any citation:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/09/000912070337.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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                 Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:26:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:09:12 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >>sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >>about other planets for a century or more.

 >Hi, Larry!

 >I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.


Hi Roger and Larry, the List, and especially EBK,

Just think, If some UFOs were robotic probes and some Earthlings
(including CSETI) had limited flashlight communication with
them, I hope they had the good sense to be using Morse code. Off
in the celestial realms there may be beings doing what NASA does
here to ascertain data from remote probes. Morse or any code
would aid the process a lot better than random flashes. And, if
they flash back the code at us it would be robotic
communication, a lot better than the supposed live
non-communication between humans and their alleged grey
abductors.

There may be several species examining Earth and some may have
only advanced to the remote probe stage of interstellar
exploration. I'd wager that they are light years ahead of SETI
and don't have to decode their signals from far off in space
hundreds of years after they are emitted.

I am glad that forms of communication other than radio waves
from space are beginning to be analyzed from Earth. In my gut,
right or wrong, I have always felt that any civilization more
advanced than ours would have moved beyond radio. My gut may be
wrong, who knows, there may be alien top 40 rock stations out
there.

Josh Goldstein
The UFO nest










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                      Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'

From: Brad Sparks <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 21:14:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:03:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO'


James,

You are a master of the non-answer.  I listed four skeptic
factoids about the Rendlesham case and your responses were
evasions.  You do not provide azimuths to the UFO and the
lighthouse to show they were in the same direction in the sky,
for example -- you just assert I'm wrong.  It's just bald
assertion.

My postings:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m12-009.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m14-005.shtml
http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m14-025.shtml

Your response:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m16-008.shtml

The bottom line is that the lighthouse and the UFO were in
different directions and the lighthouse was invisible for almost
all of the alleged 2-mile chases of the lighthouse beacon:

LIGHTHOUSE NOT VISIBLE
1.  On the physical impossibility of seeing Orfordness
lighthouse's light for about 1.9 miles of the alleged 2.2 mile
"chases" of the lighthouse supposedly mistaken as a UFO, your
response was a dodge about my supposedly confusing First and
Second Night observations.  But my postings clearly distinguish
the two and clearly state that _your_ position is that _both_
nights involved full 2-mile chases of the Orfordness lighthouse.

In your website "Rendlesham Unravelled" article
(http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/rend2.htm) you claim that "the Orford
Ness lighthouse explains most of the light phenomena" seen by
Col Halt and company.  If "most" of Halt's UFO observations were
due to the Orfordness lighthouse that means he must have made
his own 2-mile chase of the lighthouse similar to the alleged
folly of the first night's group.

In your Aug 25 posting here you state:  "So... when Halt and his
merry band of men were in the forest, effectively investigating
the previous incident and ... 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."

Do you now agree that Col Halt did _not_ chase a windmill for 2
miles, I mean, a lighthouse?

UFO & LIGHTHOUSE IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS
2.  You have no response, certainly no numbers, to dispute the
fact the UFO and the Orfordness lighthouse were in different
directions, separated by at least 20-30 degrees.  This is in
fact, an understatement, as it only applies to the beginning of
the 2-mile chases.  At the _end_ the difference in direction
would be even greater.  If the USAF parties in following the UFO
followed the reconstructed path along 122 degs true azimuth,
then at the _end_ of that path the Orfordness lighthouse would
be at about 60 degs true azimuth -- or some 60 degrees away from
the UFO.  If we convert Col Halt's magnetic compass reading at
the end, the difference in direction to the UFO and the
lighthouse is still about 45 degrees.

I told you in my postings that I measured the approximately
85-degree azimuth to the Orfordness lighthouse from the map on
your website -- it applies to the "landing site" (it reduces to
about 60 degs as one travels two miles along the 122 heading on
Mclean's reconstructed path toward the UFO).  You claim you have
no idea where I got that figure from, even though I told you
(you really need to study your own website more) but you cannot
dispute it and have no figure of your own.

PIECES FALLING OFF THE UFO
3.  Your response to the fact that the Halt tape twice reports
that pieces of the UFO were falling off like it was molten
material is to deny ever denying it, then change the subject to
the "exploding" UFO.  But here is what you posted on UpDates on
Sept 4:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m04-002.shtml

 >... Halt ... observed, that, "At one point it appeared
 >to throw off glowing particles and then broke into
 >five separate white objects and then disappeared".

 >That never happened, as was proven when a copy of
 >Halt's microcassette recording from that night became
 >available.

Here above you make a blanket denial of everything, the
"throwing off glowing particles" and the breaking up into 5
white objects.  You say flatly it "never happened."  And, that's
flatly not true, as is proven by the Halt tape, as I've already
posted.

So now let's deal with the UFO exploding into 5 white pieces.

The Halt tape transcript on your website
reveals(http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/halttape.htm):

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 is obviously doing a partial retrospective here, by
pointing out that previously the UFO had been a "glow with a red
flash" but now is a steady grouping of 5 lights.  Obviously he
inadvertently missed taping the "explosion" or breakup in
between which must have been prior to this recorded observation,
but he does have the indisputable transformation into 5
evidently white lights, contrary to your claim it "never
happened."  The tape records everything except the breakup or
explosion, but it does have the before and the after so the
in-between cannot be denied.

The fact he saw a red light again afterward doesn't negate any
of this.  His memory years later has "rationalized" some of the
multiplicity of events by telescoping multiples into one, which
is easier to remember because it is simpler.  This is a
well-known memory phenomenon and doesn't make him a liar or turn
his observations into trash.

Contrary to your Sept 4 posting claiming that "the facts confirm
our UFO tales have grown somewhat substantially in the telling,"
the facts show the reverse -- that the UFO stories in some cases
_contract_ rather than grow.  Halt for example has apparently
collapsed multiple similar events into single events.


UFO & LIGHTHOUSE SEEN AT SAME TIME
4.  Your response to the fact that Halt and
Penniston-Cabansag-Burroughs saw the lighthouse and the UFO at
the same time or sequentially and were able to distinguish them
is to pretend no skeptic ever denied it.  However I quoted
skeptic Ian Ridpath denying it -- on your current website
(http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/ridpath.txt) with no annotation or
update by you or Ridpath correcting that false claim though you
correct or update other matters, contrary to your response.

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                  Dr. Bruce Maccabee On IRC Chat - 09-22-00

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:56:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:06:49 -0400
Subject: Dr. Bruce Maccabee On IRC Chat - 09-22-00


UFO Research List - http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/

Dr. Maccabee will be the guest speaker for a special question
and answer session on the IRC Undernet channel #chariots this
coming Friday, September 22, 2000, at 10 PM EDT, 9 PM CDT,
8 PM MDT, 7 PM PDT.

For those who don't already use IRC as a method of real-time
communication over the Internet, you can access #chariots by
clicking on the link provided on my home page at:

http://www.jilain.com

Just remember that on Undernet, a nickname cannot be more than
9 characters, and if a nickname is already in use, you will get
a notice to that effect. If that happens, make up another
nickname and try again.

We look forward to seeing everyone there for this special program
with Dr. Maccabee. He will be answering YOUR questions, so don't
blow this chance. Be there!!

Bobbie

Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
   --->backwoods of Mississippi
   --->USA
   --->planet Earth
   --->somewhere in the cosmos

http://www.jilain.com
http://www.ufo-nexxus.org
IRC Undernet #chariots
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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                Re: ETI Signal From The Pleiades? - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:10:50 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:09:23 -0400
Subject: Re: ETI Signal From The Pleiades? - Cecchini


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:33:13 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: ETI Signal From The Pleiades?

 >Below is an article by Jeff Faust that I found in the latest
 >issue of Spaceviews which I think will be of special interest to
 >readers of this list, particularly the reference to astronomer
 >Frank Drake's "hair-raising experience" while doing early radio
 >observations of the Pleiades. Anyone know more about this?

You can read more about it in his & Dava Sobel's

_Is Anyone Out There?_

http://store.yahoo.com/seti-store/books.html

 From a friend:

 >It was more of a thought-provoking incident than a "Wow!"
 >signal, as it was terrestrial in origin.

 >Besides, the Pleiades are way too young for a
 >technical civilization - unless of course there
 >was some ETI starship expedition there studying
 >the development of very early star systems. :^)

Dr. Drake will also be in Boston in November, if you'd like to
roadtrip and talk to him in person about 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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                         Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart

From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:31:20 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:12:04 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.
 >Note that in a previous post, it was indicated that Carpenter
 >wrote his version of the events surrounding the "What If"
 >scenario. It was also indicated (by moi) that this version
 >would be published in the MUFON Journal.

 >Jim Mortellaro


Jim,

Since no one in MUFON other than the four ethics committee
members has actually seen the evidence, the general membership
knows next to nothing about the Carpenter case. Even this List
has only seen small pieces of the evidence in the form of
isolated quotes. If Carpenter is allowed to write an article in
the MUFON Journal "explaining" his actions along the lines we
have become familiar with, will I be allowed to write an article
to be published in the Journal which quotes from several pieces
of evidence and shows a scan of Carpenter's business cards?

Considering the serious nature of the charges, this would
provide a fair and balanced perspective.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                       NASA's Most Fantastic Proposal

From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:33:59 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:17:00 -0400
Subject: NASA's Most Fantastic Proposal


NASA's Most Fantastic Proposal Self-Replicating Industry on the Moon by
1999.

The classic space exploitation study and P E T I T I O N online.

http://www.harvest-moon.org/aasm/index.htm

The Proposal

In 1980, newly elected President Jimmy Carter ordered NASA to
prepare a list of potential goals for the space program.

The 386 page book NASA produced is titled: Advanced Automation
for Space Missions. ( NASA CP-2255 )

Costing 11.7 million dollars, the study is a historic document
written by the biggest brains at NASA in 1980.

The study made a mind-boggling offer, but it received no press
so few people ever heard about it. A Chapter of the National
Space Society put the study online in 1998. ( links below )

The study proposed a 19 year project to land a 100 ton
solar-powered robotic factory on the Moon.

The factory would automatically mine the soil around it, would
build a clone of itself in one year, and would keep itself in
repair. Each would build a clone the following year, and so on.

The factory population would increase exponentially: population
= 2years

In 10 years there would be a thousand clones, in 30 years a
billion.

One billion 100-ton factory clones would be less than 1% of 1%
of 1% of 1% of the mass of the Moon. They could fit in a single
crater on the far side.

At any time, new mechanical designs could be loaded into the
factories to produce consumer goods like electric cars, solar
cells, appliances, and automated green houses, for delivery to
Earth in great numbers.

One billion 100-ton factory clones would produce their own
weight of manufactured goods each year: They would produce 100
billion tons of goods annually. At that rate it would take more
than 100 years to use-up 1% of 1% of 1% of the Moon.

Industrial pollution would be expelled from Earth, public wealth
would be maximized, and the Moon would be almost untouched by it
all.

That's a recipe for utopia.

It may sound like fantasy science fiction to you, but that's the
technology 1980 NASA offered to develop in 19 years. How many
years would it take starting in 2000?

Beyond The Proposal

After the industrial seed was established, we would be able to
mass-produce any machines we want for the small cost of
designing them. That idea quickly leads to extreme science
fiction.

We could design city-sized space stations and have them
delivered faster than we could use them. We could live in them,
or use them as automated greenhouses.

Ganymede, one of the outer moons of Jupiter, is as massive as
Earth and is covered by more than a hundred miles of frozen
water.

In one scenario, Ganymede alone would provide enough space-homes
for a human population of a thousand trillion wealthy people.
They might all be hooked together into a rapid-transit ring
orbiting Earth, and might put-off the population crisis for
another 1000 years. Then we'd have a super-civilization.

We could even give Mars an ocean and warm it into a second Earth
with orbiting mirrors.

After building a self-replicating lunar factory, our imagination
is the only limit to what we could accomplish.

Objections

Objection 1: We can't build computers smart enough.
Rebuttal: How smart is plankton?
A plankton cell does the exact same job:
it absorbs minerals and sunlight, and duplicates itself.

Objection 2: Too many scientific breakthroughs are required.

Rebuttal: No scientific breakthroughs are required. We already
construct industries on Earth. We only need to replace human
muscle with mechanical muscle, so it is a pure engineering
challenge.

Objection 3: The needed resources may not be found on the Moon.
Rebuttal: All required resources are present.
Read the study.

Objection 4: It will cost too much.

Rebuttal: To give it 10 times the budget of the Apollo Program
would cost less than 1% of the US budget for 10 years. That
doesn't seem like too much to spend, considering the payoff.

Objection 5: The moons and planets are too sacred to use that
way.

Rebuttal: The use of one outer moon to build space cities would
increase life's useable biosphere a million times over. Could
dead rocks we can't even see without a telescope be more sacred
than expanding the biosphere?

Objection 6: It is against God's will.

Rebuttal: Who says?
God commanded us to be fruitful and multiply, and charged us to
keep good stewardship of our planet. Earth is now full of people
and sickening with industrial pollution. NASA's proposal is the
only way we can continue to obey those commands.

Objection 7: The robots would evolve and exterminate us unless a
hero goes back in time and...

Rebuttal: This is not a Hollywood thriller. It is about dumb
machines doing a pre-programmed job. They will have no more
imagination or ambition than a toaster, and as little chance of
spontaneously evolving.

Resources

Read Advanced Automation for Space Missions online.

AASM is well written with many graphs, tables, and figures, and
it's not too technical for most people: It was written for Jimmy
Carter and his staff, not Einstein.

The Original Copy

http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/AASM/

hosted by Molecular Manufacturing Shortcut Group.

http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/

The free Geocities Copy does not use pop-up advertising.

http://www.geocities.com/moonharvester/

Buy the study from: National Technical Information Service.

http://www.ntis.gov/

--A similar study by Dr. Gerard K. O'Neill at the Space Studies
Institute: Alternative Plan for U.S. National Space Program

http://ssi.org/alt-plan.html

References

A description of the study is found on one of NASA's web pages.
Molecular Nanotechnology in Aerospace: 1999

http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/papers/NanoSpace1999/paper.html

Scan that page for "advanced automation for space missions" to
find the description.

That was the _only_ page on any NASA web site that had the
study's title on it in August 2000. See how many references
currently exist on NASA sites.

http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?hl=on&q=host%3Agov+and+%22advanced+automa
tion+for+space+missions%22&r=&kl=XX&d0=&d1=&stype=&pg=aq&search.x=32&search.y=2
.

The October 1995 issue of Discover Magazine contains an article
titled Robot, Build Thyself which includes a brief description
of NASA's proposal.

It's in their online archive.

That month's edition was the Special 15th Aniversary Issue
titled: Science On The Edge; Seven Ideas That Could Change The
World.

"Robot, Build Thyself" was Idea #1.

Knowing that, you will be surprised at how few words were spared on
NASA's study. The name of the study isn't even stated, but the year is.

The article focuses instead on a couple of oddball scientists
who want to use self-replicating industry in deserts instead of
on the Moon. Ignoring the Moon, the author painted the
environmental nighmare that would happen if they were used in
deserts.

To find the article quickly, Search The Discover Magazine Archive
for thyself:

http://www.discover.com/archive/index.html

Coincidentally, the NASA Study and Discover Magazine were both
born in 1980.

.

Next time you are at the library, look for a book titled Space,
The Next 25 Years. It has a much more detailed description, with
some interesting photos.

.

Apart from the three listed above, official references to AASM's
self-replicating lunar factories have not been found.

See 75+ unofficial web references.

http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?hl=on&q=%22advanced+automation+for+space+
missions%22+and+not+host%3Aislandone+and+not+host%3Ageocities&r=&kl=XX&d0=&d1=&s
type=&pg=aq&search.x=39&search.y=11

Conclusion

NASA spends more than ten million dollars a year striving to
simulate a MICROSCOPIC self-replicating factory (nanotechnology)
on its fastest supercomputers.

Click this link to visit NASA's nanotech home page.
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/Groups/SciTech/nano/index.html

NASA and other computer labs can simulate molecular gears and
motors, but as stated bluntly on NASA's nanotechnology home
page, nobody knows how to BUILD molecular machines, just how to
calculate them.

Would it be easier to build a seed replicator as big as a
garage, ( AASM ) or a million times smaller than a flea? (
nanotechnology )

AASM would be far easier to achieve than nanotechnology, yet
NASA spends money and promotional energy on a nanotech
replicator instead of on the AASM-scale one they proposed first.

For some reason, AASM is so politically incorrect that only one
in thousands of people has ever heard of it.

This is the only web site that lobbies for AASM.

If this site ever becomes popular, an official petition will be
added to the resources. Until then, consider the survey below to
be an unofficial petition.

www.harvest-moon.org

Written by Paul 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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:52:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:19:52 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch


 >From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 00:38:21 -0700

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?


 >Larry wrote:

 >>I cannot understand how anyone today would posit that to be
 >>highly intelligent, a computer must be biological in nature.

 >>Every so many months, computers double in power, memory, what
 >>have you. That rate of advance cannot go on forever of course,
 >>but imagine the automata available to societies thousands or
 >>millions of years in advance of Earth!

 >>At one time computers were little more than glorified adding
 >>machines; huge, inefficient and slow. Perhaps Penrose wrote from
 >>that era.

 >Unfortunately I somehow mischaracterized what Penrose actually
 >said, which is closer to your point: Why couldn't a computer be
 >biological in nature? Penrose wrote in 1989, exploring the
 >concept of machine consciousness. He backed up is ideas with
 >such far ranging topics as chaos theory (still fairly new at the
 >time) quantum physics and the physiology of the human brain.

 >Roy had written:

 >>>How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >>>people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >>>source?

 >The word cybernetics, as used today, describes experimental
 >techniques of merging the human nervous system with computer
 >networks. But, when the term cybernetics was coined in 1948 it
 >described information theory, feedback systems, and computer
 >control theory. Our best scientific minds have already described
 >how an object could "know it was being flashed", the idea of
 >machine intelligence being almost as old as the modern era of
 >ufology.

 >Larry wrote:

 >>I find the concept of fully automated probes, extremely
 >>intelligent by our standards, to be intriguing. If nothing else,
 >>it answers the common objections raised by some, that the
 >>lengthy journeys required to study Earth from afar rule out any
 >>such devices reaching this planet.

 >Roger wrote:

 >>I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >>seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >>our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >>span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >>sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >>and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

 >Agreed, I chimed-in because a lot of the data on UFOs would be
 >consistent with these kind of machine controlled devices. I must
 >be very out of the loop on some of the latest thinking on the
 >subject of ufology, because some of these ideas strike me as
 >being very new to the field.


Hello Kurt:

I should add that I didn't intend to rule out organic chemistry
as part of a "cyborg" or artificially intelligent entity. Unless
I am mistaken, it might someday be possible to use organic
chemicals much like those in living creatures to develop
specialized functions otherwise unattainable with standard
electronic type hardware and robotics.

Years ago, I played with a special rubber that expanded on one
axis when an electrical current was sent through it... it was
partially conductive.

Something similar, but a material that contracts instead, would
be analogous to any animal muscle.

A very advanced culture might even capitalize on such technology
to create useful lifelike, uh, contructs which would entirely
blur the line between man and machine!

This is not the "bionic man",  a normal human whose damaged
limbs and organs were replaced with high-tech protheses .. its
just the opposite.

This would be a robot really, stealing pages out of the long
book of biology to make better organic parts!


Again, I'm speculating wildly here.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:05:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:22:24 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:26:39 +0100
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:36:25 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 17:28:37 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>>I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >>>sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >>>about other planets for a century or more.

 >>Hi, Larry!

 >>I couldn't agree more. A lot of the limitations that science
 >>seems to put on the probability of ET life seems to be based on
 >>our own limitations in terms of intelligence and general life
 >>span. I've always considered most claims of ET contacts and/or
 >>sightings were most likely robotic probes. Makes plain sense
 >>and, as you suggest, solves a multitude of unanswered questions.

 >Hi Roger and Larry, the List, and especially EBK,

 >Just think, If some UFOs were robotic probes and some Earthlings
 >(including CSETI) had limited flashlight communication with
 >them, I hope they had the good sense to be using Morse code. Off
 >in the celestial realms there may be beings doing what NASA does
 >here to ascertain data from remote probes. Morse or any code
 >would aid the process a lot better than random flashes. And, if
 >they flash back the code at us it would be robotic
 >communication, a lot better than the supposed live
 >non-communication between humans and their alleged grey
 >abductors.

 >There may be several species examining Earth and some may have
 >only advanced to the remote probe stage of interstellar
 >exploration. I'd wager that they are light years ahead of SETI
 >and don't have to decode their signals from far off in space
 >hundreds of years after they are emitted.

 >I am glad that forms of communication other than radio waves
 >from space are beginning to be analyzed from Earth. In my gut,
 >right or wrong, I have always felt that any civilization more
 >advanced than ours would have moved beyond radio. My gut may be
 >wrong, who knows, there may be alien top 40 rock stations out
 >there.

Hello Josh!

Actually, the sort of UFOs/devices or whatever I was suggesting
would not respond at all.

Maybe they might shine a light to see what's flashing at them.
Otherwise, having found any sort of "welcoming committee ",  I
would expect them to depart, as quickly and discreetly as
possible.

As for the various codes/languages etc., they have had decades
if not centuries to give up a "code book" Apparently, this is
just not in the cards, unless one buys into the contactee
drivel.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:15:13 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:24:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Hatch


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:12:04 -0700

 >A few weeks ago, Ed Dames appeared on Coast to Coast AM. During
 >this program, Dames alleged that he was contacted by the
 >Coquille, Oregon Police Department to assist them with their
 >investigation into a missing teenage girl.

 >Dames said that he had determined through remote viewing on
 >15-July-00 that the subject was deceased - this is two weeks
 >after the girl has been missing and her shoes are found along a
 >road. Tragically, the missing girl's body was found at a later
 >date.

 >I contacted the Coquille Police Department to inquire about
 >Dames' alleged involvement in this case. I received a response
 >from Michael Reaves of the Coquille Police Department.
 >Mr. Reaves stated in an e-mail, "Our department didn't hire, nor
 >officially request assistance from Dames or his company."

 >Mr. Reaves further stated that a detective had contacted Dames
 >via e-mail once about the case and that this detective did so
 >only once and did not do so in an official or department
 >sanctioned manner. Mr. Reaves further stated that Dames did
 >contact the detective with the results of his remote viewing and
 >"the results were far from accurate and the investigator didn't
 >bring it up again, until Dames started making public statements
 >about our case."

 >Ed Dames - caught in yet another long line of lies and endless
 >and inaccurate predictions that never come true. Let's not
 >forget to thank Mike Siegel for providing the soapbox that many
 >of these frauds stand upon...



Hello Royce:

Given the long track record of the Coast to Coast (Bell/Siegel)
soap box, I find this interesting but of course unsurprising.

This is just my personal opinion mind you, but to me, anyone who
appears on that show has by far the burden of proof that they
are somehow _not_ full of BS.

Once in a while somebody interesting does come on, but it really
costs them in a way. How does one maintain credibility, going on
the air nationwide if not worldwide, sandwiched in between
Richard Hoagland and Robert "Ghostwolf" ?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                          Project 1947 Roswell Page

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:51:33 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:54:40 -0400
Subject: Project 1947 Roswell Page


Greetings,

Project 1947, a research project concerned with the 1947 UFO
wave, was specifically not designed to look into the Roswell
incident. However, we have come across some material that
pertains to Roswell. Since we constantly get inquiries asking
what if anything we know about the Roswell incident, we have
established a Roswell page

http://www.project1947.com/roswell/index.html

Comments on both the official search for Roswell records and the
Project 1947 records research are discussed here. What records
were search, what records were not search, other records that
might be of interest or could possibly contain information on
Roswell, I have compile a list with comments.

Already we have nearly enough information to do a large follow
up article on this subject.

http://www.project1947.com/roswell/rosearch.htm

We also have an article from Prof. Charles Moore on radars in
New Mexico in 1947 with an assessment of the claims of radar
tracking of the Roswell object.

http://www.project1947.com/roswell/cbmintro.htm

Comments, corrections, criticisms are, of course, always welcome
at:

jan@cyberzone.net



Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.project1947.com/
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
(860) 546-9135










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:29:48 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:49:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:24:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hello Kevin, List,

<snip>

 >Serge asked for a single reference in which PTSD [Post-Traumatic
 >Stress Disorder] was the result of a fantasy. I supplied four,
 >which he rejected, saying that each was the result of men faking
 >PTSD. Possibly.

<snip>

I would rather say: convincingly. You make it look like I
rejected your references for subjective motives, which is not
the case at all. The only thing those references had going for
them was their _titles_,  _not_ their content. It would be more
appropriate to rewrite this in the following way:

"I supplied four references which, and I thank Serge for that,
_did not_ involve PTSD as a result of fantasy. They rather
discussed _faked_ PTSD to obtain compensation from government
agencies."

Maybe also:

"He ordered hamburgers, and I came up with whip cream. Sorry."

<snip>

 >However, since the syndrome was created based on
 >the large number of people claiming horrific combat experiences,
 >it would seem that the four references would have answered the
 >question.

<snip>

Your choice of words has a tendency to deserve the facts: PTSD
was not created, it was discovered. One creates something that
does not exist, and discovers something that has always been
there but has not been found yet.

PTSD encompasses a _series of symptoms_ which were first
observed on a large number of people who had _experienced_
horrific combat experiences.

If you still have your doubts, I suggest, Stephen R. Paige (1):

"The recognition by medical authorities of psychological
malfunctioning resulting from trauma can be traced back well
over 200 years (...) It was not until DSMIII (American
Psychiatric Association, 1980) was published, that Posttraumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD) was clearly delineated as a clinical
syndrome, within the category of anxiety disorders. "

<snip>

 >In fact, Donald W. Goodwin and Samuel B. Guze, in
 >Psychiatric Diagnosis, wrote, "The decision to award
 >compensation was made even more difficult by the almost total
 >lack of evidence that 'post-traumatic stress disorder, delayed
 >type' exists as a clinical entity."

<snip>

For the benefit of the reader, we will note that "Delayed onset
PTSD occurs when symptoms make their appearance six months or
longer after the recognizable stressor." (2)

The reality of PTSD delayed type is recognized, among others, by
the Industrial Medical Council (IMC) (3), U.S. Government
Humanitarian Demining Program (4), and the American Psychiatric
Association (5). The later published in 1994 its "Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-
IV)" which, incidentally, "has been referred to as the "bible"
of psychiatric diagnosis because it provides definitions,
symptoms and characteristics for mental disorders that are
recognized by clinicians from around the world" (6).

To this date (September 20 2000), The APA still stands behind
DSM-IV.

Do you have any clarification for Guze and Goodwin? What does
your reference mean exactly? PTSD is _not_ a mental illness?
PTSD does not exist? PTSD exists but is not a mental illness? A
group of doctors charged to allocate money to people suffering
from PTSD got the cold feet and decided to play the
read-the-small- print game and to deny PTSD the status of
"mental illness" to shave a few dollars?

<snip>

 >Peter Brooksmith suggested Janet from 'The Abduction Enigma',
 >but Greg Sandow rejected it because it could just be anecdotal.
 >Of course one man's anecdote is another man's empiric
 >observation.

Anecdotal sleeps in the same bed as bias. Empiric observation
implies that the observer will do just that: observe. It also
implies that all facts are taken into account.

In view of his late position on PTSD, I cannot credit Peter
Brooksmith for any competence in psychology. Can you?

 >However, the following reference from the literature should end
 >this part of the discussion:

 >Kolb, Lawrence C.
 >Chapter Title
 >Recovery of memory and repressed fantasy in combat-induced
 >post-traumatic stress disorder of Vietnam veterans.

 >Source
 >Pettinati, Helen M. (Ed);  et al. (1988). Hypnosis and memory.
 >The Guilford clinical and experimental hypnosis series. (pp.
 >265-274). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press. xiii, 301 pp.

 >Abstract
 >(from the chapter) techniques used/narcosynthesis
 >induction/abreaction and the role of the therapist/cases...
 >presented herein illustrate the powerful process of repression
 >in impairing memory for both intensively charged
 >life-threatening incidents in real life and fantasies of
 >life-threatening events connected with the emotion of terror
 >((c) 1997
 >APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

I thought that my previous posts had established that the titles
of references do not always fulfill their promises - as it
happens sometimes in the scientific literature. Even abstracts
may be misleading (see my example of Loftus & Hoffman, 1989
(7)). What about out-of-context citations? An example:

"I strongly believe that the defenses of this nation--of the
entire world--should be mobilized to protect our innocent
citizens against these such indignities (...) (It would be far
easier to use high-energy lasers to destroy a few ET craft than
to knock down thousands of enemy missile warheads.) But Federal
authorities needed to be made aware."

This is Phillip Klass (8).

In this thread (past and present discussions), I have made the
effort to provide more than the references: the material itself
can be consulted; just follow the links. This way, we can all
see what we are talking about.

I would appreciate you do the same. I think it is the only way
we can have an exchange.

But let's not get distracted from the original premise of this
discussion, which makes the Abduction Phenomena a real pain in
the *ss.: the PTSD phenomenon related to it.

As a reminder about the _true_ nature of PTSD, Matthew J.
Friedman (9):

"PTSD is unique among other psychiatric diagnoses because of the
great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic
stressor. In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the
patient has actually met the "stressor criterion" which means
that he or she has been exposed to an historical event that is
considered traumatic."

In the scientific literature PTSD is linked to all sorts of
life-threatening events. Never abduction though.

Hmmm...

Studying the Abductions/PTSD link should be much easier than
denying PTSD's etiology. As I said: if its PTSD, we've got game.

McFarlane (10), on PTSD patients:

"So when we talk about patients developing a narrative or
developing an explanation in their mind, perhaps what they are
doing is creating a commonplace sense about something that
actually isn't common place."

That might be a start.

Regards,

Serge Salvaille


References: -----------------------------------------------------

(1)
http://www.tconl.com/~spaige/FNIPBS6.HTM

"Current Perspectives on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: From the
Clinic and the Laboratory." Stephen R. Paige, Department of
Psychology, University of Nebraska at Omaha

(2)
http://www.psychiatrist.com/supplenet/v61s05/01index.htm

"Introduction - Focus on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder"
James C. Ballenger, The International Consensus Group on
Depression and Anxiety held the meeting "Focus on Posttraumatic
Stress Disorder," April 29-30, 1999, in Montecatini, Italy.

(3)
http://www.dir.ca.gov/imc/PTSD.HTML

"Treatment Guideline For Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder",
Industrial Medical Council, (Adopted February 24, 1997)

(4)
http://www.demining.brtrc.com/contents.htm

"Direct And Indirect Consequences Of Landmines On Public Health",
Unknown.

(5)
http://www.ncptsd.org/treatment/literature/assessment/cl_ptsd_dia
gnosis.html

"PTSD Diagnosis and Treatment for Mental Health Clinicians"
Matthew J. Friedman, Community Mental Health Journal 32(2): 173-
189, (April 1996).

(6)
http://www.hopeallianz.com/Resources/dsm.html

"DSM IV - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition"

(7)
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/hoff.htm

"Misinformation and Memory, The Creation of New Memories ,"
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 118(1):100-104 (March
1989). By Loftus & Hoffman.

 From the abstract:

"Misleading information presented after an event can lead people
to erroneous reports of that misinformation (...) Given the
conditions typical of most misinformation experiments, it appears
that misinformation acceptance plays a major role, memory
impairment plays some role, and pure guessing plays little or no
role. Moreover, we argue that misinformation acceptance has not
received the appreciation that it deserves as a phenomenon worthy
of our sustained investigation. It may not tell us anything about
impairment of memories, but it does tell us something about the
creation of new memories. "

We could conclude from the whole abstract that an abductologist
can induce in a subject the belief that he/she has been abducted.

But when you read the article, you notice that Loftus and
Hoffman omitted the crucial point: people may be influenced in
their recollection of _small details_. In this case: the witness
of a robbery thinks he saw the robber take a screwdriver instead
of a hammer because he is influenced by another witness who saw
a screwdriver. The robbery _did_ take place though.

(8)
http://www.caus.org/mc092899.htm
FBI & Abductions - Klass & Anonymous Comments
Phillip Klass (PhilKlass@ aol.com) writes

(9)
http://www.ncptsd.org/facts/general/fs_overview.html

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: An Overview, by Matthew J.
Friedman

(10) http://www.psychiatrist.com/supplenet/v61s05/610503.htm

[Journal of Clinical Phychiatry]
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Model of the Longitudinal
Course and the Role of Risk Factors
Alexander C. McFarlane, M.D.
From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - KRandle
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:29:48 -0400


 >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:24:55 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Hello Kevin, List,

<snip>

 >Serge asked for a single reference in which PTSD [Post-Traumatic
 >Stress Disorder] was the result of a fantasy. I supplied four,
 >which he rejected, saying that each was the result of men faking
 >PTSD. Possibly.

<snip>

I would rather say: convincingly. You make it look like I
rejected your references for subjective motives, which is not
the case at all. The only thing those references had going for
them was their _titles_,  _not_ their content. It would be more
appropriate to rewrite this in the following way:

"I supplied four references which, and I thank Serge for that,
_did not_ involve PTSD as a result of fantasy. They rather
discussed _faked_ PTSD to obtain compensation from government
agencies."

Maybe also:

"He ordered hamburgers, and I came up with whip cream. Sorry."

<snip>

 >However, since the syndrome was created based on
 >the large number of people claiming horrific combat experiences,
 >it would seem that the four references would have answered the
 >question.

<snip>

Your choice of words has a tendency to deserve the facts: PTSD
was not created, it was discovered. One creates something that
does not exist, and discovers something that has always been
there but has not been found yet.

PTSD encompasses a _series of symptoms_ which were first
observed on a large number of people who had _experienced_
horrific combat experiences.

If you still have your doubts, I suggest, Stephen R. Paige (1):

"The recognition by medical authorities of psychological
malfunctioning resulting from trauma can be traced back well
over 200 years (...) It was not until DSMIII (American
Psychiatric Association, 1980) was published, that Posttraumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD) was clearly delineated as a clinical
syndrome, within the category of anxiety disorders. "

<snip>

 >In fact, Donald W. Goodwin and Samuel B. Guze, in
 >Psychiatric Diagnosis, wrote, "The decision to award
 >compensation was made even more difficult by the almost total
 >lack of evidence that 'post-traumatic stress disorder, delayed
 >type' exists as a clinical entity."

<snip>

For the benefit of the reader, we will note that "Delayed onset
PTSD occurs when symptoms make their appearance six months or
longer after the recognizable stressor." (2)

The reality of PTSD delayed type is recognized, among others, by
the Industrial Medical Council (IMC) (3), U.S. Government
Humanitarian Demining Program (4), and the American Psychiatric
Association (5). The later published in 1994 its "Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-
IV)" which, incidentally, "has been referred to as the "bible"
of psychiatric diagnosis because it provides definitions,
symptoms and characteristics for mental disorders that are
recognized by clinicians from around the world" (6).

To this date (September 20 2000), The APA still stands behind
DSM-IV.

Do you have any clarification for Guze and Goodwin? What does
your reference mean exactly? PTSD is _not_ a mental illness?
PTSD does not exist? PTSD exists but is not a mental illness? A
group of doctors charged to allocate money to people suffering
from PTSD got the cold feet and decided to play the
read-the-small- print game and to deny PTSD the status of
"mental illness" to shave a few dollars?

<snip>

 >Peter Brooksmith suggested Janet from 'The Abduction Enigma',
 >but Greg Sandow rejected it because it could just be anecdotal.
 >Of course one man's anecdote is another man's empiric
 >observation.

Anecdotal sleeps in the same bed as bias. Empiric observation
implies that the observer will do just that: observe. It also
implies that all facts are taken into account.

In view of his late position on PTSD, I cannot credit Peter
Brooksmith for any competence in psychology. Can you?

 >However, the following reference from the literature should end
 >this part of the discussion:

 >Kolb, Lawrence C.
 >Chapter Title
 >Recovery of memory and repressed fantasy in combat-induced
 >post-traumatic stress disorder of Vietnam veterans.

 >Source
 >Pettinati, Helen M. (Ed);  et al. (1988). Hypnosis and memory.
 >The Guilford clinical and experimental hypnosis series. (pp.
 >265-274). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press. xiii, 301 pp.

 >Abstract
 >(from the chapter) techniques used/narcosynthesis
 >induction/abreaction and the role of the therapist/cases...
 >presented herein illustrate the powerful process of repression
 >in impairing memory for both intensively charged
 >life-threatening incidents in real life and fantasies of
 >life-threatening events connected with the emotion of terror
 >((c) 1997
 >APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved)

I thought that my previous posts had established that the titles
of references do not always fulfill their promises - as it
happens sometimes in the scientific literature. Even abstracts
may be misleading (see my example of Loftus & Hoffman, 1989
(7)). What about out-of-context citations? An example:

"I strongly believe that the defenses of this nation--of the
entire world--should be mobilized to protect our innocent
citizens against these such indignities (...) (It would be far
easier to use high-energy lasers to destroy a few ET craft than
to knock down thousands of enemy missile warheads.) But Federal
authorities needed to be made aware."

This is Phillip Klass (8).

In this thread (past and present discussions), I have made the
effort to provide more than the references: the material itself
can be consulted; just follow the links. This way, we can all
see what we are talking about.

I would appreciate you do the same. I think it is the only way
we can have an exchange.

But let's not get distracted from the original premise of this
discussion, which makes the Abduction Phenomena a real pain in
the *ss.: the PTSD phenomenon related to it.

As a reminder about the _true_ nature of PTSD, Matthew J.
Friedman (9):

"PTSD is unique among other psychiatric diagnoses because of the
great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic
stressor. In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the
patient has actually met the "stressor criterion" which means
that he or she has been exposed to an historical event that is
considered traumatic."

In the scientific literature PTSD is linked to all sorts of
life-threatening events. Never abduction though.

Hmmm...

Studying the Abductions/PTSD link should be much easier than
denying PTSD's etiology. As I said: if its PTSD, we've got game.

McFarlane (10), on PTSD patients:

"So when we talk about patients developing a narrative or
developing an explanation in their mind, perhaps what they are
doing is creating a commonplace sense about something that
actually isn't common place."

That might be a start.

Regards,

Serge Salvaille


References: -----------------------------------------------------

(1)
http://www.tconl.com/~spaige/FNIPBS6.HTM

"Current Perspectives on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: From the
Clinic and the Laboratory." Stephen R. Paige, Department of
Psychology, University of Nebraska at Omaha

(2)
http://www.psychiatrist.com/supplenet/v61s05/01index.htm

"Introduction - Focus on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder"
James C. Ballenger, The International Consensus Group on
Depression and Anxiety held the meeting "Focus on Posttraumatic
Stress Disorder," April 29-30, 1999, in Montecatini, Italy.

(3)
http://www.dir.ca.gov/imc/PTSD.HTML

"Treatment Guideline For Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder",
Industrial Medical Council, (Adopted February 24, 1997)

(4)
http://www.demining.brtrc.com/contents.htm

"Direct And Indirect Consequences Of Landmines On Public Health",
Unknown.

(5)
http://www.ncptsd.org/treatment/literature/assessment/cl_ptsd_dia
gnosis.html

"PTSD Diagnosis and Treatment for Mental Health Clinicians"
Matthew J. Friedman, Community Mental Health Journal 32(2): 173-
189, (April 1996).

(6)
http://www.hopeallianz.com/Resources/dsm.html

"DSM IV - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition"

(7)
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/hoff.htm

"Misinformation and Memory, The Creation of New Memories ,"
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 118(1):100-104 (March
1989). By Loftus & Hoffman.

 From the abstract:

"Misleading information presented after an event can lead people
to erroneous reports of that misinformation (...) Given the
conditions typical of most misinformation experiments, it appears
that misinformation acceptance plays a major role, memory
impairment plays some role, and pure guessing plays little or no
role. Moreover, we argue that misinformation acceptance has not
received the appreciation that it deserves as a phenomenon worthy
of our sustained investigation. It may not tell us anything about
impairment of memories, but it does tell us something about the
creation of new memories. "

We could conclude from the whole abstract that an abductologist
can induce in a subject the belief that he/she has been abducted.

But when you read the article, you notice that Loftus and
Hoffman omitted the crucial point: people may be influenced in
their recollection of _small details_. In this case: the witness
of a robbery thinks he saw the robber take a screwdriver instead
of a hammer because he is influenced by another witness who saw
a screwdriver. The robbery _did_ take place though.

(8)
http://www.caus.org/mc092899.htm
FBI & Abductions - Klass & Anonymous Comments
Phillip Klass (PhilKlass@ aol.com) writes

(9)
http://www.ncptsd.org/facts/general/fs_overview.html

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: An Overview, by Matthew J.
Friedman

(10) http://www.psychiatrist.com/supplenet/v61s05/610503.htm

[Journal of Clinical Phychiatry]
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Model of the Longitudinal
Course and the Role of Risk Factors
Alexander C. McFarlane, M.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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:36:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:50:33 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:26:39 +0100
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:09:12 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein

Previously, Josh wrote:

 >Just think, If some UFOs were robotic probes and some Earthlings
 >(including CSETI) had limited flashlight communication with
 >them, I hope they had the good sense to be using Morse code.

<snip>

 >I am glad that forms of communication other than radio waves
 >from space are beginning to be analyzed from Earth. In my gut,
 >right or wrong, I have always felt that any civilization more
 >advanced than ours would have moved beyond radio. My gut may be
 >wrong, who knows, there may be alien top 40 rock stations out
 >there.

Hi, Josh!

Without starting a CSETI debate, let me again point out that
communcation is a two way street. It doesn't matter what form of
communication that an advanced race uses to talk to each other,
be it thought-beams, laserlight, microwave, sign language, morse
code or whatever. What is important is what they decide to use
to communicate with US.

Any race advanced enough to travel here or contemplate a visit
has GOT to realize that we do not have the  means to emulate
their technology. Therefore, if they are interested in having a
chat, they know they have two choices:

A) Wait until we get smart enough to learn their language (not
likely)

or

B) Simply apply our more primitive mode of communication and get
on with it


Does this mean that they are beaming RF waves at us from a
distance of millions of light years? Of course not! They would
no more do that than we would shout in a tribal dialect from the
shores of the US hoping that someone in Africa would hear it. We
would simply GO there first, then start the conversation in
their native language. After a while, the tribe would learn our
language, as well.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter if ET's decide to send a probe
first or just show up. What is important is to remember that WE
are the limiting factor in the whole scheme of things. If ETs
want to communicate, they'll have to come here and learn out
lingo; short of that, nothing's going to happen.

Roger












   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

               Iridium'S Fall A Mixed Blessing For Astronomers

From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:55:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:54:22 -0400
Subject: Iridium'S Fall A Mixed Blessing For Astronomers


Iridium's fall a mixed blessing for astronomers
BY PAUL PARSONS
ASTRONOMY NOW
Posted: September 20, 2000

Motorola intends to deorbit all 66 of the satellites owned by
its bankrupt offshoot Iridium LLC, after attempts to find a
buyer for the satellite phone company failed. Astronomically,
the news is a mixed blessing.

It will certainly be well received by radio observers, who have
protested that the transmission frequency of the satellites
interferes with the 1612 MHz band, used to study the
distribution of OH, the hydroxyl radical. OH is one of the most
common interstellar molecules, and enables radio astronomers to
investigate the evaporation of comets and the birth and death of
stars.

Satellite watchers, however, will be less pleased. The imminent
demise of Iridium means an end to the bright spectacle of
"Iridium flares". Each satellite has two silver-coated Teflon
antennae, angled with respect to its body. The antennae act like
giant mirrors, reflecting the Sun's rays down to the ground. An
observer in the right place at the right time can see this
reflection as the satellite passes over--as a flash, lasting
only a few seconds but brighter than Venus.

Work has already begun on deorbiting the satellites. So if
you've never seen an Iridium flare before, now is the time to
start looking. To find out when the next flare will occur near
you, see http://www.heavens-above.com/.

The last Iridium satellite should drop from orbit in 2002. But
the skies won't be clear for long. Bill Gates' Teledesic
network--an armada of 288 communication satellites--is all set
to take Iridium's place 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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Murray

From: Marty Murray <mmurray31@home.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:27:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:59:26 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Murray


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:11:05 -0700
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:36:47 -0700

<snip>

 >>Roy,

 >>If you are asking how intelligently a computing device might
 >>behave then you might be interested in "The Emperor's New Mind"
 >>by mathematical physicist Roger Penrose. Posing the question,
 >>can a computer have a mind, he writes "...is it necessary that
 >>the relevant structures be biological in nature (brains), or
 >>might minds equally well be associated with pieces of electronic
 >>equipment?"

 >>He goes on to describe the (Alan) Turing test, proposed in
 >>1950, which essentially has a human interrogator trying to
 >>decide which of two subjects is a computer and which a human,
 >>simply by interacting with them in an impersonal way. If the
 >>computer fools the interrogator it might be said to think.

 >>Regarding your hypothetical UFO, it wouldn't be too surprising
 >>if it behaved intelligently, would it? Even if it didn't get
 >>here from there entirely on its own your "unmanned" craft would
 >>still have to navigate using some programmed guidance system.
 >>Not to say I'm not skeptical, but if it could fly around all by
 >>itself its already pretty "smart".

 >>To widen the debate... In "UFO-FBI Connection" Bruce Maccabee
 >>covers a reported sighting in which a flying disc was seen
 >>"...about seventy-five feet above the floor of the canyon and
 >>moving up and down as it flew." That sounds like a pretty bumpy
 >>ride for the occupants doesn't it? On the other hand, its
 >>precisely how you might expect a programmed craft to operate.

 >Hello Kurt and Roy

 >I cannot understand how anyone today would posit that to be
 >highly intelligent, a computer must be biological in nature.

 >Every so many months, computers double in power, memory, what
 >have you. That rate of advance cannot go on forever of course,
 >but imagine the automata available to societies thousands or
 >millions of years in advance of Earth!

 >At one time computers were little more than glorified adding
 >machines; huge, inefficient and slow. Perhaps Penrose wrote from
 >that era.

 >Later on, it was commonly said that computers would never beat a
 >chess-master at chess. That barrier was broken, so the
 >nay-sayers simply keep raising the bar. Mine can play music
 >while waiting for my next keystroke, and that's considered
 >mundane now.

 >Frankly, I have no idea what limits there are to such
 >technology, and it may well be that self replicating ( partly
 >biological ) memory and processing units will be incorporated in
 >the future.

 >I find the concept of fully automated probes, extremely
 >intelligent by our standards, to be intriguing. If nothing else,
 >it answers the common objections raised by some, that the
 >lengthy journeys required to study Earth from afar rule out any
 >such devices reaching this planet.

 >A fleet of such devices, self repairing and perhaps self-
 >replicating could study planets at stellar distances, all
 >without inconveniencing a single living soul. All of this is
 >provided "they" are more patient, or have a longer term outlook
 >consistent with longer life-spans.

 >Humans usually tend to plan ahead for a few decades at most, the
 >term of a mortgage or the useful lifetime of a big dam.

 >I see nothing ridiculous about a long lived species of aliens
 >sending scientific probes out which may not return useful data
 >about other planets for a century or more.

 >The time will pass whether they send them or not after all. The
 >costs may well be trivial given similar automata doing most of
 >the work. Even the tabloid "grey-alien", if any such exist,
 >could be an entirely artificial construct.

 >Motives? How about simple scientific curiosity? This would
 >prohibit significant interference/interaction with the test
 >subjects, be they animal, vegetable, mineral or human.

 >I have no way to support such speculation, but find it
 >intriguing. It might address certain other questions as to the
 >nature and behavior of certain UFOs, the ones otherwise hardest
 >to explain in prosaic terms.

Howdy Larry!

That little essay of yours is one of the most intelligent and
thoughtful things I've read on this List in a long time! Please
keep up the open mind!

Take care,

Marty








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                            Time Travel Articles?

From: Mark Hall <capn_black@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:36:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:01:40 -0400
Subject: Time Travel Articles?


Hi all,

I wonder if anyone can help me out at all?

At Destination Space, we are collating research for an article
on any UFO/alien/contactee incidents that have involved time
travel.

Does anyone on the List know of any good cases, or a direction
we could go to for information?

Warm regards,

Mark Hall (Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom)
Editor
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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                         Arthur Tomlinson Passes On

From: Stephen Mera <s_mera@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:09:07 -0400
Subject: Arthur Tomlinson Passes On

I have been informed of some very sad news.

On the evening of Monday September 18th 2000. Mr. Arthur
Tomlinson, a well known and respected veteran of British Ufology
suffered a massive heart attack and passed away.

I would like to express deepest sympathy to Mr. Tomlinson's
family on behalf of myself and many, many others.

Arthur was an extremely ambitious individual who had dedicated
most of his life to the investigation of UFOs. Arthur was a firm
believer of extraterrestrial intelligence visiting Earth and
travelled the length of the country and back many times to
educate the public regarding the UFO phenomenon.

Some of you will know Arthur as the Chairman of one of the
longest running UFO investigation groups in the country.
Arthur's group DIGAP (Direct Investigation Group of Aerial
Phenomena) was formed back in 1965.

Those who met him, will remember how friendly and supportive he
was to others.

On behalf of all those in MAPIT (Manchester's Association of
Paranormal Investigation & Training) we wish Arthur a pleasent
journey.

God Speed!

Stephen Mera








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

             Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:46:23 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:11:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference


 >From: Anthony Chippendale <anthonyc@ufon.org>
 >To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>,
 >Subject: Report On 19th Leeds International UFO Conference
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:37:39 +0100

 >Here is my report on last weekend's UFO conference at Leeds
 >University in England.

 >Anthony Chippendale.
 >####################
 >19th Leeds International UFO Conference
 >15 � 17 September 2000
 >Leeds University, England

<snip>

 >Saturday

 >Dr. Steven Greer (US)

 >Along with Martyn Stubbs & L L Wille, Dr. Steven Greer's
 >presentation was one of the best of the whole weekend. Dr. Greer
 >is head of CSETI (Centre for Studies of Extraterrestrial
 >Intelligence). One of the first things that Dr. Greer said was
 >'the only way for humanity to proceed is with peace' and that
 >really struck me. That was the essence of his presentation. Did
 >you know that since 1950 we have not needed to run cars on
 >petrol? A car will run quite happily on plain, ordinary (and to
 >a certain extent _free_) tap water! This along with anti-gravity
 >and teleportation technology has been suppressed by the
 >government. By the 1950s the US government had invested more
 >money in anti-gravity research, than they had invested in the
 >Manhattan Project. That just shows how much the government knows
 >about it.

 >Dr. Greer also discussed how in 1993 he briefed the CIA Director
 >on UFOs and alien contact and how CSETI are working hard to
 >complete 'Project Starlight'; a project to produce a report or
 >dossier of hard evidence of aliens, that will be presented to
 >governments and military leaders. Their target is to complete
 >the project by the end of President Clinton's term in office,
 >which ends on 20 January 2001.

 >Dr. Greer is a truly remarkable speaker. He put forward his
 >views and information in a straight forward, no-nonsense manner;
 >however, I am dubious about some of his claims. For example, he
 >claims that the 'greys' are being engineered in a lab in New
 >Mexico and that he has seen this lab!

<snip>

 >Anthony Chippendale,
 >The UFO Network (UK),
 >http://www.ufon.org/ufonet/


What the ****? I've always had second thoughts about Steven
Greer being "our man in Washington". But now I feel queasy if
the above kind of information is propounded by him. These are
the wackiest stories I ever heard out of him. To me he sounds
like John Lear 10 years ago.

Is _this_ what Steven Greer really believes? Just what kind of
briefings is he having with these high government officials? Did
he bring the above information to them? Or could they be doing a
"Doty" on him, pumping him for information while feeding him
heaps of outrageous disinformation?

Man, there is sure a tremendous strain on the archways of my
open mind. I've got to go now and hook up my garden hose to the
carburetor on my car.

Josh Goldstein
janitor, the grey lab










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                  Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Connelly

From: Dwight Connelly <bookdc@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:23:19 GMT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:25:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Connelly


 >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >To: "02 - UFO UpDates Subscribers":;
 >Subject: UFO UpDate: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:54:40 -0400

 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:51:33 -0400

 >Greetings,

 >Project 1947, a research project concerned with the 1947 UFO
 >wave, was specifically not designed to look into the Roswell
 >incident. However, we have come across some material that
 >pertains to Roswell. Since we constantly get inquiries asking
 >what if anything we know about the Roswell incident, we have
 >established a Roswell page

 >http://www.project1947.com/roswell/index.html

 >Comments on both the official search for Roswell records and the
 >Project 1947 records research are discussed here. What records
 >were search, what records were not search, other records that
 >might be of interest or could possibly contain information on
 >Roswell, I have compile a list with comments.

 >Already we have nearly enough information to do a large follow
 >up article on this subject.

 >http://www.project1947.com/roswell/rosearch.htm

 >We also have an article from Prof. Charles Moore on radars in
 >New Mexico in 1947 with an assessment of the claims of radar
 >tracking of the Roswell object.

 >http://www.project1947.com/roswell/cbmintro.htm

 >Comments, corrections, criticisms are, of course, always welcome
 >at:

 >jan@cyberzone.net

 >Jan Aldrich
 >Project 1947
 >http://www.project1947.com/
 >P. O. Box 391
 >Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
 >(860) 546-9135

Jan,

Is there an article in this for the MUFON Journal?

Dwight








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                      Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:23:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:29:11 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Mortellaro


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:31:20 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >>their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.
 >>Note that in a previous post, it was indicated that Carpenter
 >>wrote his version of the events surrounding the "What If"
 >>scenario. It was also indicated (by moi) that this version
 >>would be published in the MUFON Journal.

 >>Jim Mortellaro

 >Jim,

 >Since no one in MUFON other than the four ethics committee
 >members has actually seen the evidence, the general membership
 >knows next to nothing about the Carpenter case. Even this List
 >has only seen small pieces of the evidence in the form of
 >isolated quotes. If Carpenter is allowed to write an article in
 >the MUFON Journal "explaining" his actions along the lines we
 >have become familiar with, will I be allowed to write an article
 >to be published in the Journal which quotes from several pieces
 >of evidence and shows a scan of Carpenter's business cards?

 >Considering the serious nature of the charges, this would
 >provide a fair and balanced perspective.

 >Gary Hart

Gary, Listers and EBK,

I have been told only what I wrote. Allow me to repeat it here
in the event it was not clear before. John Carpenter wanted to
post his side of the story in the MUFON Journal. I was told that
this will happen _after_ MUFON completes it's own internal
investigation. If found to be innocent, I am certain Carpenter
will post his side of the story. If guilty, I do not know what
John will do. If it were me, I would want the opportunity to
post my story. I _only_ know that his request to write his side
was accepted but only after the investigation.

The point I wished to make is that until that investigation
happens, its probably a great idea to stand by and wait for the
results. Anything else is noise, no matter who it comes from at
this point.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                    Re: Time Travel Articles? - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:42:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 21:08:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Time Travel Articles? - Cecchini


 >From: Mark Hall <capn_black@msn.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Time Travel Articles?
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:36:08 +0100

 >At Destination Space, we are collating research for an article
 >on any UFO/alien/contactee incidents that have involved time
 >travel.

Betty Andreasson-Luca (Ray Fowler's _The Andreasson Affair_, et
al) claims to have been *shown* the past during her experience.

That's the only one my limited memory can recall at the moment.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:09:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:33:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich


 >From: Dwight Connelly <bookdc@hotmail.com>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:23:19 GMT

 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:51:33 -0400

 >>Greetings,

 >>Project 1947, a research project concerned with the 1947 UFO
 >>wave, was specifically not designed to look into the Roswell
 >>incident. However, we have come across some material that
 >>pertains to Roswell. Since we constantly get inquiries asking
 >>what if anything we know about the Roswell incident, we have
 >>established a Roswell page

 >>http://www.project1947.com/roswell/index.html

<snip>

 >Jan,

 >Is there an article in this for the MUFON Journal?

 >Dwight


Hi Dwight,

Perhaps, we have some documents that demonstrate how extensive
the GAO and USAF searches were... they were indeed quite large.
However, there are still some likely places to look.

The material at the St. Louis archives is the most interesting.
There are also destruction/transfer certificates on RAAF
records. It is not so much the destruction of records that
seems worrisome, but missing records from such organizations
like AMC.

I now have to agree with Michael Swords and others, AMC, T-3,
Engineering might have 1947 records on UFOs and, of course, if
Roswell records exist, this might be the place.

Regards,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 20

                   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:05:10 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:41:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Gates


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:12:04 -0700

 >A few weeks ago, Ed Dames appeared on Coast to Coast AM. During
 >this program, Dames alleged that he was contacted by the
 >Coquille, Oregon Police Department to assist them with their
 >investigation into a missing teenage girl.

Its possible that if a K-9 from the Portland PD woofed at
Dames, he could say that he had been contacted.... :)

 >Dames said that he had determined through remote viewing on
 >15-July-00 that the subject was deceased - this is two weeks
 >after the girl has been missing and her shoes are found along a
 >road. Tragically, the missing girl's body was found at a later
 >date.

 >I contacted the Coquille Police Department to inquire about
 >Dames' alleged involvement in this case. I received a response
 >from Michael Reaves of the Coquille Police Department.
 >Mr. Reaves stated in an e-mail, "Our department didn't hire, nor
 >officially request assistance from Dames or his company."

 >Mr. Reaves further stated that a detective had contacted Dames
 >via e-mail once about the case and that this detective did so
 >only once and did not do so in an official or department
 >sanctioned manner. Mr. Reaves further stated that Dames did
 >contact the detective with the results of his remote viewing and
 >"the results were far from accurate and the investigator didn't
 >bring it up again, until Dames started making public statements
 >about our case."

 >Ed Dames - caught in yet another long line of lies and endless
 >and inaccurate predictions that never come true. Let's not
 >forget to thank Mike Siegel for providing the soapbox that many
 >of these frauds stand upon...


While I didn't hear that broadcast, one could easily imagine the
following:

The first hour, we have Richard Hoagland with the latest
revelations and pearls from government insiders are are never
wrong, nor have ever told a lie in their life;

2nd hour we have Ed Dames telling us how he rv'ed a dead girl
and was instrumental in assisting the incompentent detectives
with the case;

3rd hour we have Courtney Brown who will update us on the status
of the RV'ed martian coloney living underground in New Mexico
and 4th hour we will have bible theorist Hal Lindsay who
predicted back in the 70s Armageddon would happen no later then
1979, then 80, 84, 88, 92, 98, 99, 2000, 2001; 5th hour will
be.....

People would lap it up as absolute fact, never to be doubted.
And "everybody knows" absolute facts are found on web pages all
over the web... :)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                  Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:31:58 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:48:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:12:04 -0700

 >Ed Dames - caught in yet another long line of lies and endless
 >and inaccurate predictions that never come true. Let's not
 >forget to thank Mike Siegel for providing the soapbox that many
 >of these frauds stand upon...

I remember when he was on a couple of times ago he predicted
that a _huge_ tornado was going to strike Dallas (if I recall
correctly) within a week of the show.

It never happened.

But, then again, I've yet to be impressed by anything any "remote
viewer" has actually ever demonstrated.

RVers/TRVers/CRVers: feel free to go ahead and flame me.

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:15:13 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie

 >>Hello Royce:

 >>Given the long track record of the Coast to Coast (Bell/Siegel)
 >>soap box, I find this interesting but of course unsurprising.

 >>This is just my personal opinion mind you, but to me, anyone who
 >>appears on that show has by far the burden of proof that they
 >>are somehow _not_ full of BS.


Not everyone, but most.

Bell, and now Siegel, do attract mainstream "accepted" scientists
from time to time.

...although, I'll be the first to say that I think alot of
"accpeted" scientists *are* indeed "full of BS".  e.g. one of
these days I will get through when Michio Kaku is on and -- as
brilliant as the guy is -- rake him through the coals for the
way he presents quantum mechanics.

(if you ever hear a "Ron from Boston" get on, that's most likely
me.)

 >>Once in a while somebody interesting does come on, but it really
 >>costs them in a way. How does one maintain credibility, going on
 >>the air nationwide if not worldwide, sandwiched in between
 >>Richard Hoagland and Robert "Ghostwolf" ?

Way true.

I sometimes marvel that Siegel was actually ever a lawyer.

I mean, I know the show has a reputation for "suffering all
fools"; i.e. it provides a platform for *everyone*.  But I
simply cannot fathom how Siegel seems to accept almost
everything as true, esp. the BS claims of guys like Hoagland.
Where's the skepticism and ability to think logically that he,
as a former lawyer, presumably had to once possess?  Where the
ability to recognize that he's accepting mutually and
self-contradictory statements as true?

Speaking of lawyers who demonstrate poor reasoning skills (ooo!
this is a Hoaglandesque "Synchronicity!" moment) Peter Gersten
was the guest last night.

To make a long story short, Gersten was presenting the story of
one Bob Lowrey (I think that was the name), a guy who claims to
have some kind of creature in his closet that attacks him in the
middle of the night... something like that.

(I kept asking: "Why not call an exterminator...")

Lowrey has a claw, allegedly from the creature, which can be
seen on the Coast to Coast site at:

Photo: The Claw Left By Visitors of Gary Lowrey
http://img.coasttocoastam.com/img/lowrey-claw.jpg

Anyway, for nearly four hours Gersten wondered why the UFO
community kept demonstrating such a lack of interest in this
claw and Lowrey's story.

(you see what I'm about to say coming, don't you?)

I tried calling for nearly two hours. I wanted to scream at
Gersten:

"What the *HECK* does a one inch long claw have to do with
UFOs?!? The only source of 'wonder' around here is that you are
wondering why the UFO community isn't interested in this story!"

Alas, I never got through.

Gersten should stick to going after the government. Leave the
Chupacabra stuff to the Mexicans.

Hey, it's open lines tonight.  I wonder if I'll get through...










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                     Re: Time Travel Articles? - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 21:25:21 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:50:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Time Travel Articles? - Tonnies


 >From: Mark Hall <capn_black@msn.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Time Travel Articles?
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:36:08 +0100

 >At Destination Space, we are collating research for
 >an article on any UFO/alien/contactee incidents that have
 >involved time travel.

 >Does anyone on the List know of any good cases, or a
 >direction we could go to for information?

Mark Davenport's "Visitors From Time" is the definitive book on
time-traveling UFOs, in my opinion.



=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com)
MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html
Cydonian Imperative: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                        Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:34:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:52:45 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Gates


 >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:11:32 -0400
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:07:08 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 00:58:16 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:15:47 -0500
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >>>>Subject: A Carpenter Note

 >>>>Friends,

 >>>>I'm posting this message from Mike Farrell in Australia
 >>>>regarding a note he received that was written by John Carpenter.
 >>>>I think this is of great interest to the List and I will add
 >>>>just a comment or two:

 >>><snip>

 >>>>And still waiting to hear from MUFON on this one!

 >>>The silence from MUFON has been deafening. It was suggested to
 >>>me awhile back that the reason MUFON has been silent thus far is
 >>>because it has and is a common practice to share data with NIDS
 >>>in return for the large amounts of cash/donations/grants or
 >>>whatever you want to call it. Supposedly, MUFON has also shared
 >>>data and received money.

 >>Dear Kind and gentle List Folk... and EBK,

 >>MUFON is conducting an investigation. When they have completed
 >>their investigation, UpDates will be informed of the results.
 >>Note that in a previous post, it was indicated that Carpenter
 >>wrote his version of the events surrounding the "What If"
 >>scenario. It was also indicated (by moi) that this version
 >>would be published in the MUFON Journal.

 >According to this last posting from Robert Gates "Carpenter's
 >version" is that; the reason for the uproar on the Internet is
 >because of people that he "doesn't know" who are trying to
 >discredit his "watchman in the beam of light" video. No mention
 >at all about the sale of the abductee files or the fact that
 >many abductees are outraged about it. I don't think there has
 >been one bloody post written by anyone about his videotape the
 >whole time.

I wasn't the one who posted the "descredit his watchman in the
beam of light video" although I might have been responding to
somebody who did say that.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                       Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

From: Kurt Jonach <ewarrior@electricwarrior.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:34:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:54:53 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:52:04 -0700
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hatch

Larry wrote:

 >I should add that I didn't intend to rule out organic chemistry
 >as part of a "cyborg" or artificially intelligent entity. Unless
 >I am mistaken, it might someday be possible to use organic
 >chemicals much like those in living creatures to develop
 >specialized functions otherwise unattainable with standard
 >electronic type hardware and robotics.

 >Years ago, I played with a special rubber that expanded on one
 >axis when an electrical current was sent through it... it was
 >partially conductive.

 >Something similar, but a material that contracts instead, would
 >be analogous to any animal muscle.

 >A very advanced culture might even capitalize on such technology
 >to create useful lifelike, uh, contructs which would entirely
 >blur the line between man and machine!

 >This is not the "bionic man",  a normal human whose damaged
 >limbs and organs were replaced with high-tech protheses .. its
 >just the opposite.

 >This would be a robot really, stealing pages out of the long
 >book of biology to make better organic parts!

 >Again, I'm speculating wildly here.

Off the cuff, I wouldn't say you were speculating too wildly.

You were correct when you wrote that (Gordon) Moore's law
couldn't go on forever (he expected semiconductor processing
power to double every 18 months). There are practical limits to
the manufacturing process, and costs are staggering. Intel paid
$5 billion for two plants that fabricate their latest chips.

But, on the horizon is molecular electronics. From what I've
read it might make the kind of things you've speculated about
feasible. Ten years ago critics said moletronics couldn't be
done. Today the biggest problem is molecular wiring.

Kurt Jonach (eWarrior)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                  Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 01:33:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:09:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:46:23 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Report: 19th Leeds International UFO Conference

 >>From: Anthony Chippendale <anthonyc@ufon.org>
 >>To: UFO UpDates <updates@sympatico.ca>,
 >>Subject: Report On 19th Leeds International UFO Conference
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:37:39 +0100

 >>Here is my report on last weekend's UFO conference at Leeds
 >>University in England.

 >>Anthony Chippendale.
 >>19th Leeds International UFO Conference
 >>15 � 17 September 2000
 >>Leeds University, England

 ><snip>

 >>Saturday

 >>Dr. Steven Greer (US)

 >>Along with Martyn Stubbs & L L Wille, Dr. Steven Greer's
 >>presentation was one of the best of the whole weekend. Dr. Greer
 >>is head of CSETI (Centre for Studies of Extraterrestrial
 >>Intelligence). One of the first things that Dr. Greer said was
 >>'the only way for humanity to proceed is with peace' and that
 >>really struck me. That was the essence of his presentation. Did
 >>you know that since 1950 we have not needed to run cars on
 >>petrol?  A car will run quite happily on plain, ordinary (and to
 >>a certain extent _free_) tap water! This along with anti-gravity
 >>and teleportation technology has been suppressed by the
 >>government. By the 1950s the US government had invested more
 >>money in anti-gravity research, than they had invested in the
 >>Manhattan Project. That just shows how much the government knows
 >>about it.

 >>Dr. Greer also discussed how in 1993 he briefed the CIA Director
 >>on UFOs and alien contact and how CSETI are working hard to
 >>complete 'Project Starlight'; a project to produce a report or
 >>dossier of hard evidence of aliens, that will be presented to
 >>governments and military leaders. Their target is to complete
 >>the project by the end of President Clinton's term in office,
 >>which ends on 20 January 2001.

 >>Dr. Greer is a truly remarkable speaker. He put forward his
 >>views and information in a straight forward, no-nonsense manner;
 >>however, I am dubious about some of his claims. For example, he
 >>claims that the 'greys' are being engineered in a lab in New
 >>Mexico and that he has seen this lab!

 ><snip>

 >What the ****? I've always had second thoughts about Steven
 >Greer being "our man in Washington". But now I feel queasy if
 >the above kind of information is propounded by him. These are
 >the wackiest stories I ever heard out of him. To me he sounds
 >like John Lear 10 years ago.

 >Is _this_ what Steven Greer really believes? Just what kind of
 >briefings is he having with these high government officials? Did
 >he bring the above information to them? Or could they be doing a
 >"Doty" on him, pumping him for information while feeding him
 >heaps of outrageous disinformation?

 >Man, there is sure a tremendous strain on the archways of my
 >open mind. I've got to go now and hook up my garden hose to the
 >carburetor on my car.

 >Josh Goldstein
 >janitor, the grey lab


Oh my gosh! Josh!

I first heard of "water for gasoline" when I was a child. The
milkman tried to get a chuckle convincing me (age 6 or so)
that his milk truck ran on water, and that's why it dripped.
Anyone could see that it was just ice melting.

After so much other nonsense from Greer, I suppose I could have
seen something like that coming, but I didn't.

There does seem to be a recognizable progression here however.
First some spokesperson gains a following by making relatively
innocuous claims that differ from the mold.  Newsletter
subscriptions, speakers fees etc. finance what becomes a one man
industry of sorts. To keep this all going however, he/she has to
produce greater and greater whoppers.

Eventually, the person loses all credibility with reasonable
observers, and is left with a following of the ignorant, and
that mass of believers who will eat carpet tacks before they
take a bite out of the reality sandwich.

Its happened over and over. I call it BS inflation.

Look at Billy Meier, virtually every contactee in the book and
so on. Can anyone make a list of Richard Hoagland's bizarre
claims? I wonder if Hoagland himself can do that any more.

Enjoy the show!


- 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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

              The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?]

From: Nathan G. Daniel - Underground Video <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 02:25:15 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:23:11 -0400
Subject: The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?]


 >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:54:04 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

 >>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700

 >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows@cc.UManitoba.CA>
 >>>Subject: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 09:51:40 -0500 (CDT)

 >>>In my discussions today on IRC, I learned of a series of photos
 >>>which (to me) conclusively prove Adamski's saucer photos to be a
 >>>hoax. I figured they were, ever since I saw George's books, but
 >>>didn't think it would ever be possible to find the original
 >>>model.

 >>>It seems that a device developed by Townsend Brown to measure
 >>>materials' properties in a vacuum contains a piston-like object
 >>>that is clearly identical to Adamski's saucer.

 >>>The device can be seen at the following:

Friends,

I have never entered an online forum before. Please excuse me
if I am doing so now improperly. I couldn't resist making a
response when I read Jim Deardorff's statement concerning
the authenticity of the Billy Meier case. Readers of the List
may wish to consider the following comments and findings.

James Deardorff said:

 >There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
 >just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
 >supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
 >debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
 >of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc.

Yeah, right...

In 1987, we learned about the Meier case while collecting
hundreds of hours of video archives entitled, The UFO Cover Up.
The book, Message from the Pleiades, if I remember the title
correctly, fascinated me so much I soon I became a Billy Meier
supporter. Our company sold several books and videos that
contained Meier's material produced by Genesis Publishing. The
Meier material was the largest selling series of books and tapes
for our small company.

One summer night, I shared UFO concepts with a physicist at
Henry Ford's mansion in Pasadena. He explained how much he was
interested in the Meier material when Meier's materials were
first released. Later, he claimed, he learned the Meier case was
a hoax.

I defended Meier's case by parroting the claims of Genesis
Publishing who warranted that scientific tests were conducted on
Meier's materials and no evidence of a hoax was ever found. I
was rapidly insulted a half dozen times for being sucked into a
lie and was firmly told that the Meier photos were fake. I kept
an open mind and asked to see evidence that proved the Meier
photos were hoaxed, but after several requests the scientist
never produced a shred of evidence to debunk Meier. I thought I
was onto another trail of the UFO Cover Up. The scientist
claimed to be connected with Nobel Prize winners, and to be a
lecturer at California Institute of Technology. The insults I
endured that evening irritated me so much that I made it my
mission to prove the Meier case TRUE to skeptics.

Here's what we learned about the Billy Meier materials around
1995:

Recently, Underground Video began an in-depth inquiry into the
most publicized UFO case in history. Our investigation first
began as a supportive effort to verify the known facts of the
Meier case to present the truth of alien-human contact to
skeptics.

With the assistance of members from the Hollywood special
effects team of the Ultra-Matrix Corporation, we studied the
Meier photographs and claims made by Meier's Talmud Jmmanuel,
Genesis III Publishing, author Gary Kinder,and Guido Mooseburger
of Meier's FIGU cult in Switzerland. After 6 months of intense
inquiry, with the assistance of cinematographers, physicists,
and computer analysis from Total Research, we found the claims
of the representatives of the Meier case to be absolutely
untrue. We discovered miniature models and a variety of
deceptive methods used to create this hoax.

Underground Video was one of the foremost defenders of the
Meier material. We are disappointed to now learn the entire case
is a hoax. Representations of any authenticity with regard to
this case made by alleged scientific examination has proved to
be totally unreliable and misleads the general public into
believing a carefully fabricated lie. The persons who
authenticated the Meier case are not credible scientists nor
investigators.

Any previous representations of authenticity of the Meier case
in the Underground Video catalog should be ignored. Our
findings will be presented to the Attorney General of the State
of California to see if a consumer fraud case can be instituted
against the Meier group in Switzerland. Anyone who has
previously purchased any part of the Beamship Trilogy may write
Underground Video to be included in a Federal Class Action
Suit...

�1996 by Underground Video All Rights Reserved


The above announcement ran with a photograph of one of Meier's
beamships in UFO Magazine. The photo was placed at the heading
of the announcement with bold words across the corner that read,
'BOGUS!'


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

Shortly after, we released a video featuring Kal Korff's
undercover hidden camera research entitled, The Billy Meier
Story: Fact or Fiction. More information on this title can be
found at our online catalog:

http://www.ufocoverup.com

(Click the link to the online catalog, then click the menu
button to The Billy Meier Case. If you want to laugh, click the
link on the home page that reads, Dancing Aliens.)

Underground Video contributed three chapters to Mr. Korff's
book, Spaceships of the Pleiades: The Billy Meier Story from our
own investigation, independent of Mr. Korff's.

Two members of our investigation team were originally Billy
Meier supporters. One of the members won an academy award for
cinematic achievement in the motion picture industry.

Unfortunately, we learned the Meier case is a hoax.

To quote Mr. Deardorff:

 >There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
 >just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
 >supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
 >debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
 >of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc."

Mr. Deardorff, you are grossly mistaken.


Nathan G. Daniel

-- Underground Video

----------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                  Faxed Questions To The Croatian Air Force

From: Giuliano 'Jimmy' Marinkovicc - AGETI <9a4ag@clarc.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 05:36:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:33:38 -0400
Subject: Faxed Questions To The Croatian Air Force


Dear Researchers and List members.

Recently, I have produced big UFO radio show here in Croatia
about one case above Pag Island from 1997. During that incident
the Unidentified Flying Phenomena has been seen by citizens from
Pag and also by police officers. As a radio producer of UFO
shows for few years here in Croatia, I have concluded that this
time, the special show about Pag incident will be a great
opportunity to contact Croatian Air Force and to ask for their
official view about that case and UFOs in general. Even more, I
have send them a request about COMETA, French UFO study, asking
them to take official stand on COMETA. In the text below, I am
presenting a FAX message that I sent them on 6 September 2000.
After that you will find their official answer:


========================================================

Receiver:
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
REPUBLIC CROATIA
Office of Public Relations
01/4551-516


REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL STAND OF THE HRZ (CROATIAN AIR
FORCE)


Dear Title,

Boris Gnjidicc and I [Giuliano Marinkovicc] are contacting you
because "Natporuchnik" [rank under Captain] Franjo Ivicc from
the Public Relations unit of the Croatian Air Force has directed
us, to your office.

Our radio station Donat-Fm has decided to dedicate a show about
Strange Phenomena in the Sky [UFP - Unidentified Flying
Phenomena by classification] on the 12 September 2000. This show
will be based on the UFP sighted and witnessed above Pag Island
on the 13 December 1997, by various citizens of the Island and
also by Police officers from the 7th Police Station.

We are hoping with this request, to receive your help and
co-operation so we may better present the whole controversy
surrounding this case, plus the chronology of events, to our
listeners and the general public.

So, we need to know what the official stand of the Croatian Air
Force is on the points below:

1. Does the Croatian Air Force have any knowledge, of reports
from their Air monitoring/coordinating systems, concerning big
formations or/and groups of airplanes (4- 6) on the 13 December
from 19:00 hours to 22:00 hours? The Region we are particularly
interested in, is the widest area of sea between Pag Island and
the city of Zadar. If the Croatian Air Force does not have any
knowlegde, concerning a fly over by groups of airplanes, over
that particular area, does it then have knowledge of any type of
airplane, object or phenomena monitored at that time and place?

2. What is the official stand of the Croatian Air Force towards
the UFO phenomena [Unidentified Flying Objects] and the comments
made, on the historical fact, that research of this phenomena
has been going on in military departments of many countries from
the 1950's, for example the most famous project, is the American
Air Force - BLUE BOOK? Does the Croatian Air Force have any
knowledge of similar projects which may have been active in the
previous administration inside JNA ? [JNA = Yugoslav National
Army - Croatia had been until 1990 part of Yugoslavia, after
that gained her independence and now has its own army and air
force].

3. Does the Croatian Air Force have an official stand on the
recently released study by the French Army - COMETA Report -
July 1999, which has been signed by French Generals, high
ranking officers of the French Army together with scientists. In
this study the team concluded that the UFO is a real phenomena
and that the best hypothesis to explain it, is the one which
refers towards extra-terrestrial craft and their physical
impact, on the surroundings and military equipment (radar
detections, power cuts, traces on the ground etc)? A large
article about this study has been recently published in the
American mainstream paper THE BOSTON GLOBE where journalist
Leslie Kean writes about military implications of this study.
The wider version of this article has been published also in the
Irish Independent newspaper, and the same can be found at
Internet Web address which is:

http://www.independent.ie/2000/178/d14c.shtml

Our wish is to have a telephone guest, possibly from the
Croatian Air Force - Public Relations office who is able to
respond to and give answers to these questions. The timeline for
when our show will be broadcasted is 12 September 2000, approx.
22 hours. We are able to set up a telephone conversation at a
time you find convienient, record it and re-broadcast later
during our show. If that is unsuitable or is not possible,
please inform us, so we could agree on the reception of your
official stand via a FAX message (in written form).

Please reply to this request by Monday 11 September 2000 so in
that way we can generate the structure of our show in real time.
If you are unable answer at this request, then please send us
your official answer and reasons why it is not possible.

Please contact us at the following numbers:

Telephone: 023/313-522
   023/313-213
   Fax: 023/313-904

Ask for Boris Gnjidicc or Giuliano Marinkovicc. If we are not
availalbe at the moment, please leave a message or you can try
to contact us at the home number of Giuliano Marinkovicc which
is 023/430-970)

Best regards:

Giuliano Marinkovicc
Show Editor
Radio station DONAT-FM
Obala Kneza Branimira,12
23000 Zadar
Croatia

========================================================

On Monday, 11 September 2000, we received the following FAX
message from the Croatian Air Force for our radio station:

11/09 '00 13:21 385 48 61 151 Z HRZ1PZO OOJ1I 001

[COAT OF ARMS]
REPUBLIC CROATIA
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
ZAGREB

HEADQUATERS OF THE CROATIAN AIR FORCE AND AIR DEFENCE

Zagreb, September 11. 2000.
Radio "DONAT-FM"
Zadar

Dear Mr Marinkovicc

We are honoured with your request concerning our participation
in your show, on strange phenomena in the sky. Unfortunately it
is not possible to insure a personal appearance, of a Public
Relations representative of the Croatian Air Force and Air
Defence to speak in your show, but we are hoping that this memo
will answer all your questions in a satisfactory way.

With a wish to answer your questions constructively, we are
stating this: that the role and mission of the Headquarters and
formations of Croatian Air Force and Air Defence, have precise
definitions and they are constructed from control (monitoring)
of the air space above and near state teritory of the Republic
of Croatia. In that sense, every un-announced flight or
appearance of any object in the air space over the Republic of
Croatia is the subject of interest and certain actions of the
Croatian Air Force units. So, Croatian Air Force interests are
based only on those "air" phenomena which can be detected with
our systems of monitoring and if the nature of them is
representating threat to our air space, there are powers and
measures which the Air Force uses for that kind of threat.

Croatian Air Force's job is also composed of: keeping in fight
readiness, extinguishing fires, transport of the sick, injured
people and re-organization. There is not a single person or body
which has been set up with the mission to research sky phenomena
on the theory- scientific level.

We understand your curiousity about our knowledge and
operational possibilities and the radar system characteristic of
formations from Air Monitoring and Coordinations, but there are
interests from someone else too, so please accept our decision
why we are unable to answer those kind of questions.

In the ten years that we have existed, pilots and flyings crews
have not reported encounters or sightings of the sky phenomena
[UFO] and if it was to ever happen there is no reason why the
general public wouldn't know about it. When it was still the
Yugoslav Air Force, there were known cases when
fighters-intercepters had been scrambled at objects which had
been spotted from ground observers, but later it was concluded,
that it was nothing more than clouds or meterological balloons
which are released in great numbers daily, into the atmosphere
world wide and because of the reflections from the light, sun
and altitude it is hard for the ground observers to judge
correctly, so those objects get a UFO classification.

We wish you success in your work! Regards,

[STAMP]
REPUBLIC CROATIA
HEADQUATERS OF THE CROATIAN AIR FORCE AND AIR DEFENCE
ZAGREB
[COAT OF ARMS]
1 star General
JOSIP VULETICC

========================================================

My comments on the FAX from Croatian Air Force:

Boris Gnjidicc and myself have been aware of how hard it was for
them to directly answer our three concrete points. Being an
ex-Air Force community person myself, who later in his civilian
life has conducted UFO investigations with pilots and radio air
controllers, I can raise many remarks about the official stand
taken in the last part of their FAX. Although there was
scrambling of airplanes-interceptors on wrong identified light
phenomena, there was also military incidents with something
"unusual". These cases are astonishing, from radar detections,
to cat and mouse games with something "STRANGE".

Concerning an official answer on the the French COMETA report,
the question was obviously ignored but looking at that question
from their internal point of view, we understood how hard it was
for them to give any concrete answer.

I would like to take this opportunity to encourage other
investigators, to make the effort to ask, about the official
stand on COMETA and this phenomena from their respective Air
Force's and other institutions inside their country. Together,
we can make this issue very very important.

Please send me your findings at my e-mail 9a4ag@clarc.org
or contact me directly at my ICQ which is 67412597.

Keep up with your research!

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
===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><===><=


AGETI
Analytical Group for Extra-Terrestrial Information
http://www.clarc.org/~9a4ag
http://www.onelist.com/group/ageti







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

               Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False

From: Melanie Mecca  <natural.state@erols.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:04:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:36:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:40:14 -0400
 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories

<snip>

 >"I was bored with these experiments," Dr. Nader said. "I began
 >thinking, what happens to a memory when you remember it? It
 >would be so cool if it became labile again." He proposed a new
 >experiment: animals would be trained to associate the tone with
 >the electric shock. The researchers would wait a day or more for
 >the fear memory to consolidate. Then they would present the
 >animal with the tone (to retrieve the memory) and a drug that
 >blocks protein synthesis.

<snip>

He was bored with shocking and injecting rats in old ways, so
thought he should find new ways to torture them. I'm just
flagging this in the hope that it will cause an instant of
reflection about what we do in the name of science. One instant
of rat-empathy during the shock, he'd probably never do it
again.

Melanie Mecca







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                                'Angel Hair'?

From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:38:03 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:17:06 -0400
Subject: 'Angel Hair'?


Source: Rusty's Retreat

http://www.homestead.com/rustys_retreat/spiderstuff.html

The pictures are interesting.

______________________________

September 20, 2000

This is a special page I made so I could show you what I woke up
to this morning. First though I must tell you exactly the events
as they happened as I remember them.

Last night at about 7:00 PM, I heard a loud "Droning" sound,
like a large airplane. I went out to look to see if I could see
it, but I could not see it. The droning sound lasted about an
hour.

This morning when I got up, my yard was full of these
"spider-web"stuff. Don't know exactly how to describe them other
than that they looked like spider webs but at the same time they
were not your usual "circular" webs.

These as you will see were somewhat different.

I immediately got the camera out and took about a dozen
pictures. I had my husband go to town to buy some rubber gloves
so we could get some samples.

On his way in, there were a few spots he could see on the way in
to town which was 7 miles, but nothing as heavy as what was in
my yard.

The first sample he tried to get with the gloves on turned to a
goo-like substance as soon as he touched it.

We put the samples on a piece of paper towel and put the gloves
in with it in a plastic bag.

I went to town to the One hour photo place and got the photos
developed.

I have lived here in Romney, West Virginia for 6 years and I
have never seen anything like this. If anyone has seen this also
I will be most interested.

I am going to try to find a lab that will analyze this stuff for
me.

Please email me if you have ever seen anything like this, or
know of a lab that will analyze it.

Below are the photos I took.

[11 Photographs]

If Anyone has any idea of what this stuff is please let me know.
Any feedback will be most appreciated.

Thank you

Rusty <rusty@mountain.net>
______________________________


[The pictures _are_ interesting. --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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 38

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:27:39 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:31:42 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 38


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

    UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 5, Number 38
September 21, 2000
Editor: Joseph Trainor


VIRGIN MARY APPEARS AT A MONASTERY IN EGYPT

"Curiosity and devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary have brought
Christians and Muslims together in the city of Aslut, where she
regularly appears at the Coptic Church of St. Mark."

Since August 1, thousands of pilgrims, Christians and Muslims
alike, have gone to the monastry, located 12 kilometers (7
miles) south of Aslut, to see the nightly apparitions of the
former Miriam bat-Joachim. Aslut is about 600 kilometers (360
miles) south of Cairo.

(Editor's Note: Miriam is also venerated by Muslims as a
prophetess and is mentioned often in al-Quran or the Koran.)

"'The apparition constitutes a message of peace and hope
following the upheavals throughout the region in recent years.
The Virgin has managed to bring everyone together in a single
heart,' said Father Jacob Suleiman of the Aslut bishopric in
Upper Egypt."

"With an approximate population of 64 million, Egypt is 20
percent Christian, largely belonging to the Coptic Church while
the number of (Roman) Catholics is estimated at 300,000."

Father Suleiman, said "We have had no trouble of any kind" with
"the thousands of Christians and Muslims who have come to seek a
blessing, some in the hope of being cured of serious illnesses."

The apparitions began on August 1, the start of an annual
festival in Upper Egypt honoring the Holy Family. The monastery
is located on a hilltop some 12 kilometers from the city of
Aslut. "From this date onward, many people have reported seeing
spiritual beings resembling white pigeons (doves?--J.Y.) flying
around the church belfry and around the dome, along with
(anomalous) lights and flashes," added Father Suleiman.

"'The (Coptic_ bishopric did not confirm the apparition until
August 17 (2000) when an official delegation went to the church
and saw the apparition."

"'It is a light which forms the image of the Virgin Mary and
which hovers between the church's twin spires, giving a blessing
with her hands,'" he added.

"Apparitions of the Virgin Mary have been regularly reported in
Egypt since 1968 when she was seen at a church in Zeitoun near
Cairo. Then-president Gamal Abdel Basser visited the church to
see it." (See the EFE Spanish news agency report for September
9, 1000. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales, autor de los libros
Chupacabras and Other Mysteries y Forbiggen Mexico para esas
noticias.)

(Editor's Comment: Miriam and her family reportedly lived in
Upper Egypt when they were on the dodge from Herod and the
kosherites.

Butch:    The next time I say let's go someplace like
           Bolivia, let's go someplace like Bolivia!

Sundance: Next time."

Miriam:   I still say you guys would be better off in Egypt.)


CHUPACABRA KILLS DUCKS AND GEESE IN CHILE

After lying low for several weeks, the Chupacabra has struck
again in Chile, killing five ducks and three geese at a home in
La Florida.

"The Chupacabra went out for the feathery kind (of prey--S.C.)
and feasted on five ducks ...in the early morning hours" of
Wednesday, September 13, 2000, at a henhouse at Avenida Las
Perrices in the barrio Las Catas (neighborhood) in La Florida.

Its arrival in La Florida, is just the latest in a string of
Chupacabra sightings in Chile. According to the newspaper, La
Cuarta, the Chupacabra has also been seen recently in Capiapi,
Szan Vicente de Tagua Tagua, Panquehe, Las Cabras, Roquenua and
Peumo."

These communities have reported "the strange creature that
leaves no trace of any footprints and is more like a ghost or a
creature of the Devil himself."

"The home where the incident occurred is owned by an out-of-town
family, but there are two live-in caretakers on the property,
Sra, Alicia Becker Quezada and her husband, Francisco Eduardo
Vilagros.

"With a timorous voice, Dona Alicia explained that there were
three geese in the enclosure which are not known for their
silence when something odd is afoot."

"'Imagine~ Geese holler (quite a bit--S.C.) and that night I
don't think it was the heavy rain that kept me from hearing
their honking. We were most surprised in the morning,' she said,
adding that the feathered victims' legs were all pointed upward,
were bloodless, and none of them had any signs of violence upon
their bodies except for small, curious punctures, all of them
situated in the neck and chest.

"The henhouse also has chickens, bantam roosters, cornish hens
and a dog," who was found huddled in a corner. "The hens
appeared to have escaped because, fluttering like dragonflies,
they sheltered themselves among the roof beams."

""Dona Alicia says she still cannot explain what happened.
Consulted on the Chupacabra matter, she stated that, judging
from what she had seen on TV, the killings appeared to be the
work of some kind of creature" that "passed through the wire
without leaving a crack."

Francisco Eduardo Vilagros "stated that he was left speechless
and couldn't believe his eyes."

The owner of the property came as soon as Vilagros telephoned
her. The Carabineros (Chile's national police--J.T.) also
examined the crime scene "but found no footprints" or any other
trace of an intruder. (See the newspaper La Cuarta for September
14, 2000, "Chupacabra kills three geese and five ducks in La
Florida." Otra vez, muchas gracias a Scott Corrales para eso
articulo de diario.)


CHUPACABRA SLAYS SEVEN GOATS IN NICARAGUA

Chupacabra struck again last week in Nicaragua, killing seven
goats on a farm in Limon.

On Monday, September 11, 2000, Canal (Channel) 7 TV in Manahua
aired video footage of the slain seven goats, which local
residents said were killed "by a strange animal which many
consider to be the Chupacabra."

"The goats presented cuts measuring 2 centimeters (0.8
inches--J.T.) on different parts of the body through which the
blood was extracted."

"According to many sources, the Chupacabra is responsible for
serial attacks in a number of Central American and Caribbean
nations." The attack took place on a farm approximately 164
kilometers (92 miles) from Managua, the national capital. (See
the news broadcast for Radioprogramas del Peru for September `1,
1000. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales para esas noticias.)


BLACK HELICOPTERS AND UFOs SEEN JUST WEST OF SAN JOSE

Two black helicopters and six daylight disc UFOs were sighted
just west of San Jose, California (population 350,000) on
Friday, September 15, 2000.

At 2 p.m., eyewitness James W. was having lunch at a Taco Bell
and afterward decided to "take my dog to the park/ schoolyard in
Sunnyvale. I was there for about 45 minutes. It was a clear sky,
sunshine with no clouds."

"While sitting on a bench, I saw a large military gunship
helicopter (type unknown to the witness--J.T.) fly low overhead.
About eight minutes later, I saw the same helicopter I saw
before, or another just like it. They were coming right towards
me. This was sometime between 2:30 and 3:45 p.m."

"Then I went to a friend's industrial shop in (nearby) Santa
Clara to see if the delivery truck had returned from a pickup.
It wasn't there yet, so I drove over to Sam Jose International
Airport to kill some time. I was watching the (commercial) jets
take off from the west side of the airport. That's when I saw
three UFOs" in formation "and three more UFOs moving together a
few thousand feet below."

"They were too far away" for James to see them clearly, "but
they looked white, and they were all of the same size. They were
between the airport and downtown San Jose. They were pretty much
above the flight paths of the jets (about 16,000 to 20,000 feet
or 4,500 to 6,000 meters--J.T.) and too far away to cause them
any problems. The bottom row (of UFOs) was about 4,000 feet
(1,200 meters) beneath the top row."

"They departed to the north-northeast. They looked white but not
very long. Still too far away for me to clearly make them out."

San Jose is 116 miles (185 kilometers) south- southeast of Sam
Francisco. (Email Form Report)


ANOTHER UFO SIGHTED IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE, UK

Early Sunday morning, September 10, 1000, another glowing UFO
was sighted in Marlow, Buckinghamshire, UK, the site of three
recent UFO sightings.

"Leslie Thomas, 74, of Deanfield Close,, Marlow noticed a
cluster of mysterious moving lights from his back garden last
week."

"Mr. Thomas was letting his dog out at around 2"40 a.m. last
Sunday when he saw the circle of white lights which he first
thought were fireworks."

"He explained, 'On Saturday night, some people close by were
shooting off a fireworks display. I watched the white lights in
the sky, and I thought to myself, God, are they still letting
off rockets at this time of the morning!?'"

"Mr. Thomas, who has canaries and finches in his garden, stated,
'As I watched the lights, they started to move slowly northeast
until I lost sight of them.'"

"'I was waiting for them to vanish but they remained. I just
wonder if anyone else saw them.'"

"'I am still trying to figure out what those lights were. There
was no sound at all. It was all quite weird, really.'"

Marlow, South Bucks. is about 35 miles (56 kilometers) west of
London. (See This Is Buckinghamshire for September 13, 2000,
"Fourth UFO sighting reported." Many thanks to Louise A. Lowry
for forwarding this article.)


YOUNG MOTHER SPOTS A HOVERING UFO IN QUEBEC

On Thursday, September 14, 2000, at 4:10 a.m., Mrs. Flaurie B.
was asleep in her home in the Magdalen Islands of Quebec,
Canada, when she heard her young daughter's voice.

"At 4:10 a.m., my daughter woke up and asked for juice, so I
went downstairs to get her some," she reported. Looking out the
window, "I watched what I thought was an over-large star. It was
bright yellow like a star but much longer. I was about to turn
away when I saw red and blue lights start to pulse, and all of a
sudden I was filled with fear. I don't know why."

Flaurie described the object as "shaped like a backward
check-mark (comma--J.T.) The back had flashing red and blue
lights and the base had a bright yellow light. I'm not sure
about the height (altitude--J.T.) but it wasn't up very high and
its speed was unbelievably fast."

"It seemed to be pretty still for about 10 minutes. There was a
light around it, and a bright light on the ground beneath the
object. It was as if there was something glowing beneath it."

Flaurie "then went upstairs to being my daughter her juice," but
when she "returned to the window, the object was gone." (Email
Form Report)


LARGE DARK SAUCER FLIES OVER A CITY IN TURKEY

On Sunday, September 10, 2000, at 9:41 p.m., Salih Y. and his
friends were outdoors in the city of Corum in northern Turkey
when one of them saw something dark moving on the southern
horizon.

"It was a very large disc. It caused a lot of excitement," Salih
reported. It was black and moved relatively fast," heading due
north.

The other witnesses estimated that the object was a gigantic
disc or saucer, running without lights, and measuring from 75 to
100 meters (247 to 330 feet) in diameter.

"It was flying from south to north over the city," he reported,
adding that the his companions described it as "a great black
thing" and "a disc shape with no lights."

"It was in view for about 30 seconds."

Corum is located about 200 kilometers (120 miles) northeast of
Ankara, the national capital. (Email Form Report)

(Editor's Comment: Looks like the saucer was headed for Sinop,
the Turkish port on the Black Sea where the antediluvian
civilization was discovered last week. See the following story
for more. Perhaps the aliens are rushing to remove any trace of
their presence in the ruins before Erich von Daniken can get
there.)


PREHISTORIC SUNKEN CITY MAY BE LINKED TO NOAH'S FLOOD

"Famed explorer Robert Ballard has discovered the remains of
7,000-year-old civilization that existed on the Turkish coast of
the Black Sea before the region was inundated by a flood that
archaeologists say might be the one associated with the biblical
story of Noah's Ark."

"The pre-flood civilization resided around a large freshwater
lake in a river valley."

"Ballard's expedition, which was launched from Sinop, Turkey
nearly two weeks ago, discovered a collapsed 'wattle and daub'
building (a mixture of clay, rods and twigs 12 feet by 45 feet
(4 meters by 24 meters) and a number of stone tools. The
structure was found 12 miles (19 kilometers) from the present-
day Turkish coast buried beneath 311 feet (92 meters) of water.
The explorers say there might be many more such structures in
the area."

"Experts say the discovery will force scholars to rewrite the
history of ancient civilizations."

"'These people obviously had to run for it, and as a result left
their history behind and intact,' Ballard said via satellite
phone from the Northern Horizon research vessel in the Black Sea
'This is a time capsule that carried is back to the period
before the flood.'"

"Previous research by a team of scientists at New York's
Columbia University found evidence that before 7,000 years ago
the Black Sea was a freshwater lake. The area was protected from
the Mediterranean Sea by a narrow land bridge. As sea levels
rose because of the melting of (Pleistocene Era) glaciers from
the last oce age, pressure built on the land bridge. It ruptured
and sent the Mediterranean cascading into what might have been a
fertile river valley supporting a large population."

"Last year that research was confirmed by another Ballard
expedition that found freshwater sea shells along an ancient
shoreline beneath the Black Sea. Those shells were dated to
15,000 to 7,000 years ago."

"The next phase of the expedition is to look for other buildings
in the ancient river valley where the first one was found. The
group expects to find perhaps dozens more."

"As Friedrik Heibert, expedition archaeologist from the
University of Pennsylvania at Philadelphia says, 'We are having
the first look at an entire new territory and civilization.'"
(See USA Today for September 13, 2000, "Evidence possibly tied
to biblical flood found in sea," page 4A. (Editor's Note: Sinop
is about 250 kilometers (150 miles) north of Corum, where the
giant saucer was sighted on Sunday, September 10, 2000.)


TWO MORE CROP CIRCLES FOUND IN SASKATCHEWAN

On Tuesday, September 12, 2000, a farmer combining a wheat field
"in a relatively remote area" south of Viscount, Saskatchewan,
Canada discovered two large crop circles.

"The two circles were 40 and 43 feet (12 and 13 meters) in
diameter, about 100 feet )30 meters) apart. The farmer found
them September 12 while combining his field. He reports no
tracks when (the circles) were first found and a very neat lay,
with plants pressed down fairly hard to the ground but not
damaged."

"The circles are located well into the field with nearby roads.
Two similar circles were found in Viscount last year and also in
Rocanville, Sask. in 1996." (Many thanks to Paul Anderson of
Circles Phenomenon Research-Canada for this report.)


CHEMTRAILS SEEN IN OTTAWA

On Saturday, September 9, 2000, in the early afternoon,
Catherine G. was "looking out my office window in Ottawa," the
capital of Canada, "which overlooks the Ottawa River and
Parliament Hill. I was watching a plane high up in the sky. The
plane flew across the sky very high, laying down chemtrails."

Catherine added, "The sky was perfectly clear, and it had the
kind of (blue) sky people seem to be reporting, and the plane
was all over the sky creating chemtrails."

She described them as similar to the billowing, long- lasting
contrails seen in other such incidents." (Email Form Report)


NINE SORCERERS ARRESTED IN NORTHERN MEXICO

""A group of people--practitioners of Santeria--were detained by
the Escobedo police yesterday (Monday, September 11, 2000) when
caught unawares engaging in animal sacrifices in an empty lot."

""The event took place shortly after 10 a.m. in an uninhabited
district" of Escobedo, a small city in Coahuila state near
Monterrey, "located 800 meters (2,640 feet) from the firehouse
of the barrio Bosques de Escobedo (neighborhood)."

"Miguel Angel Lozano Rodriguez, (municipal) secretary of Public
Safety and Transportation reported that the detention of the
nine individuals came about as a result of calls placed by
residents of the two neighborhoods. He added that the
complainants stated that several persons would enter into the
empty lot to engage in illegal satanic rituals in which animals
were being sacrificed and that participants stripped naked, all
of this amid screams of terror that pierced the complainants'
ears."

"'Some 15 days ago, the residents of the Hacienda los Ayala and
the Bosques de Escobedo advised us that a group of people were
getting together to perform strange or satanic rituals in the
uninhabited area. They told us the animals were being sacrificed
and that the participants were stripped naked. We caught them as
the ritual was in full progress."

Arrested in the raid were Elizabeth Cuellar Alvares, 30;
Laurentina Diaz Reyes, 32; Mario Baez Diaz, 51; Rafael Carvajal
Martinez, 42; Cinthia Josefina Tello de Lopez, 23; Aracella
Alanis Torres, 23; Mario Alberto Lopez Rivera, 29; Juan Gerardo
Gonzalez Alvarado, 42; and Florencio Carvajal Martinez, 42.

"They were found standing beside a circle drawn with whitewash
and sugar enclosing a triangle where they also had birds, toads,
eggs and herbs," which Sra. Cuellar Alvarez reportedly told her
"patients" would heal their illnesses. (See the newspaper El
Norte of Monterrey, Mexico for September 12, 2000, "Nine
detained in ritual." Otra vez, muchas gracias a Scott Corrales
para eso articulo de diario.)

(Editor's Comment: What a strange world we live in-- a world
where technological marvels like the shuttle Atlantis and the
International Space Station coexist with millenia-old sorcery.)


from the UFO Files...


1954: SAUCER FLIES ACROSS THE SAHARA DESERT

On Saturday, September 15, 1954, at around 7 p.m., M. Guitta
steered his Renault into a roadside gas (petrol in UK--J.T.)
station. It was early evening, and the last glimmers of sunset
illuminated Morocco's Atlantic coast. Guitta had been in Rabat
all day, and now he wanted to get home to Casablanca before
midnight.

After filling the gas tank, Guitta drove back onto the coastal
highway. He drove past the spacious, now- deserted beaches of
Ech Chiana and Skhirate. The Renault's tires rumbled as he went
over the Wadi Charrat bridge. Then he saw the lights of Bouznika
passing by on his left.

At 8:15 p.m., Guitta was speeding down that long vacant stretch
of highway between Bouznika and the Wadi Mafifik bridge.
"Suddenly, he saw in his rear mirror something gray, diving down
toward him. He gripped the steering wheel more tightly and
ducked instinctively, and a few seconds later, the gray thing
passed him on the left at ground level and at terrific speed."

"The passing of the object was followed by a violent gust of
cold air, which, despite M. Guitta's effort to hold the wheel
steady, carried a strong suction and pulled the car to the
left."

Brakes squealed as the Renault skidded across the centerline.
The Renault came to a bumpy stop on the highway's sandy
shoulder.

"There was no noise. M. Guitta caught a seconds-long glimpse of
the object disappearing on the (southeast) horizon in front of
him. It looked like a small gray disk."

Guitta stumbled out of the driver's side door, surprised to find
the weird chill still in the air. Then he grimaced at the sight
of the Renault's flat tires and got out the jack.

Fifteen minutes later, and 3,200 kilometers (2,000 miles) to the
south, a group of emigres (settlers--J.T.) gathered for
cocktails in the courtyard of the Residency in Danane, a town in
French West Africa ( now the northwest corner of the modern
Ivory Coast--J.T.) Among the partygoers were the Danane police
chief and his wife, Dr. Roux of the local medical station, and
Father Meybard of the Lyin Mission,

"A few hundred yards away were Dr. Mariani, head of the
Trypanosomiasis Section No. 13, M. Sory Diallo, agent for the ,
a police assistant, and a Mme. Bois."

"A luminous red object, either circular or elliptical, according
to different witnesses, was sighted in the sky over Danane at
8:30 p.m....The object remained motionless until 9:05 p.m., its
silhouette shining out against the black but clear evening sky.
It then disappeared over the horizon at high speed. The
witnesses were not able to judge its altitude, but it seems to
have been low, since the object's movements of only a few
hundred yards changed the circular silhouette into an ellipse."

"A little later, an identical sighting was made from Soubre, 150
miles (250 kilometers) northwest of Abidjan, where an object
arrived at high speed over the horizon, stood still for several
minutes over the town, and then disappeared into the zenith,
diminishing swiftly in size and brilliance in a cloudless sky.
Here, too, the witnesses were numerous and of high standing,
including the head administrator of Soubre."

Was the UFO seen over Danane and Subre the same disc that had
buzzed M. Guitta's car in Morocco? If it was, and if it traveled
from Morocco to the Ivory Coast in only fifteen minutes, then
the saucer's flight speed must have been an incredible 8,000
miles per hour (12,800 kilometers per hour)!

(See the book Flying Saucers and the Straight-Line Mystery by
Aime Michel, S.G. Phillips Inc., New York, N.Y. 1958, pages 60
and 61.)


Well, that'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 next week.

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.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                   Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - McCoy

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 07:43:18 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:03:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - McCoy


Hello, all I wanna scream too!

 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:31:58 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:12:04 -0700

 >>Ed Dames - caught in yet another long line of lies and endless
 >>and inaccurate predictions that never come true. Let's not
 >>forget to thank Mike Siegel for providing the soapbox that many
 >>of these frauds stand upon...

 >I remember when he was on a couple of times ago he predicted
 >that a _huge_ tornado was going to strike Dallas (if I recall
 >correctly) within a week of the show.

 >It never happened.

In old testament times if a Prophet wasn't 100 percent accurate
they were stoned to death. Now it's the audience that has to be
stoned to believe that crap.

 >But, then again, I've yet to be impressed by anything any "remote
 >viewer" has actually ever demonstrated.

 >RVers/TRVers/CRVers: feel free to go ahead and flame me.

Hold it now - I drive a CRV darn fine car!

 >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:15:13 -0700
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie

 >>>Hello Royce:

 >>>Given the long track record of the Coast to Coast (Bell/Siegel)
 >>>soap box, I find this interesting but of course unsurprising.

 >>>This is just my personal opinion mind you, but to me, anyone who
 >>>appears on that show has by far the burden of proof that they
 >>>are somehow _not_ full of BS.

 >Not everyone, but most.

 >Bell, and now Siegel, do attract mainstream "accepted" scientists
 >from time to time.

 >...although, I'll be the first to say that I think alot of
 >"accpeted" scientists *are* indeed "full of BS". e.g. one of
 >these days I will get through when Michio Kaku is on and -- as
 >brilliant as the guy is -- rake him through the coals for the
 >way he presents quantum mechanics.

 >(if you ever hear a "Ron from Boston" get on, that's most likely
 >me.)

 >>>Once in a while somebody interesting does come on, but it really
 >>>costs them in a way. How does one maintain credibility, going on
 >>>the air nationwide if not worldwide, sandwiched in between
 >>>Richard Hoagland and Robert "Ghostwolf" ?

Gee. I didn't know you needed credibilty to be on that show in
the first place. Obviously not on the top of the list anyway,
certainly below "Idiot" "Egocentric" and "Pathological Liar".

 >Way true.

 >I sometimes marvel that Siegel was actually ever a lawyer.

 >I mean, I know the show has a reputation for "suffering all
 >fools"; i.e. it provides a platform for *everyone*. But I
 >simply cannot fathom how Siegel seems to accept almost
 >everything as true, esp. the BS claims of guys like Hoagland.
 >Where's the skepticism and ability to think logically that he,
 >as a former lawyer, presumably had to once possess? Where the
 >ability to recognize that he's accepting mutually and
 >self-contradictory statements as true?

Hey this is the Boomer Generation in its full glory - "Yes I can
have it both ways."-no problem -and:" I'll use it all up and you
can't have have any! Me! Mine!" This includes credibilty,
standards of personal conduct, and in some cases, personal
hygine. Just for that 15 minutes (or longer) of fame, when 5
seconds is enough.

 >Speaking of lawyers who demonstrate poor reasoning skills (ooo!
 >this is a Hoaglandesque "Synchronicity!" moment) Peter Gersten
 >was the guest last night.

 >To make a long story short, Gersten was presenting the story of
 >one Bob Lowrey (I think that was the name), a guy who claims to
 >have some kind of creature in his closet that attacks him in the
 >middle of the night... something like that.

 >(I kept asking: "Why not call an exterminator...")

Perhaps Mr. Lowery should consider leaving a night light on
to better see that Cougar pelt hanging in the closet.

 >Lowrey has a claw, allegedly from the creature, which can be
 >seen on the Coast to Coast site at:
 >
 >Photo: The Claw Left By Visitors of Gary Lowrey
 >http://img.coasttocoastam.com/img/lowrey-claw.jpg

Yep, its a Cougar claw all right. Or at the very least a typical
big cat claw.

 >Anyway, for nearly four hours Gersten wondered why the UFO
 >community kept demonstrating such a lack of interest in this
 >claw and Lowrey's story.

At least it's more interesting than, say getting up at night to
go to the bathroom mistaking the closet where say the Cougar
pelt is, for the hall way and waking up and finding that you've
just had a to the death wrestling match with Grampa Vern's
Cougar pelt-there are relative ways of looking like an Idiot,
might as well make the most of it, the ol' Worhal clock is
ticking.

 >(you see what I'm about to say coming, don't you?)

 >I tried calling for nearly two hours. I wanted to scream at
 >Gersten:

 >"What the *HECK* does a one inch long claw have to do with
 >UFOs?!? The only source of 'wonder' around here is that you are
 >wondering why the UFO community isn't interested in this story!"

 >Alas, I never got through.

 >Gersten should stick to going after the government. Leave the
 >Chupacabra stuff to the Mexicans.

 >Hey, it's open lines tonight. I wonder if I'll get through...

Good Luck, its past my bedtime when it's on so the local station
runs reapeats during the week, I do occasionally listen in so I
can yell at the radio. Good for circulation you know.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                         P-47: Philistines in Space

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@CYBERZONE.NET>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:31:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:12:45 -0400
Subject: P-47: Philistines in Space

Greetings List

What I know about art would probably fill a page.  However, from
what little studies, I've done, it seems unlikely that Medieval
or Renaissance art showed UFOs as subjects in paintings.

Please see below.

------

Medren.txt

The very simplistic interpretation that some Medieval or
Renaissance art depicts UFOs demonstrates little understanding
of the purpose of art in these times.

The lack of literate people in the Middle Ages meant that there
had to be a method for transmitting ideas and especially the
religious message which did not wonder off course. How do you do
that? You carve the stories in stone. So if you go into a
Medieval or early Renaissance church, you will find all types of
unusual depictions of various scenes from the Bible. You will
also find local pious legends, stories of the saints and the
holy patrons of the local area.

One should also note that Medieval people did not think in terms
of the historic periods. Periodicity of historic eras which
seemed so logical to us today was not important to illiterates
of the time. While the vast majority of the population could not
read, that does not mean that they were not "educated". The
local churches cathedrals, and monasteries were actually tools
for teaching as well as places of worship. Inside and outside
the church were carvings representing various holy texts,
Apocryphal writings or pious legends. Sermons were illustrated
by referring to this art, but even more important people were
taught the meanings of the depictions so they could repeat the
stories by almost by rote. They didn't have to read the Bible,
they could "read" the church. Today many of the depictions in
local churches are often obscure unless there is an art
historian or a local expert to explain a specific painting or
sculpture.

So art in Medieval time was a method for transmitting cultural
traditions. For rich and powerful people building a church was
not only a profoundly religious act, it was also on the
currently level of endowing a university. The power of the
Church was such that the Art served the Church's purpose.
Accurate depictions were not important. The human body or scenes
showing where important religious event occurred did not have
look anything like the real thing as long the idea came across.
The Virgin Mary shown as a waif-like ethereal figure suckling
Jesus almost from her neck was not a problem for artists or the
viewers. The subject not the technique was important. In any
case the Virgin was suppose to be ethereal.

However, in places like Italy you have all these ancient
monuments and statues around. While many were ground down for
lime, there were over and over again people who looked at this
art and attempted to imitate the realistic depictions of the
human body and nature. There were in fact many small
"renaissances" in which one or a few artists would start along
this line, but momentum would not be developed. During the early
Renaissance studies were made about the human body moved how the
eye perceived nature. So there was developing "scientific" input
to artistic endeavours.

However, if the artist wanted to experiment with or demonstrate
perspective or the proper portions of the human body, he had to
do it within the frame work of the time. The art had to serve
the Church. Later, art would serve a broader purpose, but there
were always attempts to limit the artist. In the beginning of
the Renaissance he had to use a religious subject.

Now several paintings from this period supposedly show UFOs.
Hardly, if it is in the painting there is some reason even if
very obscure for it to be there. We don't need ufologists to
tell us why what look like flying bodies seem to be in
paintings, we need art historians. Small depictions in the sky,
may not even be items in the sky at all. Painting sometimes
incorporated a number of different events on one canvas. Or
maybe just a small hint in an empty space which showed the
prelude or the outcome of the event depicted as the main subject
of the painting. Items in the heavens probably refer to what
legend or dogma said was going on in the heavenly realm at the
time.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                        Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:14:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:03:41 -0400
Subject: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away


From: Tom Deuley <TPDeuley@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 05:30:58 EDT
Subject: No Subject
To: dstacy@texas.net


I am very sorry and saddened to have to give you this news but
Jeanne Andus, wife of Walt Andrus, passed away yesterday. On my
last visit she was very weak, although she seemed healthy enough
to carry on. I was quite surprised to get this bad news here
today.

Jeanne's service will be at the First United Methodist Church in
Seguin, TX on Saturday, September 23.

Tom Deuley







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                 Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:43:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:17:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children - Salvaille


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 14:01:27 -0400

 >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 19:24:55 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Abductee Files/Our Children
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Peter Brooksmith suggested Janet from 'The Abduction Enigma',
 >>but Greg Sandow rejected it because it could just be anecdotal.
 >>Of course one man's anecdote is another man's empiric
 >>observation.

<snip>

 >First, many thanks to Kevin for his informative and helpful role
 >in this discussion.

<snip>

Do you always accept all you read with such candor, especially
when it comes from someone with initials following his name?

<snip>

 >As for my comment, which Kevin notes here, of course Kevin is
 >right.

<snip>

No, he's not. Please refer to my response to him in the same
thread. And if you think Kevin is informative, my post should
give you some kind of rush. I suggest you refrain from sending
me a fat check. Please forward it to EBK, he deserves it.

<snip>

 >My point had been about the way empirical observations
 >reach us. In this case, Peter had read an empirical account
 >credited to William P. Cone in "The Abduction Enigma,"
 >coauthored by Kevin, Cone, and Russ Estes.

<snip>


An empiric account should have available all the material
related to it.

The reason for this is self-evident. I remember a quite heated
thread not long ago about Kevin Randle's book on abduction
stating that a significant percentage of abductees presented
para-social sexual behaviors such as homosexuality and
hypersexuality.

Based on what? Where was the data? How was it collected? What
was the protocol of the experiment?

Corollary questions would be: why question Randle's work on this
specific subject? Why not question him on other topics?

Taboos are in the eye of the beholder. Correct me if I am wrong,
but Kevin implied in his "research" that abductees were already
screwed up people. Gays and hypersexuals are all screwed up
aren't they? (If PhDs imply that, it must be true) It was never
discussed that the abduction experiment may have been the
etiological factor, e.g. the _cause_ of para-social behavior.

An anecdote is supposed to amuse people. This one was really
funny.

Empirical observation?

<snip>

 >Since I don't know anything about Cone (the book doesn't even
 >specify his training, experience, or other credentials), I don't
 >know how much weight to put on his observations. That's why I
 >called them "anecdotal." They're a story one reads in print,
 >perhaps accurate, perhaps not. I'm not criticizing Cone at all
 >here, or saying that I expect his account to be inaccurate. This
 >is only a question of how to assess what one finds in books and
 >other media.

 >My point was that -- when important scientific questions are
 >being discussed -- I'd rather get my information from
 >peer-reviewed journals, or from books written by people whose
 >credentials are known. That way, at least, I know that the
 >writer is known in his or her field, and that his or her
 >colleagues agree that what the writer says should be listened
 >to.

<snip>

Does Peter Brookesmith have a PhD in psychology?

If I still have my bearings OK, he is a reputed debunker. It so
happens that you like the guy because he expressed a positive
opinion of you in one of his books.

And for this, you lend credibility to his work?

<snip>

 >This isn't infallible. Nonsense has appeared in peer-reviewed
 >journals, and occasionally there's even fraud in science. But at
 >least it's a start. If someone is a credentialed scholar or
 >scientist, they've served an apprenticeship in their field.
 >Their work has been watched by others, and if their reports of
 >what they've seen were inaccurate, or their research was shoddy,
 >or their citations of others' work were misleading, they
 >probably wouldn't have advanced to the point where we'd be
 >reading them.

<snip>

Not necessarily. In my university years (1970s), I used to
attend conferences and doctoral thesis presentations. What can
be discovered about scholarship is fascinating.

This is a self-contained world where the participants must obey
very precise rules relating more to dominance in interpersonal
relationships than scientific pertinence. I remember a course on
fish biology where I had an argument with this PhD with a world
reputation in his field: I finally had to put his own research
papers before his eyes to smother his arrogance.

See, this habit of mine is not new ;)

But there are a lot of people, notably scholars who _work_ in
the real world who make good use of their knowledge.

This is my experience in Quebec. I do not think this is very
different elsewhere in Canada because the university system is
relatively independent from the corporate world.

In the U.S., corporations, via grant research, have a great
influence on universities and scientific literature. This poses
different kinds of problems, like doctors working for tobacco
companies, studies on the great value of aspirin to prevent
heart diseases hiding possible negative impacts on strokes.
There is also the great amount of money spent on cancer research
by scientists who refuse to talk to each other for monetary
reasons.

There is some good stuff. There is some not so good stuff. You
need to find it. This is why an opinion cannot be based on a few
readings alone. One must be able to consult the data, cross-
examine it and come up with original conclusions. Not always,
all the time and in every case, but this must be done.

There are sharp minds in there. There are also blunt ones.

<snip>

 >Compare the situation in ufology.

<snip>

The terrifying part about ufology is that, whoever you are, your
ass is on the line. A very, very uncomfortable situation for
anybody who cannot backup his assertions with material.

Ufology seems also to be a very conformable place for desiccated
debunkers. But this is an entire different story.

<snip>

 >I have a certain minor
 >standing as a ufologist, but how does anyone know whether to
 >believe what I say? If I say I've observed something at Budd
 >Hopkins's support groups, how do you know you can trust me? If I
 >say I've read something in a book or a psychology journal, how
 >many people check to see that what I claim to have read even
 >exists?

<snip>

Just put up the data. Abductologists seem very reluctant to do
that. This is why they cannot be trusted. You can trust no one
who will not come up with his material.

<snip>

 >This is why peer review is important, and why ufology, alas, is
 >still largely an amateur discipline.

<snip>

In case you haven't noticed, there is a form of peer review in
ufology.

People like Friedman, Cashman, Kenny Young, Maccabee, Rudiak,
Aldrich and a few others, seldom ask you to believe them on face
value but always seem to have some stuff up their sleeves - even
if the stuff is a 85% blacked out document. I wouldn't call them
amateurs.

You will notice that they are all engaged in the study on
historical documents and/or UFO cases in the field.

And they can put up the data.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 21

                 Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:58:18 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:29:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away - Kaeser


 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:14:36 -0500
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away

 >From: Tom Deuley <TPDeuley@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 05:30:58 EDT
 >Subject: No Subject
 >To: dstacy@texas.net

 >I am very sorry and saddened to have to give you this news but
 >Jeanne Andus, wife of Walt Andrus, passed away yesterday. On my
 >last visit she was very weak, although she seemed healthy enough
 >to carry on. I was quite surprised to get this bad news here
 >today.

 >Jeanne's service will be at the First United Methodist Church in
 >Seguin, TX on Saturday, September 23.


My thoughts and prayers go out to Walt and the rest of his
family.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                    Re: Time Travel Articles? - Isenberg

From: Holger Isenberg <H.Isenberg@ping.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:33:16 +0200 (MEST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:03:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Time Travel Articles? - Isenberg


 >From: Mark Hall <capn_black@msn.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Time Travel Articles?
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:36:08 +0100

 >At Destination Space, we are collating research for
 >an article on any UFO/alien/contactee incidents that have
 >involved time travel.

 >Does anyone on the List know of any good cases, or a
 >direction we could go to for information?

Some people do not want to see this topic in context with UFOs.

For example, a few month ago, a German author was invited
personally by a TV-Talkmaster to his show. The Talkmaster knew
his book where he wrote in one chapter about time travelling
humans in UFOs.

Most interesting was, that the short appearance of the author
was cut from the broadcast by someone higher-up than the
Talkmaster in the company. The author had said that he did not
believe the other guy in this show, who spoke about good aliens
helping humans to survive natural catastrophies. This other guy
has healed his deadly illness.

  --
    Holger Isenberg
    H.Isenberg@ping.de
    http://mars-news.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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                  Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:54:31 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:07:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie - Cecchini


 >From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ed Dames - Yet Another Lie
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 07:43:18 -0700

 >>RVers/TRVers/CRVers: feel free to go ahead and flame me.

 >Hold it now - I drive a CRV darn fine car!

Yeah, but my tricycle gets me to where I need to be even
faster...

 >>Hey, it's open lines tonight. I wonder if I'll get through...

 >Good Luck, its past my bedtime when it's on so the local station
 >runs reapeats during the week, I do occasionally listen in so I
 >can yell at the radio. Good for circulation you know.

I tried and tried for four hours. No luck.

I'm still trying to follow up on the 7/19 call from that guy who
claims he was at Wright-Patt in the late 70s when a
saucer-shaped object was trucked onto the base. That guy said he
would let Siegel put him in contact with MUFON. As far as I
know, it hasn't happened. I tried using Siegel's new "FastBlast"
to ask the same question but I don't think it he read it on air.

Anyway, you might want to stay up tonight:

("Can I get a 'Holy Synchronicity' from you! Hallelujah!")

9/21/00 - Thu/Fri

Guest: Dick Allgire

Allgire is the Vice-President of the Hawaii Remote Viewers'
Guild. For the past three years he has been training and working
closely with a former military remote viewer who was part of
U.S. Army Special Forces Intelligence.

Related Info: Remote Viewing Drawings
Website: www.hrvg.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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:35:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:09:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:36:53 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Without starting a CSETI debate, let me again point out that
 >communcation is a two way street. It doesn't matter what form of
 >communication that an advanced race uses to talk to each other,
 >be it thought-beams, laserlight, microwave, sign language, morse
 >code or whatever. What is important is what they decide to use
 >to communicate with US.

 >Any race advanced enough to travel here or contemplate a visit
 >has GOT to realize that we do not have the means to emulate
 >their technology. Therefore, if they are interested in having a
 >chat, they know they have two choices:

 >A) Wait until we get smart enough to learn their language (not
 >likely)

 >or

 >B) Simply apply our more primitive mode of communication and get
 >on with it

 >Does this mean that they are beaming RF waves at us from a
 >distance of millions of light years? Of course not! They would
 >no more do that than we would shout in a tribal dialect from the
 >shores of the US hoping that someone in Africa would hear it. We
 >would simply GO there first, then start the conversation in
 >their native language. After a while, the tribe would learn our
 >language, as well.

 >Ultimately, it doesn't matter if ET's decide to send a probe
 >first or just show up. What is important is to remember that WE
 >are the limiting factor in the whole scheme of things. If ETs
 >want to communicate, they'll have to come here and learn out
 >lingo; short of that, nothing's going to happen.

I think the likelihood of an ET visitor wanting to chat with us
Earthlings is as likely as you or me trying to chat with some
cannabalistic natives. I wouldn't know why anybody would do this
either. But, it's more likely that surveillance from a safe
distance would occur.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                   Another FOIA Request From Larry Bryant

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:33:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:19:14 -0400
Subject: Another FOIA Request From Larry Bryant


Dear Listers and EBK,

I received this from Larry Bryant's list and asked him for
permission to post it here. I imagine that EBK's people would
(or should) be interested in this new FOIA request being made.
Larry asked me to remind you that there is another and related
petition ("Tear Down this Wall of UFO Secrecy...!"), currently
posted on at http://www.petitionpetition.com. If I am not
mistaken, this has been posted here on UpDates.

Further, this relates to L. Gordon Copper's book which I
mentioned in a recent post. I believe it is important to keep
the pressure on our government and the military to demonstrate
that we are not gonna give up, neither are we gonna give in.
There is something to this UFO phenom, the government and/or
military and/or secret government knows much more than they are
saying, which is to say, not a damned thing. The more we, the
citizens, demand, the more they, the government will feel
compelled to admit to knowing. My two cents anyway.

Here is the FOIA request in it's entirety.

Jim Mortellaro

==============

TO:   Ms. Kathryn I. Dyer
       Information and Privacy Coordinator
       U. S. Central Intelligence Agency
       Washington, DC 20505

FROM: Larry W. Bryant
       3518 Martha Custis Drive
       Alexandria, VA 22302

DATE: September 20, 2000

  On the enclosed pages 82-86 of his recently published memoirs
("Leap of Faith: An Astronaut's Journey into the Unknown"), USAF
Col.(Ret.) L. Gordon Cooper recounts how, as a captain stationed
at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., on or about May 3, 1957, he
became aware that a metallic, saucer- shaped craft had landed
(silently) sometime after 8:00 a.m. on base property. He alleges
that the event was filmed by a startled technical film crew on
assignment 50 yards away, the craft zooming out of sight when
the photographers tried to approach it for a better camera shot.

Cooper writes that, upon learning of the incident, he telephoned
appropriate Pentagon officials, who ordered him to have all the
film developed (but not printed) and to ship it immediately to
the Pentagon. He adds that, before complying, he chose to peek
at some of the negatives, which confirmed the existence of the
"saucer" as described to him by the film crew.

Cooper notes that he heard nothing more about the whereabouts of
the film or the results of any investigation thereof.

Pursuant to the U. S. Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C., Sec.
552(a)), I hereby request that you provide me a copy of the
following records:

(1) The entire package of actual film (both still-photography
and motion-picture negatives) produced by the subject film crew;

(2) Any and all official U.S. government reports of analysis of
the subject film;

(3) Any and all correspondence (including outgoing and incoming
Edwards AFB teletype messages) and records- management
documentation pertaining to the acquisition, processing,
shipping, analysis, dissemination, storage, security
classification, and final disposition of the subject film;

(4) The entire case files of all your previously processed FOIA
requests pertaining to this Cooper-related event.

In addition to searching those records systems you determine may
be relevant to this request, you are specifically instructed to
search the following systems and offices during the initial
processing stages of this request: the Directorate of
Operations, the Directorate of Intelligence, the Directorate of
Administration, the Directorate of Central Intelligence, the
files of the National Photographic Interpretation Center, the
records repository of the UFO/E.T.-information control group
known as "Majestic- Twelve" (and of all MJ-12 successor
organizations), and the CIA-shared records of the now-defunct
U.S. Army-operated counterintelligence effort called
"Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit."

Please be advised that the term "records" includes, but is not
limited to, all e-mail communications to or from any individual
within your agency, memorandums-for-record, inter-agency
communications, sound recordings, tape recordings, video or film
recordings, photographs, notes, note-books, indexes, blank-form
entries, intra-office/inter-office memoranda, jottings, message
slips, document-transmittal "buck slips," letters, telexes,
telegrams, facsimile transmissions, conference-agenda sheets,
statements, policy briefs, SOP's, briefings' transcripts and
graphics ("Vu-Graphs"), manuals, temporary-duty reports,
travel-authorization documents, diplomatic correspondence,
technical-specification sheets, binders, books, handbooks,
business records, personnel records, minutes of meetings,
memo-summaries of telephone calls, ledgers, notices, warnings,
affidavits, declarations under-penalty-of-perjury, unsworn
statements, reports, diaries, and calendars -- regardless of
whether they be hand-written, printed, typed, mechanically or
electronically recorded, or reproduced on any medium capable of
conveying an image (such as paper, computer discs, magnetic
tape, or diskettes).

To the extent that your records-search inquiries apply to
individuals who are still living and from whom no privacy
authorization or waiver has been submitted, this letter
constitutes a third-party request under which the public
interest in disclosure outweighs any privacy interests these
individuals may possess. If you require further elaboration as
to specific individuals, please let me know so that I timely may
provide such information.

Inasmuch as I submit this request as a free-lance representative
of the news media, I respectfully request that you waive all
records-search fees incident to your fulfilling this request. My
status as a retired federal employee now writing on assignment
for various UFO/E.T. research/publication media and Internet
public-interest websites qualifies me as a "person primarily
engaged in disseminating information" (a category envisioned by
the FOIA and set forth by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia, per the case of National Security Archive
v. DoD, 880 F.2d 1381, 1387 (D.C.Cir. 1989). I possess the
knowledge, experience, qualifications, and ability to use and
disseminate any information I receive. In fact, my activities in
this research field recently have become the subject of various
newspaper coverage (including the Washington Post, the
Alexandria, Va., JOURNAL, and the Newport News, Va., Daily
Press) and radio programs across the nation. My publication
credits, which date back some 40 years, include the websites of
http://www.caus.org and http://www.ufocity.com; Alternate
Perceptions (a newsstand magazine); Fate (ditto); Fact (ditto);
Flying Saucers (ditto); the Mutual UFO Network's monthly
Journal; the ORTK Forum (newsletter of the public-interest group
Operation Right to Know); UFO Commentary (a research
newsletter); and the UFO Newsclipping Service (its
letters-to-editor section).

Furthermore, no question exists that your full, prompt
disclosure of the sought-for information would contribute to the
public's understanding of government operations or activities;
and, hence, said disclosure obviously would help satisfy the
public interest. Past/current/future disclosure about the
government's knowledge of UFO/E.T.- related activity remains a
highly controversial topic, as does the issue of current
UFO/E.T. encounters being reported worldwide -- a development
that engenders continual public debate and investigation, both
governmental and non-governmental. Accordingly, the UFO/E.T.
controversy continues to fuel widespread public discussion and
inquiry, especially in the United States; and the prospective
disclosure of all records concerning the possible cover-up of
actual official film footage of a "flying saucer," as well as
the contents thereof, clearly meets all requirements for a fee
waiver. Alternatively, I am willing to pay reasonable copying
costs only. Should this amount exceed $250 dollars, please
notify me first.

If you choose to deny all or part of this request, please cite
the specific exemptions you believe justify your refusal to
release the information and notify me of your appeal procedures
available under the law. Please use "black-out" rather than
"white out" techniques for any deletions. The CIA is required by
law to respond to this request within 20 working days. Failure
to timely respond within this period will result in the filing
of a civil action in the U. S. District Court for the District
of Columbia.

Your cooperation in this quest for greater freedom of official
UFO/E.T. information would be appreciated. If you wish to
discuss this request, please do not hesitate to contact me.


LARRY W. BRYANT
Contributing Writer
http://www.ufocity.com

Enclosure

cc: Mark S. Zaid, Esq

==============

After cutting and pasting this thing, I can well imagine the
amount of effort which EBK takes in putting UFO UpDates
together. This is an enormous task. And I probally screwed it
up, too. Errol, my most sincere compliments to you on what to me
would be an impossible task. Putting up with us and putting up
these posts. It took me a half bottle of Gripple in Bond-age to
complete this one little post together. (Hic!) - Excuse 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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 02:25:15 -0700
 >Subject: The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?]
 >From: Nathan G. Daniel - Underground Video <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:54:04 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

 >>>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700

 >I have never entered an online forum before. Please excuse me
 >if I am doing so now improperly. I couldn't resist making a
 >response when I read Jim Deardorff's statement concerning
 >the authenticity of the Billy Meier case. Readers of the List
 >may wish to consider the following comments and findings.

 >James Deardorff said:

 >>There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
 >>just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
 >>supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
 >>debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
 >>of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc.

 >Yeah, right...

 >I defended Meier's case by parroting the claims of Genesis
 >Publishing who warranted that scientific tests were conducted on
 >Meier's materials and no evidence of a hoax was ever found. I
 >was rapidly insulted a half dozen times for being sucked into a
 >lie and was firmly told that the Meier photos were fake. I kept
 >an open mind and asked to see evidence that proved the Meier
 >photos were hoaxed, but after several requests the scientist
 >never produced a shred of evidence to debunk Meier. I thought I
 >was onto another trail of the UFO Cover Up. The scientist
 >claimed to be connected with Nobel Prize winners, and to be a
 >lecturer at California Institute of Technology. The insults I
 >endured that evening irritated me so much that I made it my
 >mission to prove the Meier case TRUE to skeptics.

 >Here's what we learned about the Billy Meier materials around
 >1995:

 >Recently, Underground Video began an in-depth inquiry into the
 >most publicized UFO case in history. ...

 >With the assistance of members from the Hollywood special
 >effects team of the Ultra-Matrix Corporation, we studied the
 >Meier photographs and claims made by Meier's Talmud Jmmanuel,
 >Genesis III Publishing, author Gary Kinder,and Guido Mooseburger
 >of Meier's FIGU cult in Switzerland. After 6 months of intense
 >inquiry, with the assistance of cinematographers, physicists,
 >and computer analysis from Total Research, we found the claims
 >of the representatives of the Meier case to be absolutely
 >untrue. ...

Nathan,

I believe we've all heard most of this before, via Kal Korff
(TotalResearch) and then others who fell for his claims. Korff's
false claims have been thoroughly refuted, with many of his key
falsehoods, distortions, irrelevancies and innuendo having been
posted on a website of Jeroen Jansen to which my website linked
(http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj ). But I see now that my link
to this is no longer current. I'll let you know if I find
there's a current URL for it.

A thorough refutation of Korff's claims against the Talmud of
Jmmanuel is in my website, however. To read it, go to:

http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/refutekk.htm

Korff quite evidently never even read the Talmud of Jmmanuel
(TJ) for himself, but relied on what a couple others had said.
One of these persons he referred to as a group of scientists and
scholars, when it was just one Swiss scientist, Ted Auerbach,
with whom I had been in contact for some years. His views,
expressed by Korff in his book, are responded to in my
refutations.

At one point Korff did refer to Underground Video, saying you
had done a significant analysis of the TJ. However the only item
of this analysis he mentions is that you had "proven" that the
TJ does not contain Aramaic! (Well, it's translation was into
German and later English, as the Aramaic text would not have
been understandable to readers. So how could it contain
Aramaic?) Was he perhaps referring to a conclusion that the TJ
contains no Aramaisms? In my refutation I supply several
Aramaisms present in the German text, and other items indicating
that it derived from an ancient source that did not use
punctuation. I'd like to hear from you (privately, I suppose) on
any other items regarding the TJ you came up with, or which
you'd care to discuss. In my website, I've compared the TJ's
verses against those of Matthew, and have found over 600
Matthean verses that various scholars have validly criticized as
seeming non-genuine; yet the TJ does not suffer from these
criticisms, though in over half of these verses the TJ does have
parallel verses (or cognates). This means beyond any doubt that
the Gospel of Matthew was formed out of the TJ rather than vice
versa. This can be concluded without the original TJ scrolls
having survived. From the TJ it's also fairly easy to deduce how
and why 19th-century New Testament scholars went astray and
decided to assume that Mark, not Matthew, was the first gospel.

I'm aware that various ufologists besides Korff have been
debunking the Meier case, but that's largely due to its high
degree of strangeness. When you combine that with all the
evidential and witness support for it, the strangeness only
enhances its genuineness.

I trust you can also understand that the TJ's heresies for
Christianity and Judaism have further induced some to try to
discredit the Meier case. As much as the typical ufologist may
deplore that religion enters into some UFO cases, it has a way
of doing it.

 >We discovered miniature models and a variety of
 >deceptive methods used to create this hoax. ...

The topic of UFO models -- the model first brought to him to
photograph and compare with the real thing in his photos, and
the one Wendelle had a studio make and hen tested out, using
Meier's own camera, and another -- was looked into thoroughly by
Wendelle Stevens and reported upon in his 1982 book. I believe
that Wendelle's crew "discovered" the models, not UV. Meier
never denied the existence of these models, and his photos speak
for themselves, especially the ones where Semjase posed her
beamship on all sides of a tree for Meier to photograph on 9
July, 1975. I now have several of those displayed in the front
page of my website, since from them two Forestry experts at
Oregon State Univ. easily concluded the tree in question was a
mature abies alba (European silver fir). Hence it was no model
tree or baby tree. (This much can be concluded from photos that
are not 1st or 2nd generation.) I never could get Korff to
comment on this; instead, he'd just switch the topic to
something like how Meier's wife divorced him. Yet, she's a key
witness to one of the beamship sightings that 4 other adults
viewed, in daytime (which Korff ignored). Her affirmative
dialogue and comments about it are on a video tape Genesis III
has, which also shows the picture one of their kids, who was
with them that day and had the earliest view of the beamship
while it was nearest, drew of it.

 >... The persons who
 >authenticated the Meier case are not credible scientists nor
 >investigators.

They're a lot more credible than TotalResearch, who never even
spoke to Meier on his two clandestine trips to Schmidrueti.
Stevens obtained a lot of comprehensive, detailed, signed
statements from witnesses who could vouch either for the
Meier-case UFOs being genuine or his contact experiences having
been genuine. Kinder did similarly, and concluded the case could
be no hoax, as you know.

Not too long ago Michael Hesemann recorded the supportive
statements of 14 Meier-case witnesses. Their English
translations are presented in:

http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/witness.htm .

One of these persons (P.C.) was a witness to Meier's 1964 UFO
sightings in India, photos of which Stevens has presented in
several of his books. She and others at the ashram where Meier
was then staying witnessed both the UFOs and Meier in the
company of the alien (Asket) then contacting him. She reported
on it a year and a half ago at the 8th International UFO
Congress in Laughlin, NV; it's all on video tape.

 >Any previous representations of authenticity of the Meier case
 >in the Underground Video catalog should be ignored. Our
 >findings will be presented to the Attorney General of the State
 >of California to see if a consumer fraud case can be instituted
 >against the Meier group in Switzerland.

You might want to examine the evidence that TotalResearch
ignored (which was an awful lot) before you do this, and learn
about his false claims and distortions.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                         Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Gehrman

From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:05:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:46:56 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Gehrman


 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:38:03 -0400
 >Subject: 'Angel Hair'?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >If Anyone has any idea of what this stuff is please let me know.
 >Any feedback will be most appreciated.

<snip>

 >[The pictures _are_ interesting. --ebk]

I agree; this is a strange phenomenon. But "angel hair" has been
reported under similar circumstances. In 1955, M.K Jessup
published a book called 'The UFO Annual'; it contained UFO
reports from all across the USA for that year. It is quite a
remarkable book but I doubt that listfolk are familiar with it.

One of my favorite reports in the collection is an occurrence
that took place Oct. 22nd., 1955, fifteen miles northwest of
Columbus Ohio. It was a clear day, and students at Jerome
Elementary School were playing outside when they all spotted an
object circling high above the school. Most teachers and the
principal saw the craft.

It was "cigar shaped" and "dazzling" bright and "motionless". As
they all watched, the object took off at "tremendous" speed.

What they witnessed next was a most "beautiful scene".

"The air as high and far around as the teachers could see was
filled with the most beautiful soft white looking tufts of
cotton slowly floating to the ground."

But that's not all:

"For about forty-five minutes they watched the fibrous material
floating downward" and "the substance had long fibers very
much like as if someone had taken the strands of 'angel hair'
and pushed some bunches toward the middle or end, leaving a
trail of fibers attached to it. It was very fine and soft to the
touch. It did not stick to our hands, but when we held two ends
and pulled, it stretched without tearing.

Where it stretched, it had a shiny appearance. The part we held
between our fingers quickly seemed to go to nothing."

The substance turned their hands green but soon washed off. The
mysterious downpour covered a three mile area and attached
itself to trees and telephone poles and was quite a sight.

There's also a picture in this same book of a "cobwebby
substance" which was identified as radioactive, heavily damaged
cotton fiber that covered a half-mile square area in
Horseheads, NY, on Feb. 23, 1955.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                      Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Sanchez-Ocejo

From: Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 22:08:39 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:56:40 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Sanchez-Ocejo


 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:38:03 -0400
 >Subject: 'Angel Hair'?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Source: Rusty's Retreat

 >http://www.homestead.com/rustys_retreat/spiderstuff.html

 >The pictures are interesting.

 >______________________________

 >September 20, 2000

 >This is a special page I made so I could show you what I woke up
 >to this morning. First though I must tell you exactly the events
 >as they happened as I remember them.

 >Last night at about 7:00 PM, I heard a loud"Droning" sound,
 >like a large airplane. I went out to look to see if I could see
 >it, but I could not see it. The droning sound lasted about an
 >hour.

 >This morning when I got up, my yard was full of these
 >"spider-web"stuff. Don't know exactly how to describe them other
 >than that they looked like spider webs but at the same time they
 >were not your usual"circular" webs.

 >These as you will see were somewhat different.

 >I immediately got the camera out and took about a dozen
 >pictures. I had my husband go to town to buy some rubber gloves
 >so we could get some samples.

 >On his way in, there were a few spots he could see on the way in
 >to town which was 7 miles, but nothing as heavy as what was in
 >my yard.

 >The first sample he tried to get with the gloves on turned to a
 >goo-like substance as soon as he touched it.

 >We put the samples on a piece of paper towel and put the gloves
 >in with it in a plastic bag.

 >I went to town to the One hour photo place and got the photos
 >developed.

 >I have lived here in Romney, West Virginia for 6 years and I
 >have never seen anything like this. If anyone has seen this also
 >I will be most interested.

 >I am going to try to find a lab that will analyze this stuff for
 >me.

 >Please email me if you have ever seen anything like this, or
 >know of a lab that will analyze it.

 >Below are the photos I took.

 >[11 Photographs]
 >
 >If Anyone has any idea of what this stuff is please let me know.
 >Any feedback will be most appreciated.

 >Thank you

 >Rusty <rusty@mountain.net>
 >______________________________


 >[The pictures _are_ interesting. --ebk]


Dear Rusty,

I haven't hearded of 'Angel Hair' for years. It used to be very
popular in the 60's and 70's. We translated your note to Spanish
and placed it on a few Spanish Lists. Here is one response:

-----

The strange "apparatus" (UFO) made diverse maneuvers in the
field and soon it disappeared at great speed. This took place in
the winter of 1979 in the countryside of Uriburu, province of
Pampas, in Argentina. The following morning, the ones in charge
of that rural estate crossed the zone where the" the apparatus
"had flow and found what they described like" great amount of
spiderwebs". At that time, they did not disclose the experience
until later time.

Two months later, we arrived at that zone and find absolutely
nothing. Some witnesses declared that they did not say anything
before to avoid problems with mass media, but assured us that in
that zone, "it was very frequent", specially to see
"apparatuses" (UFOs) at night. In our region, it is the only
case that we could called "Angel Hair", since we do not have
registry of similar events. Lamentably there is no photograph,
but as a description, this is a wide open field, apt for cereal
farming, with some small natural lagoons.

Source: Quique & Mario from La Pampa, Argentina. placed in CEUFO
List (in Spanish).

Very truly yours,

Dr. Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo

Miami UFO Center  (Espaol)   http://ufomiami.nodos.com
Miami UFO Reporter (English)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/1341/index.html
Depredador de Sangre(Espaol)    http://ufomiami.homestead.com/index.html
Hemo Predator (English)  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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                    Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Maly

From: Kevin Maly <kevin_maly@bigfoot.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:08:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:01:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Maly


 >From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:51:33 -0400

<snip>

 >We also have an article from Prof. Charles Moore on radars in
 >New Mexico in 1947 with an assessment of the claims of radar
 >tracking of the Roswell object.

Yes, the problem with Roswell is that there are so many urban
legends, fictional stories and outright lies that everything is
blurred into a mess. This does not invalidate the fact that the
_government_ stated they had a flying saucer. The Air Force did
not have to make any statement at all, but they choose to and
then they retracted that statement. That is what is odd about
this whole situation. The military had just come out of WWII and
was very good at keeping things quiet.

I don't believe that attacking a intelligence officer with a
good service record and character is the answer to this
situation.

Another odd thing is that in the Pentagon investigation into
this matter in the 90's the government admitted to exercises
with strange looking dummies and said this happened in the
1950's, however they say this was because of time compression
that people mistaken this to have happened in 1947.

Yes, people are making millions of dollars from the Roswell
stories that are around, but with every lie there is always a
grain of truth. If there ever was something extra-terrestrial
recovered at Roswell, NM we may never know about it in our
lifetime. But one day the truth will be exposed and hard science
will be the judge of what was recovered in Roswell, NM.

73,

Kevin               AOL IM:KevinMaly
=====================================================
NW Oregon Radio Page http://NWOregonRadio.netfirms.com/
rec_radio_swap Mail List http://NWOregonRadio.netfirms.com/rrs/
PGP 0xDF6BC357 78AD 2366 ED83 EE63 8328  D36D 13F3 DA00 DF6B C357
=====================================================








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

               Cydonian Imperative Update: 'Catbox' Revisited

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:09:36 -0400
Subject: Cydonian Imperative Update: 'Catbox' Revisited


9-21-00

THE CYDONIAN IMPERATIVE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(for illustrated version, please visit

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.html

and select Page 8 from the Journal section.)


NASA's "Enhancement" of the Face on Mars: Deliberate Fraud

by Mac Tonnies


When NASA revealed its first picture of the 'Face on Mars' in
April of 1998, we knew it looked bad. How bad we didn't know
until Mark Carlotto and others produced proper rectifications
that showed that the flat, wavy-looking rendition (now known
near-universally as the 'catbox' photo) actually conformed well
to the Viking data. The Face, newscasters and condescending
headlines to the contrary, was still a face--only now boasting
apparent ornamentation on the 'headpiece', anatomically correct
'nostrils' and lip-like structures around the broad, stoic
'mouth'.

NASA's 1998 release is historic not merely for being the first
attempt to resolve a potential extraterrestrial artifact on the
surface of another world, but in its confusing and substandard
format. Mars-watchers know all-too-well that JPL's press
releases do their best to make Mars look like a temptingly
detailed world, with resolution so fine one can often make out
individual boulders. And well they should; funding for continued
exploration hinges significantly on the public's interest in
space science. (The Mars Observer, the Global Surveyor's failed
predecessor, carried a high-resolution camera included largely
for PR interests; after all, what good are Martian canyons and
volcanoes when the public can't even see them?)

So the 'catbox' stacked anomaly on top of anomaly. Why was the
so-called enhancement so bad? Even those peripherally aware of
the 'Mars Face' controversy knew that the 'Face' was a large
mesa; paradoxically, the 'catbox' made the Face appear utterly
flat, like scratchings in a, well, you know. (Only later would
NASA reveal its second attempt to get the Face right: geologist
T.J. Parker's orthorectification, which warped the Face mesa's
centerline to such a degree that the nostril features appeared
on the Face's far right. This image has gone on to become NASA's
final word on the subject, and publications that feature
Parker's Picasso-esque rendition never fail to exclude any
disclaimer explaining that the "symmetry" evidenced in Parker's
fanciful image is the product of bad computer work.)

NASA sub-contractor Lan Fleming was one of the few that noted
the 'catbox's' deceiving format right away. On his website,
www.vgl.org, he has produced a duplicate of NASA's 'enhancement'
process on a Mississippian Indian Mound, reducing it to the
vague, grainy caricature familiar from NASA's press release. His
recent attempts to replicate NASA's 'enhancement' procedure have
resulted in the following graphic, which shows the spurious
un-face-like image for what it has to be: either gross
incompetence on the part of NASA's otherwise capable image
processors, or a deliberately substandard image designed to kill
interest in an issue that, of NASA's own admission, is
scientifically without merit.

[illustration here]

NASA's very first mention of the Face, upon its discovery in
1976, was founded on error when it was publicly dismissed as a
"trick of light and shadow"--presumably because the Face failed
to register in a second image taken of the Cydonia region "a
couple hours later". Later sleuthing revealed that not only did
such a disconfirming image not even exist, but the Viking
orbiter was in no position to take a second photo "a couple
hours later," being on the other side of the planet at that
time. Indeed, a second confirming frame, 70A13, was later
tracked down by independent researchers Vincent DiPietro and
Gregory Molenaar, ruining the "trick of light" explanation.

In my considered opinion the botched 'catbox' image of the Face
was a deliberate scam to nullify public interest in an object
NASA never considered worth investigating. The evidence for this
position, i.e. that the Face couldn't be an artifact, is a
matter of record, as is the fact that Dr. Mike Malin, the
contractor in charge of the Surveyor's camera, has vented not a
little disgust at being "forced" into taking the allegedly
disconfirming photo in 1998.

Granted that the 'catbox' was a lie, where do we stand? The
public largely swallowed NASA's conclusion that the Face was a
false alarm, despite meaningless reassurances that the agency
held no official opinion on the Face's origin. NASA has
forfeited its chance to engage in research that may ultimately
prove the existence of a previous technological civilization on
Mars. The ball is, after twenty-five years, back in the court of
the independent researchers.

In the words of one NASA employee upon eying JPL's haphazard
photograph, "I hope we've scotched this thing for good."

We can only hope he doesn't speak for all of us.

http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

               Dust Bunny Hunt - In Case Anybody Was Wondering

From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 04:21:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:12:23 -0400
Subject: Dust Bunny Hunt - In Case Anybody Was Wondering


Hi All,

I just received the following from Nick Balaskas. In case
anybody was wondering what ever happened to the dust bunny
experiment, here is a portion of Nick's response note to me that
relates to it.

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

 >Yo Nick!

 >What's up with the dust bunnies?

 >John ;)

Hi John.

Got back to Toronto on September 1 after a month long vacation
to England, Greece and Turkey. I started work again after the
Labour Day weekend on September 5 and expect to be very busy
until September 29. I have set aside a lot of time during the
first two weeks in October to finish the visual examination and
photographic documentation of all the dust samples and I expect
to have a full report for you immediately afterwards.

<snip personal note>

  Nick.
-------------------------------------------------

There it is peeps. As soon as I know, _you_ will know. When I
get the results of his examination of the samples; I will post a
text copy to the UpDates list, and set up a webpage so that
folks can view the photographic documentation that Nick will
generate during his investigation.

Probably because we are both astronomers (he a pro, myself an
avid amateur) we have been speculating privately that the source
of the "glass beads" & other silica oddities that were found in
the original study are probably cosmic in origin but not the ET
kind of "cosmic."

We suspect that the "thing" that generated the kind of heat and
pressures required to turn silica/sand particles into those tiny
spherical and spidery glass particles would be the entry of a
meteor into our atmosphere. In the event that these tiny glass
particles should appear uniformly in the dust samples of both
control groups (abductees/non-abductees) it would kind of
strengthen our theory that these particles are probably
ubiquitous and originate in our own atmosphere. A vaporized
'meteor' would be a good candidate/suspect for the source at
that point. It 'could be' anything. It's just that a meteor
makes sense and should be considered as a source of these weird
blown glass-like particles. But that's just me and Nick shooting
the breeze about it.

If the particles should turn up _only_in the samples submitted
by the (self-professed) abductees, then we've got a whole other
set of problems to confront. Maybe even a scenario or two that
would make those who detest and debunk the ETH shiver in their
boots at the thought of it. <LOL>

Regards to All, and to those who submitted samples, thanx for
your patience.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                       MAGONIA Monthly Supplement #30

From: Mark Pilkington <m.pilkington@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 10:59:52 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:27:03 -0400
Subject: MAGONIA Monthly Supplement #30


MAGONIA Monthly Supplement
Editor: JOHN HARNEY
No. 30   August  2000


EDITORIAL

Reports of people who are said to be highly sensitive to
magnetic fields or electromagnetic radiation are published
occasionally, but I have yet to hear of any such claims being
scientifically tested. A recent report concerns a woman who
"said she suffered from piercing head pains, blurred vision and
nausea every time she went near a computer". It is claimed that
these effects are caused by anything containing a microchip, but
more old-fashioned electric and electronic devices do not affect
her. She said that her doctor told her that "her brain produced
insufficient waves to counteract the modern frequencies emitted
by computers". The doctor also said: "It is so rare people often
dismiss it as a psychological problem, but it is certainly not."

It would surely be quite simple to put such a claim to the test.
All that is needed is to conduct a laboratory experiment in
which the woman is exposed to a device containing microchips,
another device which looks as if it might contain microchips but
doesn't, and a concealed device containing microchips. Similar
experiments could be done to test other people who make similar
claims. I have never heard of such tests being done; all we ever
get is pseudoscientific gobbledegook. I wonder why?


UNDERSTANDING THE PSYCHOSOCIAL HYPOTHESIS

Many critics of the psychosocial hypothesis (PSH) seem to assume
that it purports to explain all UFO reports, but this assumption
is a serious error which leads to much needless (and
meaningless) controversy.

The purpose of the PSH is to strip away the psychological and
mythical elements from reports of alleged UFO incidents, so that
the verifiable facts of any particular case can be laid bare.
What starts as a puzzling sighting, or series of sightings,
often accretes false interpretations drawn from the UFO myths
which have developed since 1947. When such a sighting receives
publicity it attracts hoaxers and fantasists who cause confusion
and make it seem, to the credulous, far more mysterious than it
really is.

The purpose of the PSH is not to attempt to show that unusual
events do not really happen but, by separating fact from
imagination and misinterpretation, to discover the truth about
them. No complicated or controversial psychological theories
need to be employed to do this; common sense is usually
sufficient.

It is important to realise that the PSH was developed in
response to the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH). If the
popular myth of visitations by alien spacecraft did not exist,
it would have been taken for granted that UFO reports were
generated by sightings of unusual aircraft or natural phenomena,
and that the imperfections of human perception and memory could
account for any strange details or inconsistencies in the
reports. No one would seriously suggest UFO sightings as
evidence of alien visitation unless there were compelling
reasons for doing so.

A good example of the difference between the ETH approach and
the PSH approach is the Berwyn Mountain case. A few years ago,
ETH proponents in Britain were putting about stories about this
incident which can briefly be summarised as follows:

On the night of 23 January 1974 a UFO crashed in the Berwyn
Mountains in North Wales. There were strange lights seen in the
sky and a loud explosion was heard. A local nurse, fearing that
there might have been a plane crash, set off up the mountain in
her car, but was turned back by soldiers guarding the area, but
not before she saw the grounded UFO glowing in the distance.
Dead aliens from the saucer were taken by soldiers to Porton
Down in Wiltshire. Local people were closely questioned by a
team of mysterious strangers who moved into the area shortly
after the incident. These and other amazing facts were
discovered by intrepid ufologists, despite efforts by the
authorities to conceal them.

As Andy Roberts was to discover, the true facts were somewhat
different.

(1) Although the incident happened a long time ago there had
been no serious investigation, apart from some ufologists
talking to people who were, or who claimed to be, witnesses and
putting an ETH spin on the stories they were told.

Roberts discovered that the lights in the sky were caused by
exceptionally bright bolides which were seen that evening. There
were at least four of them.

Records kept by astronomers at Leicester University showed that
the timing of one of them coincided with an earth tremor,
accompanied by a sound like an explosion, at 8.30 pm. This earth
tremor was investigated by the British Geological Survey, which
sent a team to the area to question local people about the
event. This accounts for the story of the mysterious strangers.

The nurse did indeed go up the mountain but she did not
encounter anyone there. The story about the military sealing off
part of the mountain probably arose from the fact that witnesses
were questioned many years after the incident and probably
confused it with an incident in 1982 when an RAF Harrier jet
crashed in the area and the crash site was sealed off until the
wreckage was cleared up.

The mysterious lights, thought to be a grounded UFO, turned out
to be lamps powered by car batteries being used by poachers.
There was no independent corroboration of the story of the
aliens being taken to Porton Down, and internal inconsistencies
in the story added to its lack of credibility.

Of course, in unravelling this case, Andy Roberts did not
explicitly employ the PSH, except to suggest that the affair was
"a tangle of belief and wishful thinking". The point I am making
here is that ETH proponents who looked at the story tended to
believe anything which confirmed their beliefs, and showed
little interest in discovering the facts and critically
analysing testimony to sort out reliable reporting from
misinterpretation and fantasy.

Finally, it should be emphasised that the PSH does not purport
to explain anything by itself. It is merely employed to consider
how UFO reports are so easily fitted into a ready-made
mythology. Much is said about the reliabilty or otherwise of
witnesses, but the reliability of ufologists is more important.
A devotion to the ETH inevitably leads to wishful thinking and a
tendency to twist the facts to fit it. On the other hand, the
PSH must not be confused with the extreme sceptical approach,
which discards awkward facts in order to produce simple and
satisfactorily mundane solutions to mysterious occurrences.

Reference
1. Roberts, Andy. "Fire on the Mountain", in Jenny Randles, Andy
Roberts and David Clarke, The UFOs That Never Were, London
House, 2000


LITERARY CRITICISM

Phillip H. Wiebe. Visions of Jesus: Direct Encounters from the
New Testament to Today, Oxford University Press, 1998. �12.99

While portions of this book of are of a chiefly theological
character, there is much in it which should be of interest to
Magonia readers. The core of the study deals with 28 cases of
modern "Christic visions", in which people claim to have had a
vision or other chiefly visual encounter with a figure they
identify as Jesus Christ. These visions have much in common with
the range of visionary material we have been studying, and much
of Wiebe's commentary could apply to those as well.

He classifies the visions into four main categories:

1) those taking place in dream or trance-like states; 2) waking
experiences in which the environment seems to change (what Green
and McCreery called metachoric experiences); 3) those in which
the figure of Jesus is seen as superimposed on the normal
environment; 4) those of a collective character, or which seem
to impact on the environment, i.e. produce physical evidence.
Such a categorisation may be useful for a wider range of
anomalous personal experiences.

Of the four cases of physical evidence mentioned here, three are
essentially bounded by the narrative, i.e. the only evidence for
it is that the narrator says it exists. Two of these were
healings, and one a ground trace identical to those claimed in
UFO reports: deep snow disappeared where Jesus stood, and there
was a 3-foot diameter circle of burned grass. This suggests very
much that we are dealing with a narrative convention in which
anomalies in the environment are incorporated into narratives as
"stigmata of the supernatural" marking places where theophanies
occurred rather than a unique physical phenomenon.

One case of physical evidence involved an alleged film of the
materialisation of Jesus in a Pentecostal church in Oakland,
California, part of an ongoing series of paranormal events
there. Various other people, including Wiebe himself as a
teenager, remember seeing the film, but it comes as no surprise
to Magonians that it is now reported stolen. Memories of the
film differ, and some people who were present when it was shown
do not appear to have any memory of it at all. Is there a
connection here with the newish Fortean experience, memories of
non-existent photographs, like the "Thunderbird" photograph
which has been dealt with at length in Strange Magazine.

The general run of experiences do not look as though they have a
common origin; some seem to relate to dream-like, possibly
narcoleptic and epileptiform states, others fall into the
hypnogogic/hypnopomic category, some within the context of
spiritual crisis and religious conversion, while others have a
strange matter-of-fact quality. Of course it has to be borne in
mind that what we are really dealing with here are personal
memorates of experience, not experience itself, as Wiebe was not
present when any of these events took place. In some cases the
narratives do appear to be part of an established religious
biography, particularly when the narrator is a religious
professional of one sort or another.

Wiebe examines a range of explanations for these experiences,
supernatural, paranormal, psychological and neurological, not
finding any of them truly satisfactory, but suggests that they
may be tentatively interpreted as evidence of the
transcendental. That conclusion he would admit must be a matter
of personal faith, and he hints that such an interpretation
would not necessarily contradict a naturalistic explanation at
the empirical level.

Peter Rogerson


LETTER

I would like to say some words on a certain often repeated
argument that goes: "The results of the Battelle Memorial
Institute study showed that the better the sighting, the more
likely it is to be unexplainable in terms of known phenomena,
hence true UFOs do exist". This study, commissioned by the USAF
in the fifties, found that "excellent" reports contained a
higher percentage of "unknowns" than "poor" reports (besides
"knowns" and "unknowns", there was a separate category for
"insufficient information" reports, so that couldn't be
counted). But can we really draw any conclusion from such
heterogeneous data, such disputable criteria and so many factors
playing their roles?

The usual assumption underlying the argument is: "If there were
no true UFOs, the most reliable cases would have the lowest
percentage of unexplained" I'll try to show that this is
dubious, at best.

The Battelle analysts divided the sightings into reliability
groups, based on the quality, completeness and self-consistency
of the report and upon the quality and experience of the
witness. We can argue about how can this evaluation be
accomplished in practice and about its true relevance, but this
is not the point that I want to make here.

If we focus on the report side of this concept of reliability,
it seems reasonable that the cases considered most reliable are
the least likely to have erroneous data or to be incomplete in
their descriptions and hence should have the least percentage of
unknowns if there were no true UFOs.

But what if we focus on the witness side?

1) We'll assume that the most reliable witnesses are the least
prone to experience misperceptions/misinterpretations that could
lead them to report UFOs.

2) Let's suppose that most, if not all, UFO cases are
explainable, most of them as misperceptions/misinterpretations
(for simplicity's sake, we'll set aside delusions, hoaxes...).

3) The key point is that the most reliable witnesses will report
the least number of cases due to
misperceptions/misinterpretations but those reported will be in
the class of those most difficult to explain, since they are not
easily fooled by most stimuli, at least under normal conditions.

4) Therefore, after the analysis, the group of cases with the
more reliable witnesses will show the larger percentage of
unknowns. Note that in any group of less reliable witnesses,
besides these difficult cases we'll find many cases of
misperceptions/misinterpretations more easily resolvable after
analysis, that will count as knowns, so lowering the percentage
of unknowns.

5) Finally, this trend will also appear in the overall analysis
of cases vs. reliability, since witness reliability is one of
the pillars of the general concept of reliability handled in the
study. Hence we conclude that the cases considered most reliable
should have the higher percentage of unknowns if there were no
true UFOs!

Obviously, this is not to say that the Battelle results prove
that there are no true UFOs. What I intended to show is that
they don't admit a straightforward interpretation as many
ufologists think. I hope the examples below will help to clarify
all this.

Let's start with a group of so-called "reliable witnesses" and
another of average people. Now imagine that individuals from
both groups experience the following situations:

a) At night, in a secluded place, members of a sect perform a
silent procession, holding torches and wearing black clothes.
Casual observers are surprised by strange lights moving in
circle near the ground for some minutes.

b) An unusual red light (in fact, Venus) seems to approach the
witness's plane and keep pace with it for a while before
disappearing at a fantastic speed. Later, the witness will
report a wrong date for the event.

c) Witnesses observe a landed "flying saucer" and, afterwards,
an ascending green light, all arranged by sophisticated
pranksters. Observers in both groups report the three sightings
above as UFOs. Subsequent analysis fails to solve them and they
remain as unknowns.

d) A plane brightly illuminated by the sun makes an odd display
in the twilight sky.

e) A cloud in the upper atmosphere resulting from a ballistic
missile secret test is taken for a mysterious nearby phenomenon
by some observers. Again, witnesses in both groups report these
sightings as UFOs. But this time, subsequent analysis finds the
right explanations.

f) One night, an observer from the "average" group discovers the
hovering lights of a phantom airship. A nearby  reliable
observer recognizes Venus and Jupiter, very close in
conjunction.

g) A yellowish disc follows the car of a witness of the
"average" group for many miles and, finally, it seems to land
behind some trees. Shortly after, a "reliable" observer
experiences the same, but when he stops the car to better
observe he quickly realises he has been watching the moon. In
these two last examples, only observers from the second group
(less reliable observers) report seeing UFOs. Analysis comes up
later with the correct identifications.

To sum up, the resulting proportion of unknowns in the "reliable
witnesses" group is 60% (3 out of 5), while in the "average
witnesses" group it is about 43% (3 out of 7)! Hence, if there
were no true UFOs, the cases with most reliable witnesses would
have the highest percentage unexplained. Manuel Borraz,
Barcelona, Spain


STING IN THE TAIL

The Daily Telegraph has long been noted for its eccentric
readers' letters. Some years ago there was a lengthy
correspondence on the subject of pet flies. Recently there has
been one on the sport of wasp hunting, the object being to trace
the wasp back to its nest. This involves holding the wasp
against a window and tying a length of white cotton round it.
The wasp is then released and, slowed down by the cotton, is
easily followed. Another correspondent suggested it was better
to sprinkle them with flour to make them highly visible. Mr Paul
Carr-Griffin of
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogooch,
expected that the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Wasps
would ask the Government to ban the sport. (I am not making this
up - Ed.)


MAGONIA Monthly Supplement. Letters and short articles welcome.
Letters will be considered for publication unless otherwise
indicated. Please send all contributions to the Editor: John
Harney,   e-mail (plain text, please)
harney@harneyj.freeserve.co.uk

--
Mark Pilkington             m.pilkington@virgin.net
----------------------------------------------------------
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk : Magonia online


"The blood is the life, but electricity is the life of the blood."
Dr Carter Moffat, 1892








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

              Dr. Bruce Maccabee On Irc Chat Tonight - 9/22/00

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 09:11:53 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:29:55 -0400
Subject: Dr. Bruce Maccabee On Irc Chat Tonight - 9/22/00


UFO Research List - http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/

Just a quick reminder to everyone that Dr. Bruce Maccabee will
be the guest speaker for a special question and answer session
on the IRC Undernet channel #chariots tonight, Friday, September
22, 2000, at 10 PM EDT, 9 PM CDT, 8 PM MDT, 7 PM PDT.

For those who don't already use IRC as a method of real-time
communication over the Internet, you can access #chariots by
clicking on the link provided on my home page at:

http://www.jilain.com

Just remember that on Undernet, a nickname cannot be more than 9
characters, and if a nickname is already in use, you will get a
notice to that effect. If that happens, make up another nickname
and try again.

We look forward to seeing everyone there for this special
program with Dr. Maccabee. He will be answering YOUR questions,
so don't blow this chance. Be there!!

Bobbie

Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
   --->backwoods of Mississippi
   --->USA
   --->planet Earth
   --->somewhere in the cosmos

http://www.jilain.com
http://www.ufo-nexxus.org
IRC Undernet #chariots
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 >
   Sep > Sep 22

               Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False

From: Sue Strickland <strick@H2Net.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 09:16:38 -0600
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:35:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:40:14 -0400
 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories

 >September 19, 2000

 >Brain-Updating Machinery May Explain False Memories
 >By Sandra Blakeslee

 >http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/19/science/19MEMO.html

 >Scientists may have found a biological reason to explain why two
 >people who witness the same event will, years later, often have
 >different memories of what happened.

 >It seems that every time an old memory is pulled into
 >consciousness, the brain takes it apart, updates it and then
 >makes new proteins in the process of putting the memory back
 >into long-term storage. The fact that new proteins are made
 >means that the memory has been transformed permanently to
 >reflect each person's life experiences - not the memory itself.

 >The finding is based on research involving a specific kind of
 >fear memory in animals, but many experts predict that it may
 >also hold true for other kinds of memories in humans. They also
 >say that the discovery could lead to ways of altering or erasing
 >people's memories.

 >The research, carried out at the Center for Neural Science at
 >New York University, was described in the Aug. 17 issue of the
 >journal Nature. This is the first good neurobiological
 >explanation of the way memories are updated, said Dr. Daniel
 >Schacter, a Harvard psychology professor and a memory expert.
 >"It's a mistake to think that once you record a memory, it is
 >forever fixed," he said.

 >Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who studies memory at the
 >University of Washington in Seattle, said: "This is very
 >interesting research. We're on the brink of being able to figure
 >out how you might accomplish something like memory engineering."

 >It may be possible to erase traumatic memories in people who are
 >plagued by them, she said, and to better understand how false
 >memories are implanted into people's minds when they are given
 >suggestions that they want to believe.

 >It has been known for at least 100 years that newly formed
 >memories are initially unstable, said Dr. Yadin Dudai, a
 >neurobiologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot,
 >Israel. A bump on the head, an electric shock or certain drugs
 >can disrupt the process that gradually turns short-term memories
 >into long-term memories through the production of new
 >connections and protein synthesis in memory circuits.

 >In the 1960's, researchers showed that certain drugs could
 >interfere with the recall of memories, he said, but the research
 >did not get very far because the drugs affected the entire brain
 >and could not be traced to cellular mechanisms in memory
 >networks.

 >Dr. Karim Nader and Dr. Glenn Shafe, research assistant
 >professors at N.Y.U., carried out the new experiments on memory
 >recall in ways that reveal those cellular mechanisms with much
 >greater precision. In a process called fear conditioning, they
 >simultaneously played a tone and delivered an electric shock to
 >the feet of caged rats. Later, when the rats heard just the
 >tone, they froze; they had learned to be afraid.


Dear Listers,

This article is most interesting to me, especially since I am an
ex-abductee.

I have been concerned that what I remember and relate is
factual... as best as I can consciously recall. I have tried to
avoid exaggeration, in the form of embellishment of any sort.
And, I have often wondered if my memories were "correct" simply
because the fear factor was so intense (most of the time) when
encounters did occur, and because the memories I have are so
very detailed.

For example, if you ask me what I dreamt 2 weeks after the fact,
I would not be able to tell you, unless I had written that dream
down in a journal the morning after or very shortly thereafter.

I have always wondered why the experiences (which I labeled
"dreams" for so long) were so vivid, while other "dreams" went
unrecalled or vague. The fear factor along with the accompanying
pain reinforced the "dream" experiences.

Through the years, recall is much less traumatic (violent
chills, accompanied simultaneously by the hair standing up
straight on the back of my neck and on my arms).

That partial relaxation may be due in part to the fact that I
have not experienced any long-term "visits" for many years. But,
I can safely say that _if_ such should occur again, my reactions
will probably be the same. I guess that indicates that I am a
"slow learner."

Even my (now) blind dog jumps 3' into the air from a standing
position after smelling a snake, whether alive or dead, due to
his past encounter with a snake. I guess I shouldn't expect less
of myself where ETs are concerned.

Sincerely,

Sue Strickland









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                        Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:11:45 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:42:20 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Balaskas


 >From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:38:03 -0400
 >Subject: 'Angel Hair'?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >http://www.homestead.com/rustys_retreat/spiderstuff.html

<snip>

 >This is a special page I made so I could show you what I woke up
 >to this morning. First though I must tell you exactly the events
 >as they happened as I remember them.

<snip>

 >If Anyone has any idea of what this stuff is please let me know.
 >Any feedback will be most appreciated.

Hi Rusty,

As you first assumed, I think what you saw were indeed spider
webs observed under unusual conditions. With the coming of Fall
weather, the morning temperatures can be low enough for dew to
condense on cold outdoor surfaces. Fine spider webs which are
normally not very noticeable to humans (or bugs), would then
stand out in the bright sunlight when they are saturated with
the early morning dew. They would also seem to dissolve and
disappear when one tried to collect these fine water saturated
spider webs.

If this alleged 'Angel Hair' did fall from the sky, then one would
expect it to be fairly evenly distributed on the earth. Although
I can see a fairly uniform distribution of high density Angel
Hair patches on the grass and the bushes, I did not notice any
on the branches of the many trees which would suggest that they
did not drop from above. Also, one closeup photo of a patch of
'Angel Hair' on the grass looks very much like a spider web which
is anchored to several surrounding blades of grass.

Since the size of the blades of grass in your yard suggest that
it has been a while since you last cut them, if your neighbours
cut their grass more recently, this would explain why some of
would have few 'Angel Hair' patches on their yards since it
would take time for the spiders to rebuild their webs, if at
all.

Never-the-less, the above is only the opinion which I derived
from what I observed in your photos. If you have not been able
to find someone to examine the 'Angel Hair' samples you have
collected, I would be happy to arrange for some appropriate lab
to examine them here [York University - Toronto --ebk]. I would
suggest that they also look for evidence of fine spider web
fibers on the gloves you used to collect your samples (not the
paper towels, since their fibers could be mistaken for spider
web fibers).

As for the sounds you heard coming form the sky on the night
before, this is more of a mystery to me, even if there is no
direct connection to the 'Angel Hair' you photographed the
following morning.

Nick Balaskas








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:05:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

<snip>

 >The topic of UFO models -- the model first brought to him to
 >photograph and compare with the real thing in his photos, and
 >the one Wendelle had a studio make and hen tested out, using
 >Meier's own camera, and another -- was looked into thoroughly by
 >Wendelle Stevens and reported upon in his 1982 book. I believe
 >that Wendelle's crew "discovered" the models, not UV. Meier
 >never denied the existence of these models, and his photos speak
 >for themselves, especially the ones where Semjase posed her
 >beamship on all sides of a tree for Meier to photograph on 9
 >July, 1975. I now have several of those displayed in the front
 >page of my website, since from them two Forestry experts at
 >Oregon State Univ. easily concluded the tree in question was a
 >mature abies alba (European silver fir). Hence it was no model
 >tree or baby tree. (This much can be concluded from photos that
 >are not 1st or 2nd generation.)

<snip>

Hi, Jim...

With all due respect, the tree in the photo is a model. Unless,
of course, natural trees are capable of turning 90 to 180
degrees while still in the ground.

If you look closely at the photos, you will quite plainly see
that the backgound changes to a different view while the side of
the tree facing the camera never changes. This is because the
model of the ship is attached to the tree. Beyond that, the
forestry experts are wrong. It isn't even a real tree. My mom
has one just like it on a shelf at her house. She bought it at a
TG&Y five and dime about 20 years ago along with a bunch of silk
plants. It even has the same branch pattern. I'll see if I can
borrow it and post a picture for the List.

Believe me, you don't need a 1st or 2nd generation photo to tell
these things are not real. Plants do not spin in the ground and
spaceships do not need to "hug" a tree.

Use common sense when you look at these photos and you'll see
what I mean.

Take care,

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                    Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:01:08 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:24:05 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Evans


 >From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:35:45 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:09:50 -0400
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans


 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:36:53 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, I wrote:

 >Without starting a CSETI debate, let me again point out that
 >communcation is a two way street. It doesn't matter what form of
 >communication that an advanced race uses to talk to each other,
 >be it thought-beams, laserlight, microwave, sign language, morse
 >code or whatever. What is important is what they decide to use
 >to communicate with US.

Roger replied:

 >I think the likelihood of an ET visitor wanting to chat with us
 >Earthlings is as likely as you or me trying to chat with some
 >cannabalistic natives. I wouldn't know why anybody would do this
 >either. But, it's more likely that surveillance from a safe
 >distance would occur.

Roger, Roger!

You may very well be right. Why _would_ anyone out there want to
talk to us? However, my point is that if they do, then they're
smart enough to know that it's easier for them to adopt our
primitive communication techniques than for us to adopt theirs.
This may very well mean that they _would_ use RF since that's
what we use. Why come all this way and make it harder than
necessary. After all, if RF is so primitive, then the technology
shouldn't be beyond them.

However, I am going to back out of this thread. I don't want to
muddy the waters by starting a CSETI debate when Roy originally
asked a completely different question regarding flashing lights
and claims by contactees. Sorry for the detour, Roy.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming....

Roger and out.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                         Remote Viewers: Target EL-6

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:51:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:04:18 -0400
Subject: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6


Did anyone happen to catch Dick Allgire on Coast to Coast? These
guys are amazing... one caller asked if Allgire could see the
outcome of the current Presidential election and this guy said
he couldn't because there were "too many variables." What? So
let's see here, Ed Dames can remote view Satan, can remote view
the Hale-Flop companion, these guys claim they could remote view
the Kennedy assasination and can remote view alien planets - but
can't even give the outcome of an election? Didn't Dames claim
Psi-Tech was 100% accurate?

Another thing: Ed Dames can use his astounding remote viewing
capabilities to tell cops in Coquille, Oregon that a missing
teen they're looking for is dead but can't give them any details
regarding the murder suspect? Dames is more than capable of
lying about his involvement with the police. That seems to be
the only truly astounding capability Dames does actually have -
he can lie like no other.

Okay, time for a little experiment here: I am going to designate
a target as EL-6. This is your target to remote view. Tell me
what it is and you can have it! What say there Dames? This
should be far too simple of an exercise for such an advanced
remote viewer as yourself. This should be no problem for guys
that can see distant alien worlds near the hubble telescope...

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 (This may turn into just
UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded it...again!
Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:06:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 ><snip>


Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
believes in it is needs some serious help...


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
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded
it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                           UFO Images From The UK

From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:03:52 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:08:46 -0400
Subject: UFO Images From The UK


Hello

I recently received some images from someone in the UK. The UFO
appears to be very similar to the Haines Vancouver Island case.
I do not vouch for authenticity, just wanted to share what I
have received. Too large to impose directly thru the mail, so if
interested go to the "Want to see a UFO?" Section at UFO
Folklore!

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

They are under the Year 2000 section and the link is called
UFOs from the UK

There you have it

Enjoy,

Dan






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                      Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away

From: Daniel Muoz <Ovnimexico1@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:06:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:17:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Walt Andrus' Wife Passes Away


 From Mexico, Jaime Maussan and I would like to transmit our
condolences to Walter.

Our best thoughts and wishes are with you, and our prayers with
Jeanne, Walt. Finally she will know the truth...

Sincerily,

Daniel Muoz






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:21:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:19:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >Hi, Jim...

 >With all due respect, the tree in the photo is a model. Unless,
 >of course, natural trees are capable of turning 90 to 180
 >degrees while still in the ground.
 >If you look closely at the photos, you will quite plainly see
 >that the backgound changes to a different view while the side of
 >the tree facing the camera never changes. This is because the
 >model of the ship is attached to the tree. Beyond that, the
 >forestry experts are wrong.

Hello Roger,

With all due respect in turn, when one views a tree from
different angles and sees different limbs sticking out of its
left & right sides, a rational person doesn't then conclude it's
a model tree. Just because Korff in his book claims it was a
model that was rotated for some of its views, doesn't mean that
we have to fall for it when an ordinary examination refutes his
claim.

(I guess it's OK with the rest of the List to discuss a bit of
nitty gritty here, if one can discuss pelicans and lighthouses!)

That tree had a significant gap of limbs on one side near its
top, sufficient to show up over a range of a good 180 degrees
change in view. Look at photo #65, which shows the different
background of snow-spotted hills (it's the 4th photo from the
left in the array of 7 photos of it in my website's main page),
and compare it with several of the others that don't, say with
the 2nd photo on the left (I believe that's Meier's #66). That
upper gap of limbs on the left in #65 has a different detailed
profile from that of #66, while on the right, not quite as far
up the tree, there's a prominent limb sticking out with
prominent off-shoots, not present in #66 or the others. Also,
the rest of the tree's outline is all different in its finer
detail when the altered background is present.

I think it's that large upper gap that has fooled you, if it's
not Korff that's done it. Close your eyes until everything's
blurry and you can barely see the gap, then your conclusion
could be forthcoming. But open them and look closely, and you'll
see that the details all differ. Thus it was no model, rotated.
(The devil is in the details.)

Notice the tree's trunk in photo #66. It shows a couple gnarled
protrusions indicating limbs had once grown out there, and
subsequently got broken off or pruned off with the bark growing
over. This is clearer from the enlargement shown on p. 64 of Lee
& Brit Elders' Vol. II pictorial album. Thus it was no model.

If it had been a model tree, the bare trunk, which extends up
some 20% of the tree's height in the photo, would have been
obscured by the meadow grass that itself extends up some 3 feet
by mid July. Hence, it was no model.

And you might glance at the 1st photo on the left in the
website's series of 7; it's #57. It shows branches of a tree on
the right that's up fairly close to the camera. It's blurry, as
expected, in comparison with the more distant abies-alba tree
with its posing beamship. Hence it was no model tree with a
model UFO close to the camera. (Stevens found that the focus of
Meier's camera had been stuck on a setting just one notch short
of the infinity setting. Korff accepted this much.)

Jim Deardorff

http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

                          UFO Scotland Changes URL

From: Dave Ledger <dledger@igclick.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:22:14 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:23:20 -0400
Subject: UFO Scotland Changes URL


Dear Errol & List members,

Just a quick note to inform you all that the UFO Scotland
website at the address:

http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/dledger

is no longer online and the new address for the UFO Scotland
database and substantial UFO video collection, can be found at:

http://www.ufoscotland.co.uk

If any members have any current links to the old site, it would
be appreciated if you could ammend them to the new address.

Many thanks in advance and best wishes to everyone,

 From your friend,

Dave Ledger (UFO Scotland)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 22

               Limited X-PPAC Media Update - Background Only -

From: Steven G. Bassett <ExPPAC@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:29:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:29:38 -0400
Subject: Limited X-PPAC Media Update - Background Only -


X-PPAC
Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee
        _______________

X-PPAC Update - September 22, 2000

Politics of Disclosure Town Hall Meeting

X-PPAC, in cooperation with numerous cosponsors, is in the
process of setting up the first campaign related Town Hall
Meeting in history where national candidates would engage in
unscripted Q&A addressing the Politics of UFOs/Dislosure.
National media coverage is assured.

A formal announcement along with coast to coast advance media
saturation awaits only the fixing of a date which will be
sometime during the first two weeks of October.

Negotiations have taken place with seven presidential campaigns
and three California Senate campaign. All aspects of production
and financing have been addressed.

You may follow the fast-paced development of this project
at this webpage:

http://www.x-ppac.org/TownHall.html


Donations

A major election is underway. National and international
developments addressing the politics of disclosure have taken
place. Now is the time for those who care about the process and
outcome of history to step to the plate.

If each person on this update list were to donate $10 to
X-PPAC right now, the entire cost of the Town Hall would
be covered in full. If each person on the list were to
donate $100, full page ads in the Washington Post and
the San Francisco Chronicle could be placed to appear
the day of the Town Hall directly engaging the key issues
of disclosure and cover-up. A media frenzy would result.

X-PPAC is ready and willing to do its part to resolve the
political deadlock that has held this issue hostage for 50
years. All it needs is your support.

Contributions payable to: X-PPAC
           4938 Hampden Lane, #161
           Bethesda, MD 20814

Secure credit card contributions at:
      http://www.x-ppac.org/Contribute.html

Only individuals or other PAC's may contribute
$5000 limit per year per person
U.S. citizens and Green Card holders only

_______________________________________________

  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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                     Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked?

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:30:57 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:03:07 -0400
Subject: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked?


Did anyone catch Coast to Coast last night when Siegel said that
someone had hacked into Ghostfraud and Hoaxland's website for
their 'conference'? Siegel said someone had posted something
else and I'm interested in knowing what was put up - the site is
now fixed.


Any help is appreciated, thanks!

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
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:39:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:04:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
 >and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
 >blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
 >the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
 >instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
 >stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
 >believes in it is needs some serious help...

 >Regards,

 >Royce J. Myers III


Royce,

Yes, that's the Berg-Rumlikon sequence of 12 June, 1975. Have
you ever read witnesses' accounts of the "Oz" effect? Suddenly
no animal or bird sounds, no wind. This film shows this UFO
phenomenon in operation. Meier described it to his interviewers
while the film was being replayed and video-taped, back around
1980(?) or so. It commenced when the beamship  suddenly
disappeared and ceased when it reappeared a half minute or so
later. Of course, he didn't call it the Oz effect -- I don't
think Jenny had described it and named it that until later --
and Meier wasn't then reading a lot of UFO books.

This "film" is a video of a copy of 7 segments of original film
Meier took on 7 occasions that were spliced together, which
Meier had loaned out to a studio in Munich. He received what he
thought was the same film back only after prodding them for
several months. It was Stevens who later discovered it was only
a copy, and not the original Meier had sent them. Meier found
that they had cut out sections here and there and respliced it.
But according to Meier, this particular sequence had not been
cut and spliced by them (or by him).

Perhaps someone can point out the date of the first book
reference to the Oz effect that he knows of.

Jim D.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:06:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:21:53 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:19:01 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously I wrote:

 >>With all due respect, the tree in the photo is a model. Unless,
 >>of course, natural trees are capable of turning 90 to 180
 >>degrees while still in the ground.
 >>If you look closely at the photos, you will quite plainly see
 >>that the backgound changes to a different view while the side of
 >>the tree facing the camera never changes. This is because the
 >>model of the ship is attached to the tree. Beyond that, the
 >>forestry experts are wrong.

Jim replied:

 >I think it's that large upper gap that has fooled you, if it's
 >not Korff that's done it. Close your eyes until everything's
 >blurry and you can barely see the gap, then your conclusion
 >could be forthcoming. But open them and look closely, and you'll
 >see that the details all differ. Thus it was no model, rotated.
 >(The devil is in the details.)

Hi Jim.

I have looked at the photos and stand by my observations. The
tree turns. If you want to interpret the details a different
way, so be it. I do not see the things you do.

Moving on, Jim wrote:

 >And you might glance at the 1st photo on the left in the
 >website's series of 7; it's #57. It shows branches of a tree on
 >the right that's up fairly close to the camera. It's blurry, as
 >expected, in comparison with the more distant abies-alba tree
 >with its posing beamship. Hence it was no model tree with a
 >model UFO close to the camera. (Stevens found that the focus of
 >Meier's camera had been stuck on a setting just one notch short
 >of the infinity setting. Korff accepted this much.)

I could care less about Korff. He means nothing to me. The
simple truth is that optical mechanics dictates that you can't
have it both ways.

On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
closer!

However, the branches close to the camera are out of focus. This
would be impossible if the camera suffered from the malady you
suggest. They would be razor sharp and the background would be
out of focus. As you have pointed out, the opposite is true.

More to the point, even if a camera were unable to focus to
infinity wide open, the inherent depth of field gained by
closing down the aperture (as necessary when shooting in the
sunlight) will always overcome the infinity focus shortfall. The
reason is that depth of field increases at the rear of the lens
as well as the front when you close down the aperture (this is
known as back-focus gain).

What does this all mean? It means that there was nothing wrong
with the camera at all. (Actually, if I wanted to shoot a model
up close, a camera that had the defect you describe would be
ideal, but not necessary.)

As I said earlier, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim
that the camera won't focus to infinity and NOT focus up close
either! It has to be one or the other.

The photo is a fake.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                    Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 03:40:30 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:08:48 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Hale


 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:35:45 -0400
 >From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >I think the likelihood of an ET visitor wanting to chat with us
 >Earthlings is as likely as you or me trying to chat with some
 >cannabalistic natives. I wouldn't know why anybody would do this
 >either. But, it's more likely that surveillance from a safe
 >distance would occur.

 >Roger


Hi Roger and all,

A quick question concerning the actions displayed by UFOs
refereed to in my mail and in reference to the above statement.

REF: Alagash Incident:

After the guys flashed the UFO, whilst in their boat, and the
object flashed back' how do we make out what the next part of
the experience was, when they were apparently taken on board for
some kind of examination by beings?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                       Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Rutherford

From: Retha Rutherford <rusty@mountain.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 22:38:51 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:12:45 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Rutherford


[Non-subscriber Post]

 >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'?
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:05:30 -0700

 >>From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:38:03 -0400
 >>Subject: 'Angel Hair'?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>If Anyone has any idea of what this stuff is please let me know.
 >>Any feedback will be most appreciated.

 ><snip>

 >>[The pictures _are_ interesting. --ebk]

 >I agree; this is a strange phenomenon. But "angel hair" has been
 >reported under similar circumstances. In 1955, M.K Jessup
 >published a book called 'The UFO Annual'; it contained UFO
 >reports from all across the USA for that year. It is quite a
 >remarkable book but I doubt that listfolk are familiar with it.

 >One of my favorite reports in the collection is an occurrence
 >that took place Oct. 22nd., 1955, fifteen miles northwest of
 >Columbus Ohio. It was a clear day, and students at Jerome
 >Elementary School were playing outside when they all spotted an
 >object circling high above the school. Most teachers and the
 >principal saw the craft.

 >It was "cigar shaped" and "dazzling" bright and "motionless". As
 >they all watched, the object took off at "tremendous" speed.

 >What they witnessed next was a most "beautiful scene".

 >"The air as high and far around as the teachers could see was
 >filled with the most beautiful soft white looking tufts of
 >cotton slowly floating to the ground."

<snip>

Hello

Strange that you mentioned the story because I just received an
email from someone who lives about 15 miles away from me who
saw a cigar-shaped object at the same time I heard the Droning
sound.

About a third of all the feedback I am getting tells me that
this stuff is UFO related.

Rusty








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                   Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 23:33:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:26:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Gates


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:51:56 -0700

 >Did anyone happen to catch Dick Allgire on Coast to Coast? These
 >guys are amazing... one caller asked if Allgire could see the
 >outcome of the current Presidential election and this guy said
 >he couldn't because there were "too many variables." What? So
 >let's see here, Ed Dames can remote view Satan, can remote view

So was Satan a Democrat, Republican, or Independent? Inquring
minds are waiting breathlessly for the revelations from the
RV'ers.

 >the Hale-Flop companion, these guys claim they could remote view
 >the Kennedy assasination and can remote view alien planets - but
 >can't even give the outcome of an election? Didn't Dames claim
 >Psi-Tech was 100% accurate?

Wasn't it Dames who claimed to have RV'ed a underground Martian
colony in New Mexico? Perhaps it was Brown.

<snip>

 >Okay, time for a little experiment here: I am going to designate
 >a target as EL-6. This is your target to remote view. Tell me
 >what it is and you can have it! What say there Dames? This
 >should be far too simple of an exercise for such an advanced
 >remote viewer as yourself. This should be no problem for guys
 >that can see distant alien worlds near the hubble telescope...

What you should have done is have somebody you know in the Dept
call Dames up and tell him they are working on a puzzling case
and the only thing left at the scene is/was a piece of paper
with Mars EL - 6 or whatever on it.

Two things. If Dames is the 100 percent accurate RV'er that it
is claimed, he would no fairly soon their was no scene with a
piece of paper with Target EL - 6 on it. You merely wait a month
until Dames is crowing all of Hoax-to-Hoax (sorry Coast to
Coast) how he helped RV this crime scene with a mysterious piece
of paper etc etc. Who knows, you never know what he may come up
with :)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                 Gere To Star In Movie On Mothman Prophecies

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 06:09:11 +0200
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:29:14 -0400
Subject: Gere To Star In Movie On Mothman Prophecies


Source: Sci Fi Wire, a news service of the Sci Fi Channel. URL:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2000-09/22/11.00.film

Stig

***

Updated 3:47pm ET on 22-September-2000

9:00am ET, 22-September-00

Gere Drawn To Mothman

**

Richard Gere will star in Mothman Prophecies, an SF movie to be
directed by Mark Pellington (Arlington Road), according to The
Hollywood Reporter. The Lakeshore Entertainment project is
slated to begin production in January.

Mothman tells the story of a newspaper reporter (Gere) who
leaves his job after his wife dies to find out about a series of
strange events in a small town. He discovers that the events
might point to an alien visitation, the trade paper reported.

The movie is based on John Keel's account of his investigation
of UFO reports around Point Pleasant, W.Va., during the late
1960s, the trade paper reported. Richard Hatem wrote the
original screenplay; Becky Johnston wrote the most current
draft.

*

� Copyright 1997-2000, Sci Fi. 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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                   Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:38:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:32:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page - Aldrich


 >From: Kevin Maly <kevin_maly@bigfoot.com>
 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:08:56 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Project 1947 Roswell Page

 >>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Project 1947 Roswell Page
 >>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:51:33 -0400

<snip>

 >>We also have an article from Prof. Charles Moore on radars in
 >>New Mexico in 1947 with an assessment of the claims of radar
 >>tracking of the Roswell object.

 >Yes, the problem with Roswell is that there are so many urban
 >legends, fictional stories and outright lies that everything is
 >blurred into a mess. This does not invalidate the fact that the
 >_government_ stated they had a flying saucer.

What exactly is a flying saucer in the context of 8 July 1947
journalism? That the newspapers said RAAF captured a flying
disc, did not mean they had an ET spaceship... as pointed out in
my article "flying disc" and "flying saucer" had not taken on
any particular meaning at that time.

Flying discs, were taken to be spots in front of the eyes, the
Navy's flying flapjack, balloons, and any of a score of other
things. During the 1947 wave dozens of "flying discs" were
brought in to newspaper offices, police stations, etc. In Idaho,
New York, California, Texas, Florida, Missouri, Pennsylvania,
Connecticut, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Louisiana,
etc., newspapers announced that people had found flying saucers
or flying discs. These all turned out to be ordinary things,
airplane parts, models, hoax items, kites, weather balloons,
etc., but the names flying saucers or flying discs were applied
to all of them.

 >The Air Force did
 >not have to make any statement at all, but they choose to and
 >then they retracted that statement. That is what is odd about
 >this whole situation. The military had just come out of WWII and
 >was very good at keeping things quiet.

 >I don't believe that attacking a intelligence officer with a
 >good service record and character is the answer to this
 >situation.

 >Another odd thing is that in the Pentagon investigation into
 >this matter in the 90's the government admitted to exercises
 >with strange looking dummies and said this happened in the
 >1950's, however they say this was because of time>compression
 >that people mistaken this to have happened in 1947.

I don't think anyone, but a few members of the Air Force and
press ever took this last one seriously. However, the USAF and
other agencies now can answer the hundreds of FOIAs with this
report. Anyone who has seen the color videos of thses tests
would have to laugh at this answer, dummies in traffic orange
falling from the sky certainly don't fit the bill.

 >Yes, people are making millions of dollars from the Roswell
 >stories that are around, but with every lie there is always a
 >grain of truth. If there ever was something extra-terrestrial
 >recovered at Roswell, NM we may never know about it in our
 >lifetime. But one day the truth will be exposed and hard science
 >will be the judge of what was recovered in Roswell, NM.

 >73,

 >Kevin AOL IM:KevinMaly


The whole point of posting this material was because a good deal
was unavailable on the web, was new and/or came from Project
1947 research.

The idea of Project 1947 was to research the 1947 wave and
report back on what was found, good, bad or indifferent. A lot
of Roswell material is collected here for the first time. The
two main autenticated official documents are here in one place
on the web, the FBI cable and the RAAF history.

More, especially on records research, will be posted later.

Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.project1947.com/
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331, USA
(860) 546-9135








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:34:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire


 >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:44:29 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 09:39:02 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >>>Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >>>brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >>What are the chances that this could be a sprite, or one of the
 >>other new kinds of lighting discharges recently discovered?

 >Don't know much about sprites except that they appear to be very
 >brief discharges upward from the tops of clouds. Lightning
 >strikes are very brief (milliseconds to tenths of seconds
 >generally). The anomalous object seen by RJC was, according to
 >his reportm, stationary under the anvil of a T-storm for several
 >minutes at least.

 >Phil's guess a "bal lightning" is as good as any conventional
 >explanation... except that this object goes far beyond
 >"conventional" ball lightning (for which there is no real
 >explanation but at least there is general admission that it is a
 >real phenomenon). Conventional BL sizes are less than a meter
 >and generall less than 10 cm.

An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
meteors' located at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

Very well worth the read.


Todd Lemire
Michigan UFO CENTRAL
http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                       Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:29:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:36:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:51:56 -0700

 >Did anyone happen to catch Dick Allgire on Coast to Coast? These
 >guys are amazing... one caller asked if Allgire could see the
 >outcome of the current Presidential election and this guy said
 >he couldn't because there were "too many variables." What? So
 >let's see here, Ed Dames can remote view Satan, can remote view
 >the Hale-Flop companion, these guys claim they could remote view
 >the Kennedy assasination and can remote view alien planets - but
 >can't even give the outcome of an election? Didn't Dames claim
 >Psi-Tech was 100% accurate?

 >Another thing: Ed Dames can use his astounding remote viewing
 >capabilities to tell cops in Coquille, Oregon that a missing
 >teen they're looking for is dead but can't give them any details
 >regarding the murder suspect? Dames is more than capable of
 >lying about his involvement with the police. That seems to be
 >the only truly astounding capability Dames does actually have -
 >he can lie like no other.

 >Okay, time for a little experiment here: I am going to designate
 >a target as EL-6. This is your target to remote view. Tell me
 >what it is and you can have it! What say there Dames? This
 >should be far too simple of an exercise for such an advanced
 >remote viewer as yourself. This should be no problem for guys
 >that can see distant alien worlds near the hubble telescope...

 >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 (This may turn into just
 >UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded it...again!
 >Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)


Dear Royce:

Ed Dames is probably not on this List, so let me give it a stab!

[eerie music softly rises...]

I see a white box... big box standing up on end. No, its not a
box, its a, a a refrigerator!

Wait, there more. Inside the box there's some, ah, milk and
stale veggies .. and lots of... ah... soda pop? No its not
sodas, its .. its beer!

Yes! That's it, a fridge full of beer.

The EL comes from Electric (appliance) and the 6 comes from
six-packs!

OK Royce! Am I good or what? No fair changing the target to to a
tree or something that won't keep the beer cold.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

PS: Your turn! Try to remote view EL-12.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:36:21 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:41:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch


 >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims [was: The Meier Hoax]

 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 02:25:15 -0700
 >>Subject: The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?]
 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel - Underground Video <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:54:04 -0700
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

 >>>>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>>>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700

 >>I have never entered an online forum before. Please excuse me
 >>if I am doing so now improperly. I couldn't resist making a
 >>response when I read Jim Deardorff's statement concerning
 >>the authenticity of the Billy Meier case. Readers of the List
 >>may wish to consider the following comments and findings.

 >>James Deardorff said:

 >>>There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
 >>>just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
 >>>supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
 >>>debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
 >>>of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc.

<snip>

 >>With the assistance of members from the Hollywood special
 >>effects team of the Ultra-Matrix Corporation, we studied the
 >>Meier photographs and claims made by Meier's Talmud Jmmanuel,
 >>Genesis III Publishing, author Gary Kinder,and Guido Mooseburger
 >>of Meier's FIGU cult in Switzerland. After 6 months of intense
 >>inquiry, with the assistance of cinematographers, physicists,
 >>and computer analysis from Total Research, we found the claims
 >>of the representatives of the Meier case to be absolutely
 >>untrue. ... [ Nathan Daniel ]

 >Nathan,

 >I believe we've all heard most of this before, via Kal Korff
 >(TotalResearch) and then others who fell for his claims. Korff's
 >false claims have been thoroughly refuted, with many of his key
 >falsehoods, distortions, irrelevancies and innuendo having been
 >posted on a website of Jeroen Jansen to which my website linked
 >(http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj ). But I see now that my link
 >to this is no longer current. I'll let you know if I find
 >there's a current URL for it.

 >A thorough refutation of Korff's claims against the Talmud of
 >Jmmanuel is in my website, however. To read it, go to:

 >http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/refutekk.htm

<snip>

 >.. Meier never denied the existence of these models, and his
 >photos speak for themselves, especially the ones where Semjase
 >posed her beamship on all sides of a tree for Meier to
 >photograph on 9 July, 1975.

<snip>

Please pardon this intrusion, I wasn't really up to speed on
"Semjase". I found this website on a quick browse:

  http://www.figu.ch/us/plej/semjase.htm

.. a page that answers the question " Who is Semjase? " with the
following. (There's a nice line drawing too) Please forgive the
length of this quotation:

"Semjase is a 350 years old (1996) woman. She is the
  daughter of JHWH Ptaah, commander of the Pleiadian /
  Plejaran space fleet. JHWH (pronounced: ish-wish) is a
  rank and means - translated into terrestrial languages -
  "king of wisdom". (An JHWH possesses the highest degree
  of spiritual knowledge and wisdom among the peoples of
  the Plejadian/Plejaran federation.) "


Note: Yahweh was the ancient Hebrew name for God,
usually spelled something like YHWH since written Hebrew
consists of consonants only, dropping the implied vowels.

More on Semjase from the same web page:

"Semjase carries the rank of an ELO-JSCHRJSCH, a "demi-
  queen of wisdom". (According to Pleiadian/Plejaran
  understanding the rank JHWH alias "king" has nothing to do
  with a hierarchy; it stands for a spiritual and
  consciousness- related level of evolution. Semjase,
  granddaughter of Sfath, with whom Billy [Meier] had his
  first contact, has a brother called Yucatan. "

  Semjase was once married for only 7 years. About 220 years
  ago her husband lost his life when - on a foreign galaxy
  research expedition - his spaceship had a control damage
  and crashed into a sun."


I think that's enough for now. (see website link above)

Here's my question:

Jim: Minor inaccuracies aside, do you think that this is a fair
description of Semjase?

Do you think this is the same Semjase that posed her space-ships
on or about 9 July, 1975, so Billy Meier could take some
pictures?

Just curious.

- 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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:44:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >><snip>

 >Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
 >and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
 >blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
 >the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
 >instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
 >stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
 >believes in it is needs some serious help...

 >Regards,

 >Royce J. Myers III


Yes, I agree, anyone who believes in the Meier case does need
serious help.

With regard to the Meier beamship film you spoke about:
According to Genesis Publishing, a Japanese television station
produced that segment of film. You'll also notice that they laid
a time code over Meier's 8mm film. The time code gives the
untrained viewer the impression that since there is no visible
break in the time code, there is no cut, edit, or camera start
and stop. But that is not the case. This is one of the carefully
fabricated lies the producer's of the Meier material led the
public into believing--forced perspective shots that are taught
in film school. Beneath the time code is the actual JUMP CUT
filmmakers try to avoid. You described it very accurately,
Royce.

A miniature tree with a miniature beamship can be plainly seen
when you examine the un-cropped photos from this series.
Hell!!!--the leaves in the foreground are so large it indicates
that the photographer's camera lens was close to the ground,
shooting upward, at an angle, toward the side of a hill, with a
tiny tree and miniature beamship stuck in its body in midground.
These photos were purposely made to create the illusion of a
large object--to purposely deceive the general public into
buying Meier's fraudulent materials.

In a way, I feel sorry for Mr. Deardorff. He is seriously
delusional. He explains hoaxed issues with the skill of an
defense attorney--spinning and weaving something out of nothing
and then asking us to examine it. What about this and what about
that, he says, generating data from out of the blue, when
there's no foundation for the conclusions he reaches...Sounds
like an OJ Simpson defense team member. The Talmud of
Jmmannuel--fooey! The foundation for determining the
authenticity of that phony book is first of all, having the
alleged original Aramaic version to examine. Without the
original manuscript, any conclusions of authenticity are
ridiculous, reckless and unprofessional.

Deardorff blames Kal Korff for uncovering Meier's fraud, instead
of having outrage against Meier for duping the public. Suddenly,
the investigator has become the Villain and is accused of
creating a hoax. (Oh, God... Save me.) Deardorff should then
blame many more people for debunking Meier including Stanton
Friedman and Walt Andrus, you, Royce, and myself.

Give me a break!


Nathan G. Daniel

Underground Video








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                     Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 03:08:07 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:11:55 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:03:52 -0700
 >From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: UFO Images From The UK

 >Hello

 >I recently received some images from someone in the UK. The UFO
 >appears to be very similar to the Haines Vancouver Island case.
 >I do not vouch for authenticity, just wanted to share what I
 >have received. Too large to impose directly thru the mail, so if
 >interested go to the "Want to see a UFO?" Section at UFO
 >Folklore!

 >http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

 >They are under the Year 2000 section and the link is called
 >UFOs from the UK

<snip>


Hello Dan:

Maybe its just me, but I couldn't find the image.

I got lost in some sort of lookup routine etc.

Could you simply drag down a link from the actual page itself?
Its easy in Netscape, I don't know what browser you are using.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                         Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart

From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 10:37:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:16:22 -0400
Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note - Hart


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:23:35 EDT
 >Subject: Re: A Carpenter Note
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >If guilty, I do not know what John will do. If it were me, I
 >would want the opportunity to post my story. I _only_
 >know that his request to write his side
 >was accepted but only after the investigation.

  >Jim

Jim, this is an interesting piece of information. John will be
allowed to post a response to the charges even if found guilty?
Hm-m-m. Again, this will be without the membership being made
aware of the evidence itself? Hm-m-m. Sounds rather odd to me.
The acceptance of John's request seems to pre-suppose an
outcome.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 08:59:25 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:20:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hatch


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:21:53 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:19:01 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

<snip>

 >Hi Jim.

 >I have looked at the photos and stand by my observations. The
 >tree turns. If you want to interpret the details a different
 >way, so be it. I do not see the things you do.

 >Moving on, Jim wrote:

 >>And you might glance at the 1st photo on the left in the
 >>website's series of 7; it's #57. It shows branches of a tree on
 >>the right that's up fairly close to the camera. It's blurry, as
 >>expected, in comparison with the more distant abies-alba tree
 >>with its posing beamship. Hence it was no model tree with a
 >>model UFO close to the camera. (Stevens found that the focus of
 >>Meier's camera had been stuck on a setting just one notch short
 >>of the infinity setting. Korff accepted this much.)

 >I could care less about Korff. He means nothing to me. The
 >simple truth is that optical mechanics dictates that you can't
 >have it both ways.

 >On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
 >unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
 >camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
 >aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
 >necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
 >closer!

 >However, the branches close to the camera are out of focus. This
 >would be impossible if the camera suffered from the malady you
 >suggest. They would be razor sharp and the background would be
 >out of focus. As you have pointed out, the opposite is true.

 >More to the point, even if a camera were unable to focus to
 >infinity wide open, the inherent depth of field gained by
 >closing down the aperture (as necessary when shooting in the
 >sunlight) will always overcome the infinity focus shortfall. The
 >reason is that depth of field increases at the rear of the lens
 >as well as the front when you close down the aperture (this is
 >known as back-focus gain).

 >What does this all mean? It means that there was nothing wrong
 >with the camera at all. (Actually, if I wanted to shoot a model
 >up close, a camera that had the defect you describe would be
 >ideal, but not necessary.)

 >As I said earlier, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim
 >that the camera won't focus to infinity and NOT focus up close
 >either! It has to be one or the other.

 >The photo is a fake.


Dear Roger:

I am no photo expert, in fact I am the dumbest photo expert in
nine counties.

Nevertheless, and having followed these discussions. I have come
to the conclusion that there is a brick missing from Jim
Deardorff's chimney.

I wish I could add something cheerier, but I'm much too busy
trying to remote view my lost car keys.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:15:30 EDT
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:05:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Mortellaro


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 08:59:25 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:21:53 -0700
 >>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:19:01 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 ><snip>

 >>Hi Jim.

 >>I have looked at the photos and stand by my observations. The
 >>tree turns. If you want to interpret the details a different
 >>way, so be it. I do not see the things you do.

 >>Moving on, Jim wrote:

 >>>And you might glance at the 1st photo on the left in the
 >>>website's series of 7; it's #57. It shows branches of a tree on
 >>>the right that's up fairly close to the camera. It's blurry, as
 >>>expected, in comparison with the more distant abies-alba tree
 >>>with its posing beamship. Hence it was no model tree with a
 >>>model UFO close to the camera. (Stevens found that the focus of
 >>>Meier's camera had been stuck on a setting just one notch short
 >>>of the infinity setting. Korff accepted this much.)

 >>I could care less about Korff. He means nothing to me. The
 >>simple truth is that optical mechanics dictates that you can't
 >>have it both ways.

 >>On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
 >>unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
 >>camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
 >>aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
 >>necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
 >>closer!
 >
 >>However, the branches close to the camera are out of focus. This
 >>would be impossible if the camera suffered from the malady you
 >>suggest. They would be razor sharp and the background would be
 >>out of focus. As you have pointed out, the opposite is true.

 >>More to the point, even if a camera were unable to focus to
 >>infinity wide open, the inherent depth of field gained by
 >>closing down the aperture (as necessary when shooting in the
 >>sunlight) will always overcome the infinity focus shortfall. The
 >>reason is that depth of field increases at the rear of the lens
 >>as well as the front when you close down the aperture (this is
 >>known as back-focus gain).

 >>What does this all mean? It means that there was nothing wrong
 >>with the camera at all. (Actually, if I wanted to shoot a model
 >>up close, a camera that had the defect you describe would be
 >>ideal, but not necessary.)

 >>As I said earlier, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim
 >>that the camera won't focus to infinity and NOT focus up close
 >>either! It has to be one or the other.

 >>The photo is a fake.

 >Dear Roger:

 >I am no photo expert, in fact I am the dumbest photo expert in
 >nine counties.

 >Nevertheless, and having followed these discussions. I have come
 >to the conclusion that there is a brick missing from Jim
 >Deardorff's chimney.

 >I wish I could add something cheerier, but I'm much too busy
 >trying to remote view my lost car keys.

 >Best wishes

 >- Larry Hatch

Dear Doctor Hatch,

Relative to bricks, chimneys and remote viewing car keys... Now
I ain't no X-Spurt or nuttin... but I do got me a pinion or two,
so please allow me to verbalize these.

First, one cannot have bricks missing from one's chimney if
one's chimney is made of wood. Doctor Deary's chimney,
therefore, doesn't count in this case.

Second, I can tell you from first hand experience, that you
cannot remote view car keys. I tried. I can remote view my
mommy. I can remote view Pia (boy oh boy is that a kick) and I
can remote view the whereabouts of my 1979 Mazda RX-7, the one
with the Weber DCOE45's and three rotors. That one is easy to
remote view. It's now in various pieces on turn five at Watkins
Glen. Yep, turn five. I lost a suspension part, probally a real
important one, cause the car went out of control.

I woke up in the ambulance thinking the attendent with the full
beard was Pia Zafora. Anyway, that car is now part of the crash
barriers all over the track. But they kept most of it right
there at turn five, as a lesson to others with about as much
talent at racing GTP cars as I had.....

I have only one last thing to say. When the frost is on the
pumpkin, that's the time for Meier dunkin. Lehmberg, eat your
heart out.

Jim








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:57:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:18:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:36:21 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims [was: The Meier Hoax]

 >>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 02:25:15 -0700
 >>>Subject: The Meier Hoax [was: Adamski Saucer Model Found?]
 >>>From: Nathan G. Daniel - Underground Video <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:54:04 -0700
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?

 >>>>>From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
 >>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Adamski Saucer Model Found?
 >>>>>Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 08:39:05 -0700

 >>>I have never entered an online forum before. Please excuse me
 >>>if I am doing so now improperly. I couldn't resist making a
 >>>response when I read Jim Deardorff's statement concerning
 >>>the authenticity of the Billy Meier case. Readers of the List
 >>>may wish to consider the following comments and findings.

 >>>James Deardorff said:

 >>>>There's no need to include Meier in there. Otherwise, you will
 >>>>just be asking for a host of e-mails detailing names of
 >>>>supporting witnesses and their credibility, photos that can't be
 >>>>debunked, false claims made against him, detailed investigations
 >>>>of his experiences that cannot be ignored, etc.

 ><snip>

 >>>With the assistance of members from the Hollywood special
 >>>effects team of the Ultra-Matrix Corporation, we studied the
 >>>Meier photographs and claims made by Meier's Talmud Jmmanuel,
 >>>Genesis III Publishing, author Gary Kinder,and Guido Mooseburger
 >>>of Meier's FIGU cult in Switzerland. After 6 months of intense
 >>>inquiry, with the assistance of cinematographers, physicists,
 >>>and computer analysis from Total Research, we found the claims
 >>>of the representatives of the Meier case to be absolutely
 >>>untrue. ... [ Nathan Daniel ]

 >>Nathan,

 >>I believe we've all heard most of this before, via Kal Korff
 >>(TotalResearch) and then others who fell for his claims. Korff's
 >>false claims have been thoroughly refuted, with many of his key
 >>falsehoods, distortions, irrelevancies and innuendo having been
 >>posted on a website of Jeroen Jansen to which my website linked
 >>(http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj ). But I see now that my link
 >>to this is no longer current. I'll let you know if I find
 >>there's a current URL for it.

 >>A thorough refutation of Korff's claims against the Talmud of
 >>Jmmanuel is in my website, however. To read it, go to:
 >>http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/refutekk.htm
 >>.. Meier never denied the existence of these models, and his
 >>photos speak for themselves, especially the ones where Semjase
 >>posed her beamship on all sides of a tree for Meier to
 >>photograph on 9 July, 1975.

 ><snip>

 >Please pardon this intrusion, I wasn't really up to speed on
 >"Semjase". I found this website on a quick browse:

 > http://www.figu.ch/us/plej/semjase.htm

 >.. a page that answers the question " Who is Semjase? " with the
 >following. (There's a nice line drawing too) Please forgive the
 >length of this quotation:

 >"Semjase is a 350 years old (1996) woman. She is the
 > daughter of JHWH Ptaah, commander of the Pleiadian /
 > Plejaran space fleet. JHWH (pronounced: ish-wish) is a
 > rank and means - translated into terrestrial languages -
 > "king of wisdom". (An JHWH possesses the highest degree
 > of spiritual knowledge and wisdom among the peoples of
 > the Plejadian/Plejaran federation.) "

 >Note: Yahweh was the ancient Hebrew name for God,
 >usually spelled something like YHWH since written Hebrew
 >consists of consonants only, dropping the implied vowels.

 >More on Semjase from the same web page:

 >"Semjase carries the rank of an ELO-JSCHRJSCH, a "demi-
 > queen of wisdom". (According to Pleiadian/Plejaran
 > understanding the rank JHWH alias "king" has nothing to do
 > with a hierarchy; it stands for a spiritual and
 > consciousness- related level of evolution. Semjase,
 > granddaughter of Sfath, with whom Billy [Meier] had his
 > first contact, has a brother called Yucatan. "
 >
 > Semjase was once married for only 7 years. About 220 years
 > ago her husband lost his life when - on a foreign galaxy
 > research expedition - his spaceship had a control damage
 > and crashed into a sun."

 >I think that's enough for now. (see website link above)
 >Here's my question:

 >Jim: Minor inaccuracies aside, do you think that this is a fair
 >description of Semjase?

Hi Larry,

Yes. It comes from the website of the FIGU group in Switzerland
that Meier heads. Thanks for posting it, for those who had not
heard of the name Semjase. However, I would make one
qualification -- much of this is what Billy Meier was told by
Semjase. We have no evidence of its necessary truth, other than
that Semjase did tell Meier a lot of things that were true.
E.g., if she had told him she was 100 years old, or 500 years
old, instead of 350, we wouldn't know the difference but that
would have been what was accepted. And as to their names, Meier
was told that the Pleadians/Plejarens have their own, different
names than the "stage names" they chose for us to know them by.

Meier was never permitted to photograph Semjase, so he did the
next best thing, and had a police-station artist sketch a
picture of her under his guidance. It's been widely available
for years, though I don't right now know whereabouts on the web.

 >Do you think this is the same Semjase that posed her space-ships
 >on or about 9 July, 1975, so Billy Meier could take some
 >pictures? ...

 >- Larry Hatch

Very definitely the same, according to Meier.

Jim D.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:34:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:21:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:21:53 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:19:01 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously I wrote:

 >>>With all due respect, the tree in the photo is a model. Unless,
 >>>of course, natural trees are capable of turning 90 to 180
 >>>degrees while still in the ground.
 >>>If you look closely at the photos, you will quite plainly see
 >>>that the backgound changes to a different view while the side of
 >>>the tree facing the camera never changes. This is because the
 >>>model of the ship is attached to the tree. Beyond that, the
 >>>forestry experts are wrong.

 >Jim replied:

 >>I think it's that large upper gap that has fooled you, if it's
 >>not Korff that's done it. Close your eyes until everything's
 >>blurry and you can barely see the gap, then your conclusion
 >>could be forthcoming. But open them and look closely, and you'll
 >>see that the details all differ. Thus it was no model, rotated.
 >>(The devil is in the details.)

 >Hi Jim.

 >I have looked at the photos and stand by my observations. The
 >tree turns. If you want to interpret the details a different
 >way, so be it. I do not see the things you do.

Well, Roger, anyone can see for themselves that although the
large gap in branches in the upper part of the tree is still
visible from all views, its framing outline of small branches
and twigs is different from the different viewing angles. The
photos still speak for themselves.

 >Moving on, Jim wrote:

 >>And you might glance at the 1st photo on the left in the
 >>website's series of 7; it's #57. It shows branches of a tree on
 >>the right that's up fairly close to the camera. It's blurry, as
 >>expected, in comparison with the more distant abies-alba tree
 >>with its posing beamship. Hence it was no model tree with a
 >>model UFO close to the camera. (Stevens found that the focus of
 >>Meier's camera had been stuck on a setting just one notch short
 >>of the infinity setting. Korff accepted this much.)

 >I could care less about Korff. He means nothing to me. The
 >simple truth is that optical mechanics dictates that you can't
 >have it both ways.

How dare you steal my line! That's what I'm saying. You can't
have a model UFO with a model tree up close to the camera, at a
comparable distance as the branches of the close-up tree on the
right, without the model UFO and model tree being similarly out
of focus. You can't use a camera whose focus setting was stuck
one notch short of infinity to take a sharp picture of a nearby
small model UFO and model tree, on a cloudy day.

 >On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
 >unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
 >camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
 >aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
 >necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
 >closer!

This was an old Olympus 35 ECR camera. It didn't have any
automatic focus adjustment. Its manual focus was stuck real
close to infinity. That means it could take sharp picture of
objects at intermediate and rather large distances, though not
of sharpest quality for the treelines of distant hills. Is this
understood?

 >However, the branches close to the camera are out of focus. This
 >would be impossible if the camera suffered from the malady you
 >suggest. They would be razor sharp and the background would be
 >out of focus. As you have pointed out, the opposite is true.

You still have it totally backwards, Roger (as did Korff at
times in his book). When an old camera's focus is set close to
the infinity setting, it can take sharp pictures at intermediate
to fairly large distances, but only blurry pictures of close-up
objects. Perhaps you failed to realize that there are a lot of
"notches" between infinity and shortest range on such a camera.
One stop short of infinity could be centered for a sharp focus
of around 20 meters, one more notch could be for 10 meters, the
next could take it in to 6m, the next to 4m, the next to 3m, the
next to 2.5m,  etc. You'd need the focus adjusted to around the
latter setting in order to obtain a clear picture of model
objects at a distance of around 8-10 feet.

 >More to the point, even if a camera were unable to focus to
 >infinity wide open, the inherent depth of field gained by
 >closing down the aperture (as necessary when shooting in the
 >sunlight) will always overcome the infinity focus shortfall. The
 >reason is that depth of field increases at the rear of the lens
 >as well as the front when you close down the aperture (this is
 >known as back-focus gain).

It was a cloudy, overcast day then. No sunlight.

Perhaps if someone else were to bring all this to Roger's
attention, he could be made to realize that his arguments don't
hold water.

It could be pointed out that there were two persons besides
Meier who witnessed that the tree was a genuine, large tree,
before it disappeared (the "high strangeness" in this incident).
They are listed in Stevens' 1982 book as Margarite Rufer and
Jacob Bertschinger. When they went to visit the site after the
photos were developed, they found the tree to be dead. On a
later visit with Meier, Bertschinger and Meier found the tree
was missing entirely with no evidence of ever having existed.
However, they did notice that in the precise area where the tree
had been, the grass was 20-30 cm higher than the other grass
around.

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:23:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700

 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
 >>and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
 >>blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
 >>the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
 >>instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
 >>stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
 >>believes in it is needs some serious help...
 >>Regards,

 >>Royce J. Myers III

 >Yes, I agree, anyone who believes in the Meier case does need
 >serious help.

 >With regard to the Meier beamship film you spoke about:
 >According to Genesis Publishing, a Japanese television station
 >produced that segment of film. You'll also notice that they laid
 >a time code over Meier's 8mm film. The time code gives the
 >untrained viewer the impression that since there is no visible
 >break in the time code, there is no cut, edit, or camera start
 >and stop. But that is not the case. This is one of the carefully
 >fabricated lies the producer's of the Meier material led the
 >public into believing--forced perspective shots that are taught
 >in film school.
 >...

Nathan,

I guess they forgot to edit out Meier's own remark on the tape
that the film had been cut and spliced (at the  hands of the
studio in Munich). So the viewer who listens to the tape while
viewing it will not gain the false impression you have supplied
above. However, the improper cuts that were made are relatively
few.

 >Beneath the time code is the actual JUMP CUT
 >A miniature tree with a miniature beamship can be plainly seen
 >when you examine the un-cropped photos from this series.

It's the uncropped photos I've looked at, Nathan. They don't
show anything like that. They show what I have on my website.

 >Hell!!!--the leaves in the foreground are so large it indicates
 >that the photographer's camera lens was close to the ground,
 >shooting upward, at an angle, toward the side of a hill, with a
 >tiny tree and miniature beamship stuck in its body in midground.

Evidently you're speaking of the Fuchsbuel photograph series, now, and not
the 8mm movie film.  But where's your evidence? What photo No. do you have
in mind? What leaves? Did you mean fir needles or pine needles rather than
leaves?

 >These photos were purposely made to create the illusion of a
 >large object--to purposely deceive the general public into
 >buying Meier's fraudulent materials.

Please note that genuine photos of a large object alongside a
large tree also generate the impression that it is a large
object alongside a large tree.

 >In a way, I feel sorry for Mr. Deardorff. He is seriously
 >delusional. He explains hoaxed issues with the skill of an
 >defense attorney--spinning and weaving something out of nothing
 >and then asking us to examine it. What about this and what about
 >that, he says, generating data from out of the blue, when
 >there's no foundation for the conclusions he reaches...Sounds
 >like an OJ Simpson defense team member.

I should have been a lawyer, eh?

 >The Talmud of
 >Jmmannuel--fooey! The foundation for determining the
 >authenticity of that phony book is first of all, having the
 >alleged original Aramaic version to examine.

Have you no specific refutation at all to make of my refutations
to Korff's false claims? Do you not wish to explain Korff's
strange claim in his book that UV, which you head, "discovered
evidence proving that the _Talmud Jmmanuel_ does not contain
Aramaic!"? Is that all you proved, that a document translated
into German does not contain Aramaic text? I've given over 600
detailed reasons indicating the TJ was the source for the Gospel
of Matthew. Can you not even attempt to refute 10% of them?
"Fooey" doesn't cut it.

 >Without the
 >original manuscript, any conclusions of authenticity are
 >ridiculous, reckless and unprofessional....

I wonder why, then, that New Testament scholars have long been
trying to assess the genuineness of various sections of the
Gospels without having any original manuscript of them (their
autographs) on hand, but only going by 3rd-5th century
transcriptions of transciptions of transcriptions... of them?
They've made their livings doing this, along with teaching or
preaching. No, it's fair game to assess genuineness when the
originals are no longer existent. We use source criticism,
redaction criticism, form criticism... in doing it. Most of all,
open-minded common sense is needed.

 >Deardorff should then
 >blame many more people for debunking Meier including Stanton
 >Friedman and Walt Andrus, you, Royce, and myself.

 >Give me a break!

 >Nathan G. Daniel
 >Underground Video

Hey, your turn to give me a break. I've never said that Korff
was the only debunker of Meier. One of the earliest was Bill
Moore, with whom Korff as a youngster associated.

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Zeigermann

From: Ralf Zeigermann <kag15@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 22:25:40 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:48:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Zeigermann


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:15:30 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Second, I can tell you from first hand experience, that you
 >cannot remote view car keys. I tried. I can remote view my
 >mommy. I can remote view Pia (boy oh boy is that a kick) and I
 >can remote view the whereabouts of my 1979 Mazda RX-7, the one
 >with the Weber DCOE45's and three rotors. That one is easy to
 >remote view. It's now in various pieces on turn five at Watkins
 >Glen. Yep, turn five. I lost a suspension part, probally a real
 >important one, cause the car went out of control.

<snip>

Yeah, but what if those Webers are DCOE 40's, fitted to a bored
out 1600cc Ford engine which has found its place in a
Caterham 7?

Remote viewing won't work, because those cars are low flying.

Yours pondering,

Ralf

----------------------------------------------------
Ralf's 3D-Site
Infos about the German Sf series 'Raumpatrouille',
a Bryce-Gallery, models to download and more!

http://www.kag15.dial.pipex.com/
----------------------------------------------------








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                      Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-23-00

From: Rense E-News <e-news@the-i.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:56:45 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:27:26 -0400
Subject: Jeff Rense Weekly E-News 9-23-00



----------------------------------------------------------------
     Jeff Rense Weekly E-News
----------------------------------------------------------------

     The Week Ahead
     9-24-00 thru 9-30-00

    Guests, Announcements, Week's Top Stories
      From rense.com
    Jeff Rense E-News is distributed
    exclusively by Free Subscription.

    --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

      * EDITOR'S CORNER *

REQUEST:

As you all know, this newsletter is delivered by eGroups. The
service is great � dependable and easily accessible.

However, for several reasons, we feel like it may be time to
make a change in how this newsletter is delivered. For one, we
are not always comfortable with the advertising that is
inserted. Another reason is that the signup form that is
presented asks what we feel are potentially invasive questions.
The system will take ANY info you give it � even Donald Duck�s �
but new people signing up don�t know that and may feel their
privacy could potentially be breached.

Egroups has a strong privacy policy � but still, some of the
questions could be perceived as too personal. Again � I must
say the service has been exemplary. But we are **SO** privacy
conscious, that if there�s a better option that�s affordable,
we�ll go with it.

So please forward to me any information and experience you have
with mailing list distribution services or software. As time
permits, I�ve been doing periodic research. But perhaps you
already have the answer we need.

Email for this: mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=ListOptions

I do thank you.

Jocelyn

    --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

      * READER'S CORNER *

Quotes, quotes and more quotes were received this week � almost
60kb! (Average size of this entire newsletter is 15kb. So
obviously, they�ll be spread out to a few newsletters. Your
active participation with us is SO MUCH APPRECIATED and, if your
quotes are not in this newsletter � they will be in a later
edition.

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

From: IGOR MIKHAILUSENKO

Real poets, writers, dramatists and translators will go on working
whatever happens ! Such work is part and parcel of their nature.
Without it they would die ! I wish them determination and strength
of will. I hope that they will express their opposition to much of
the moden smash and grab. pornographic and sensual trash seen on
every-day TV programmes and on films coming mainly from the USA.
   From "TALKING WITH WALTER MAY" in "FIVE POEMS SEEN BY
    THE ENGLISH QUEEN " by Igor Mikhailusenko

Peace is not a firebird from a fairy tale to be chased by its tail
on the rocks, but an ardent and persistently active attitude
towards life. Any reasonable effort is valuable for achieving this
great aim of mankind, for peace spells happiness.
   I am a Human...
   One of many, many.../ For
   the survival of us all I bear
   responsibility...
  �FIVE POEMS SEEN BY THE ENGLISH QUEEN" by Igor Mikhailusenk


From: Fred Coley
  "There is nothing as terrible as active ignorance." Goethe


From: Gene McParland
  What following is my collection of saying and quotations that
  I have been semi-collecting over the year. It's my depository
  of wonderful information and advise for living life.

  I'll start off with a quote of my own; hey I'm full of some
  good advise also:
   We should probably spend less time learning these quotes,
   and more time just living them. -Gene McParland-


   There are two ways to live your life.
   One is as though nothing is a miracle,
   the other is as though everything is a miracle.
       ~ Albert Einstein ~


Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens
can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
       - Margaret Mead -


Do not wish to be anything but what you are, and try to be that
perfectly. St. Frances De Sales, French bishop, author (b. 1859)


"What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible."
       Theodore Roethke


   "Great spirits have always encountered violent
   opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein


   "The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of
  their dreams." -Eleanor Roosevelt


"There is no such thing as a negative occurrence....it's all just
useful information." -Rinaldo S. Brutoco


"Follow your bliss." -Joseph Campbell


  The difference between a goal and a dream
  is the written word. -Gene Donohue


  Beer is living proof that God loves us and
  wants to see us happy. ---Benjamin Franklin


"The work of the poet comes to meet the spiritual need of the
society in which he lives, and for this reason his work means more
to him than his personal fate, whether he is aware of this or not."
     ~C.G. Jung, Modern Man In Search Of A Soul


   Better to be thought of as a fool, than to open your mouth
   and remove all doubt.  -Abraham Lincoln


   Lead us not into temptation. Just tell us where it is;
   we'll find it.  -Sam Levenson


"The reason why rivers and seas receive the homage of a hundred
mountain streams is that they keep below them. Thus, they are
able to reign over all the mountain streams. So the sage,
wishing to be above men, puts himself below them. Thus, though
his place be above men, they do not feel his weight, though his
place be before them, they do not count it an injury "  ~Lao Tse


"Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist
once he grows up" ~ Pablo Picasso


   "Faith is the bird that sings when the dawn
   is still dark."  -Rabindranath Tagore


"This we know. The earth does not belong to man; man belongs to
the earth. This we know. All things are connected. Whatever
befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth. Man does not
weave the web of life, he is a merely a strand in it. Whatever
he does to the web, he does to himself." -Attributed to Chief
Seattle


   "It takes courage to grow up and turn out to be
   who you really are." -e.e. Cummings


"Awe enables us to perceive in the world intimations of the
Divine, to sense in small things the beginning of infinite
significance, to sense the ultimate in common and the simple; to
feel in the rush of the passing the stillness of the eternal."
-Abraham Joshua Heschel


   "Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed."
       -Author Unknown


"The only place where your dream becomes impossible is in your
own thinking." -Robert H. Schuller {American Minister & Author}


  "My religion is very simple -- my religion is kindness."
       -Dalai Lama


  "Persistent people begin their success where others end in
   failure." -Edward Eggleston {American Writer & Historian}


Continued next week�..

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

   Got a favorite quote? Feel free to send it:
    mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=quote

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

Past and present guests: to be showcased in "The Guest Corner",
please email mailto:e-news@the-i.net?Subject=Guest_Corner

    --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

      Occult Theocrasy

Published Posthumously - occult, secret societies and sundry other
covert movements throughout the world. The most complete work on
this topic. 741 pp., Hardcover Full table of contents at:

http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/hm01/index37.html

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

      * TOP STORIES *

   Just a few of last week's most intriguing!
     http://rense.com

  * NOAA Satellite Photo Of Massive Chemtrails Over Pennsylvania
   And Maryland
  * Superfund Sites -13 Indicted in Biggest Lab Fraud in American
   History
  * Kraft Recalls Taco Bell Shells With Biotech Corn
  * Russian Made Anti-Tank Weapon Used In London Spy HQ Attack
  * Virgin Mary Said To Appear Again At Monastery In Egypt
  * Pictures Of Nessie? Underwater Nessie-Cam Reveals Strange Shape
  * New Mexico A Staging Ground For NWO Troops?
  * UPDATE Bizarre 'Spider Web' (?) Fall Covers Woman's Property -
    Photos
  * Oops....You're Dead -The Body Count From Drug Raids Climbs -
    Are You Next?
  * Toxic Level Of Mercury Found In New England Rain And Snow
  * Chamish Calls For New, Formal Investigation Of Rabin Murder
  * US Preparing For BioTerrorism Attack
  * Israel Declares Epidemic Of West Nile Virus
  * Chicago Archdiocese Appoints Full-Time Exorcist
  * Dried Blood In Italian Cathedral Goes Liquid On Schedule
  * Rabbit Gene-Spliced With Jellyfish Glows In The Dark
  * Breakthrough - New Polymer Coating Immobilizes Chernobyl
    Radioactive Waste
  * Top Scientists Speak Out On Genetically Modified Crops And Food
  * Asteroid Strike Risk Said 'Intolerable' In New Assessment
  * MilitaryCorruption.com Censorship Dropped By US Army Barracks
  * Kursk Disaster Predicted Accurately By Bulgarian Psychic In
    1980
  * Connect The Prions - Dairy And Meat Industries In Grave Trouble
  * I Could Tell You, But I'd Have to Kill You: The Cult of
    Classification in Intelligence
  * US 82nd Airborne 'Peacekeepers' Abused, Beat, Fondled Kosovo
    Civilians - Probe
  * Iraq Accuses Kuwait Of Slant Drilling And Stealing 300,000
    Barrels Of Oil Daily
  * Russian Jet Defies UN sanctions To Land At Baghdad Airport

   Read these stories and more at http://www.rense.com

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

     TEXT by: W. C. VETSCH
      FREE BOOK ONLINE

"For years there have been basically two sets of books kept on
the Planet Earth. The set for the elite were called text books"
and they contained the Truth. The set of books for ordinary
people were known [to the elite] as X-Text which means bad text
or text filled with disinformation�"

http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/cartwebtv/af/az16/index0.html

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

     * THIS WEEK'S GUESTS *
     9-24-00 thru 9-29-00

   (Please note Jeff's Guest schedule can
   change due to late breaking stories, etc).


SUN 9-24
  Dr. Joseph Chappilone, MD: Terminal Madness Of The End Time

MON 9-25
  Bill Northern: Talking To Horses

TUE 9-26
  Graham Conway: UFO*BC Canada Report
  Lee Paton: Medical Case Worker

WED 9-27
  Dr. Lorraine Day, MD: How To Raise Healthy Children!

THU 9-28
  Martin Gross - The Demise Of America's Schools

FRI 9-29
  Dr. Leo Sprinkle and Adam Clark, Abductee

  Live Real Audio Broadcasts & Archives: http://www.sightings.com

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

      Cosmiverse!

No time to research? Cosmiverse will deliver the latest Space,
Science, and Technology news direct to you every morning. Need a
homepage? Perhaps a planner or new address? Cosmiverse is
perfectly tailored to fit your needs! Let Cosmiverse provide it
for you--FREE at  http://www.cosmiverse.com

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

     * 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/
Rense.com Store:
   http://www.sightings.com/store/store.htm
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.

     --<>-- --<<<+>>>-- --<>--

We thank eGroups for providing this tremendous service to us.
The uppermost ad is inserted by eGroups and is not affiliated
with Jeff Rense.














   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 23

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:05:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:29:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:34:53 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:21:43 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously, Jim wrote:

 >How dare you steal my line! That's what I'm saying. You can't
 >have a model UFO with a model tree up close to the camera, at a
 >comparable distance as the branches of the close-up tree on the
 >right, without the model UFO and model tree being similarly out
 >of focus. You can't use a camera whose focus setting was stuck
 >one notch short of infinity to take a sharp picture of a nearby
 >small model UFO and model tree, on a cloudy day.


Jim,

Who says the model and the branches would have to be the same distance
from the camera? The branches could be within a foot of the camera and
the model could be, say, five to ten feet from the camera and still get
the effect seen in the shot. You make no point by including the out of
focus branches as some kind of "proof". They mean nothing, Jim.

Moving on, I wrote:
 >
 >>On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
 >>unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
 >>camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
 >>aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
 >>necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
 >>closer!

Jim replied:

 >This was an old Olympus 35 ECR camera. It didn't have any
 >automatic focus adjustment. Its manual focus was stuck real
 >close to infinity. That means it could take sharp picture of
 >objects at intermediate and rather large distances, though not
 >of sharpest quality for the treelines of distant hills. Is this
 >understood?

Not by you, apparently. What has auto-focus got to do with
anything, Jim? In fact, it's obvious that you have literally no
understanding of photography or optical mechanics. So, I will
try to make this as simple as possible so that you will
understand.

There is something called "depth of field" that comes into play
when taking pictures. When you focus on an object, you don't
just focus on a single point in space. You focus on a area that
begins a certain distance from the camera and ends at another
distance from the camera. This area is called field of focus.
How MUCH of that field you can achieve is called "depth of
field". If the aperture on a lens is wide open, then you have
very shallow depth of field. On the other hand, the further down
the aperture closes, the more that depth of field expands both
toward the camera and away. Hence the depth of field gets deeper
and more things come into focus even if you NEVER readjusted the
focus of the lens. Got it?

Now, when shooting in daylight hours, even on a cloudy day, the
aperture will close down enough to bring almost everything into
focus regardless of what the focus is set at. And this is the
real point, here. Early pin hole cameras had no focus of any
kind. This is because they had enough depth of field to bring
everything into focus. However, they were limited to daylight
shots or shots with long exposures. The element of focus was
added for convenience so that shots at wider apertures (no
pinhole) could be obtained. However, the mechanics of depth of
field still apply. Focus or not, if you close down the lens (as
necessary during daylight shots) then you will gain depth of
field and things in both the distance and foreground will come
into clarity regardless of WHERE the focus setting on the lens
is at.

Which brings up a curios point:

You keep using the term "stuck one notch short of infinity".
What in the world does that even mean? There is no such term. In
fact, if the focus were "stuck close to infinity", then even a
wide open lens would still have enough aperture to include the
distant treelines and hills in the field of focus. Remember,
focus doesn't just "stop" at a given point in space. Therefore
your statement that it would not be be "sharpest quality for the
treelines of distant hills" really makes no sense of any kind.

But really, it doesn't matter:

1) If you meant that the camera wasn't focused to infinity,
daylight aperture settings would bring things back into focus
anyway.

2) If you meant that the camera was focused just short of
infinity, daylight aperture settings would still bring things
back into focus.

2) If you meant that the mounting was defective and the lens was
not seating as close to the camera as possible (the REAL meaning
of not focusing to infinity) then that means that the camera
would be even BETTER at focusing up close and the branches you
keep pointing out would therefore be sharp and the background
would be out of focus. More to the point, such a camera would be
IDEAL for shooting models up close.

No matter how you slice it, the pictures don't back up you
assertions. The camera seems to be in correct working order as
the distant hills seem in focus (contrary to your assertions).
They look like shots of a model that was about ten feet from the
camera (well within moderate depth of field settings, even for a
lens focused short of infinity) with other branches closer to
the camera (outside the depth of field and, therefore, in soft
focus).

What's so mysterious about that?

I suggest you read as many books about photography as you do
about bogus religions.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      John Carpenter Does it Again - 2

From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:47:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:07:04 -0400
Subject: John Carpenter Does it Again - 2


 >>Mike Farrell recently wrote:

 >>How many times can we say "shame on you, Mr. Carpenter??!"
 >>And shame on Constance Clear for jumping on Carpenter's
 >>bandwagon without knowing the facts of this case.

This in reference to:


 >>Email from JOHN CARPENTER (to one of his friends):

 >>>There is a good point to be made about "good evidence" not
 >>>being allowed and researchers being discredited. Constance
 >>>Clear, MSW, also believes this is one reason I am under
 >>>attack by people I have never met or heard of before.

 >>>John


List Members,

I made a phone call to Constance Clear, MSW, LCSW (as with John,
a state-licensed position) and discovered the following:

She _was_ aware of the discussion of John's unethical activities
and did not appreciate being dragged into the controversy since
she had _not_ made any statement such as John attributes to her.

Constance was aware of the video he mentions but has not seen
it. Seems that John is just making things up to suit his own
needs and provably so. I contacted Ms. Clear suspecting this was
the case.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:38:32 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:10:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers


 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:39:53 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700

 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
 >>and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
 >>blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
 >>the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
 >>instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
 >>stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
 >>believes in it is needs some serious help...


 >Royce,

 >Yes, that's the Berg-Rumlikon sequence of 12 June, 1975. Have
 >you ever read witnesses' accounts of the "Oz" effect? Suddenly
 >no animal or bird sounds, no wind. This film shows this UFO
 >phenomenon in operation. Meier described it to his interviewers
 >while the film was being replayed and video-taped, back around
 >1980(?) or so. It commenced when the beamship  suddenly
 >disappeared and ceased when it reappeared a half minute or so
 >later. Of course, he didn't call it the Oz effect -- I don't
 >think Jenny had described it and named it that until later --
 >and Meier wasn't then reading a lot of UFO books.

 >This "film" is a video of a copy of 7 segments of original film
 >Meier took on 7 occasions that were spliced together, which
 >Meier had loaned out to a studio in Munich. He received what he
 >thought was the same film back only after prodding them for
 >several months. It was Stevens who later discovered it was only
 >a copy, and not the original Meier had sent them. Meier found
 >that they had cut out sections here and there and respliced it.
 >But according to Meier, this particular sequence had not been
 >cut and spliced by them (or by him).

 >Perhaps someone can point out the date of the first book
 >reference to the Oz effect that he knows of.

Actually, the piece is in the Genesis 3 video on the Meier case.
The narrator clearly states that the ship is disappearing and
then reappearing. It isn't a cut and splice technique, it is -
what I siad it was earlier - blatant stop motion. Nobody can
defend that piece of footage as anything other than that.

Meier filmed his little model, stopped the film, took it out of
the frame, began filming for a second more, stopped it again,
placed his model back in the frame and began filming. The branch
in the frame proves this without question. Branches being blown
by the wind do not just automatically stop moving in an instant.
I have much of the Meier material from my early and naive days
in ufology. While I was at first interested in the case, the
more and more I looked at the more I became convinced it was,
and is, nothing but a hoax.

As for the coffee table sized book, I had that until recently
and was not at all impressed by it. Genesis 3 may have some good
UFO video from Mexico, but I'm extremely leary of any material
they produce...

Regards,

Royce J. Myers III
eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind...or your
remote viewing sketch books...
eXpos News    http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame   http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                     Remote Viewing/Guessing Target EL-6

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:50:09 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:12:40 -0400
Subject: Remote Viewing/Guessing Target EL-6


Here are the remote viewing/remote b.s.ing results so far for
target EL-6:

1. $10.00 (Check the want ads under 'Help Wanted.')

2. A fridge full of beer. (Yes, I do have a fridge with beer in
it, good beer in fact - but this is not what the target is.)

3. A copy of the cartoon movie 'The Road to El Dorado'
(Mmmmm...no.)

Ian Punnett apparently did not care for my article on Dames and
came to the defense of Coast to Coast AM saying, "Nobody
affiliated with the show that I know of takes fraud lightly.
Personally, I have been a part of many conversations where
either a previous guest or a topic has been avoided because the
producers were convinced that somebody was intentionally
misleading people."

"Beyond that, Coast to Coast AM puts a premium on a guest or a
caller's belief in the truth and allows the listener to make up
his or her own mind. The host is not there to disseminate some
"objective" truth but rather to facilitate the narrative truth
of whoever is telling their story."

I have to give Ian Punnett some credit, at least it only took
four or five e-mails to him to finally get a response. And Ian
is half-critical of some of his guests.

One more thing, the target designator is not a clue of some
sort. It is simply a designator used to facilitate the focus of
those attempting to view the object. The letters and number used
in it have no secret meaning. Keep the viewing seesion results -
and guesses - coming in.

Regards,

Royce J. Myers III
eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind...or your
remote viewing sketch books...
eXpos News  http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame  http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

              Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Killeen

From: Patrick Killeen <p.killeen@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:11:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:31:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Killeen


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked?
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:30:57 -0700

 >Did anyone catch Coast to Coast last night when Siegel said that
 >someone had hacked into Ghostfraud and Hoaxland's website for
 >their 'conference'? Siegel said someone had posted something
 >else and I'm interested in knowing what was put up - the site is
 >now fixed.

 >Any help is appreciated, thanks!


99% of all intrusions appear on this site:

http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/index.html

If it's not there, it probably didn't happen!

Glad to see that theatre isn't dead in the double naughts!

Patrick








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:33:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young


 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >meteors' located at:

 >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

Dear Todd, List:

Interesting, indeed. Is anyone aware of a "crater" or other
evidence of impact or outgassing on the ground for this event?
If there isn't such evidence, the incident would seem not to be
associated with a "geophysical meteor".

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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:28:04 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:37:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:05:32 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:34:53 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:21:43 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:33:37 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously, Jim wrote:

 >>How dare you steal my line! That's what I'm saying. You can't
 >>have a model UFO with a model tree up close to the camera, at a
 >>comparable distance as the branches of the close-up tree on the
 >>right, without the model UFO and model tree being similarly out
 >>of focus. You can't use a camera whose focus setting was stuck
 >>one notch short of infinity to take a sharp picture of a nearby
 >>small model UFO and model tree, on a cloudy day.

 >Jim,

 >Who says the model and the branches would have to be the same distance
 >from the camera? The branches could be within a foot of the camera and
 >the model could be, say, five to ten feet from the camera and still get
 >the effect seen in the shot. You make no point by including the out of
 >focus branches as some kind of "proof". They mean nothing, Jim.

Roger,

There's no need to dismiss important evidence just because it
doesn't point in the desired direction. You can count several
years of growth on the lower limb of that out-of-focus tree on
the lower right of photo #57, and can estimate its length as
extending a foot or two out from the thicker mass of branches.
But a horizontal branch only 1.5 feet from the camera would
extend all across the frame (and be much more blurry), the
camera's angular field of view being only around 45 degrees. It
would have to be some ten times farther away to show up as a
limb that occupies only a small fraction of the photograph's
width.

And so it is not surprising that being some 10 feet away on a
cloudy day, that close-by tree is somewhat blurry.

I hope it's clear that that blurry tree and its mass of limbs
was on the order of ten feet away, not 1 foot. Draw a picture,
if you need to, and insert a 1 foot limb 1 foot away from the
camera, etc.

 >Moving on, I wrote:

 >>>On the one hand, you maintain that the camera is defective and
 >>>unable to focus to infinity. This sort of defect means that the
 >>>camera will, instead, focus closer than usual, even if the
 >>>aperture is wide open. If the aperture were closed down (as
 >>>necessary when shooting in sunlight), then it will focus even
 >>>closer!

 >Jim replied:

 >>This was an old Olympus 35 ECR camera. It didn't have any
 >>automatic focus adjustment. Its manual focus was stuck real
 >>close to infinity. That means it could take sharp picture of
 >>objects at intermediate and rather large distances, though not
 >>of sharpest quality for the treelines of distant hills. Is this
 >>understood?

 >Not by you, apparently. What has auto-focus got to do with
 >anything, Jim? In fact, it's obvious that you have literally no
 >understanding of photography or optical mechanics. So, I will
 >try to make this as simple as possible so that you will
 >understand.

 >There is something called "depth of field" that comes into play
 >when taking pictures. When you focus on an object, you don't
 >just focus on a single point in space. You focus on a area that
 >begins a certain distance from the camera and ends at another
 >distance from the camera. This area is called field of focus.
 >How MUCH of that field you can achieve is called "depth of
 >field".

Sigh. We all know that, Roger.

 >If the aperture on a lens is wide open, then you have
 >very shallow depth of field. On the other hand, the further down
 >the aperture closes, the more that depth of field expands both
 >toward the camera and away. Hence the depth of field gets deeper
 >and more things come into focus even if you NEVER readjusted the
 >focus of the lens. Got it?

 >Now, when shooting in daylight hours, even on a cloudy day, the
 >aperture will close down enough to bring almost everything into
 >focus regardless of what the focus is set at.

Now you have the aperture closing down by itself! This camera
had no built in light meter with aperture adjust, and Meier
didn't use one. Meier was once quizzed about the aperture, and
as I recall he said he never bothered to vary the aperture,
whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
usually somewhat smoggy days.

But even if you don't trust what he said, what you say simply
isn't true for the camera in question. The depth of field
typically isn't great enough to bring an object 6 or 8 feet from
the camera into sharp focus when the focus is centered on a
distance of 100 feet, say. Instead, the depth of field then
would more typically range from 20 feet to 1000 ft. That blurry
tree demonstrates this, which is why it shouldn't be dismissed.
It was no one foot away! We're talking an order of magnitude,
here, Roger; there's a big difference between something 1 foot
away from a camera and 10 feet away.

 >And this is the
 >real point, here. Early pin hole cameras had no focus of any
 >kind. This is because they had enough depth of field to bring
 >everything into focus. However, they were limited to daylight
 >shots or shots with long exposures. The element of focus was
 >added for convenience so that shots at wider apertures (no
 >pinhole) could be obtained. However, the mechanics of depth of
 >field still apply. Focus or not, if you close down the lens (as
 >necessary during daylight shots) then you will gain depth of
 >field and things in both the distance and foreground will come
 >into clarity regardless of WHERE the focus setting on the lens
 >is at.

Yes, we all know that, Roger, and that Meier's camera was not a
pinhole camera.

 >Which brings up a curios point:
 >
 >You keep using the term "stuck one notch short of infinity".
 >What in the world does that even mean? There is no such term.

It was Stevens' description, and means just what anyone should
think. The focus adjustment arrow did not point at the infinity
line, or did not lie in the infinity notch, but pointed along
one marked line (which denoted a distance), or lay along one
notch, to the left of the infinity setting. It was stuck there,
and could not be moved. (Whether that line was marked by a
distance, like 50 or 100 meters, or not, I don't know.)

 >In
 >fact, if the focus were "stuck close to infinity", then even a
 >wide open lens would still have enough aperture to include the
 >distant treelines and hills in the field of focus.

Yes, it gets the distant hills pretty well, though not as
sharply in focus as if the infinity setting had been used. This
is clear from other of Meier's photos that show individual tree
tops in the far distance.

 >Remember,
 >focus doesn't just "stop" at a given point in space.

Roger, we've all known that. But do you know what "field of
view" means? What do you think the camera would see if you put a
1.5 foot square piece of cardboard in front of the camera, just
one foot away? Would it be just a little square occupying only a
small fraction of the frame? Or would it not block all the view.
Now, how much farther would you need to back it off before it
occupied only 3% or 5% of the area of the photograph? Think
about it, please?

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:45:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>


 >Nathan,

 >I guess they forgot to edit out Meier's own remark on the tape
 >that the film had been cut and spliced (at the hands of the
 >studio in Munich). So the viewer who listens to the tape while
 >viewing it will not gain the false impression you have supplied
 >above. However, the improper cuts that were made are relatively
 >few.

 >>Beneath the time code is the actual JUMP CUT
 >>A miniature tree with a miniature beamship can be plainly seen
 >>when you examine the un-cropped photos from this series.

 >It's the uncropped photos I've looked at, Nathan. They don't
 >show anything like that. They show what I have on my website.

 >>Hell!!!--the leaves in the foreground are so large it indicates
 >>that the photographer's camera lens was close to the ground,
 >>shooting upward, at an angle, toward the side of a hill, with a
 >>tiny tree and miniature beamship stuck in its body in midground.

 >Evidently you're speaking of the Fuchsbuel photograph series,
 >now, and not the 8mm movie film. But where's your evidence?
 >What photo No. do you have in mind? What leaves? Did you mean
 >fir needles or pine needles rather than leaves?

 >>These photos were purposely made to create the illusion of a
 >>large object--to purposely deceive the general public into
 >>buying Meier's fraudulent materials.

 >Please note that genuine photos of a large object alongside a
 >large tree also generate the impression that it is a large
 >object alongside a large tree.

 >>In a way, I feel sorry for Mr. Deardorff. He is seriously
 >>delusional. He explains hoaxed issues with the skill of an
 >>defense attorney--spinning and weaving something out of nothing
 >>and then asking us to examine it. What about this and what about
 >>that, he says, generating data from out of the blue, when
 >>there's no foundation for the conclusions he reaches...Sounds
 >>like an OJ Simpson defense team member.

 >I should have been a lawyer, eh?

 >>The Talmud of
 >>Jmmannuel--fooey! The foundation for determining the
 >>authenticity of that phony book is first of all, having the
 >>alleged original Aramaic version to examine.

 >Have you no specific refutation at all to make of my refutations
 >to Korff's false claims? Do you not wish to explain Korff's
 >strange claim in his book that UV, which you head, "discovered
 >evidence proving that the _Talmud Jmmanuel_ does not contain
 >Aramaic!"? Is that all you proved, that a document translated
 >into German does not contain Aramaic text? I've given over 600
 >detailed reasons indicating the TJ was the source for the Gospel
 >of Matthew. Can you not even attempt to refute 10% of them?
 >"Fooey" doesn't cut it.

 >>Without the
 >>original manuscript, any conclusions of authenticity are
 >>ridiculous, reckless and unprofessional....

 >I wonder why, then, that New Testament scholars have long been
 >trying to assess the genuineness of various sections of the
 >Gospels without having any original manuscript of them (their
 >autographs) on hand, but only going by 3rd-5th century
 >transcriptions of transciptions of transcriptions... of them?
 >They've made their livings doing this, along with teaching or
 >preaching. No, it's fair game to assess genuineness when the
 >originals are no longer existent. We use source criticism,
 >redaction criticism, form criticism... in doing it. Most of all,
 >open-minded common sense is needed.

 >>Deardorff should then
 >>blame many more people for debunking Meier including Stanton
 >>Friedman and Walt Andrus, you, Royce, and myself.

 >>Give me a break!

 >>Nathan G. Daniel
 >>Underground Video

 >Hey, your turn to give me a break. I've never said that Korff
 >was the only debunker of Meier. One of the earliest was Bill
 >Moore, with whom Korff as a youngster associated.

 >Jim D.

 >The Meier Case is like a piece of Swiss Cheese: it's full of
holes and it smells!

It's time to end this delusion, Jim. Apparently, you have so
much invested in the Meier dribble you will never admit you are
wrong. The preponderance of evidence proves the Meier case is a
fraud. I hope your continual defense of Meier has not suckered
more consumers into spending money for the Meier fraud Material.

But for your highly educated mind, let's take it a step further.

You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
settle the controversy.

If you don't have the million, have Meier put up the copyright
to all of his materials, as well as his farm. If you lose no one
will ever see the materials again because we'll have a great
winter bonfire and new vacation land in Switzerland.

Nathan G. Daniel

Looking forward to roasting marshmallows.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      Re: UFO Images From The UK - Geib

From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:35:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:52:43 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK - Geib


 >From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 03:08:07 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:03:52 -0700
 >>From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: UFO Images From The UK

 >>Hello

 >>I recently received some images from someone in the UK. The UFO
 >>appears to be very similar to the Haines Vancouver Island case.
 >>I do not vouch for authenticity, just wanted to share what I
 >>have received. Too large to impose directly thru the mail, so if
 >>interested go to the "Want to see a UFO?" Section at UFO
 >>Folklore!

 >>http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

 >>They are under the Year 2000 section and the link is called
 >>UFOs from the UK

 ><snip>

 >Maybe its just me, but I couldn't find the image.

 >I got lost in some sort of lookup routine etc.

 >Could you simply drag down a link from the actual page itself?
 >Its easy in Netscape, I don't know what browser you are using.



Larry,

Sorry for the difficulty in navigation the direct URL is:

http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/ufo/ufopic.htm

Dan

--
FREE Music Win PRIZES
Art Gomperz Bluegrass & Rockabilly
http://www.artGomperz.com/

UFO Folklore!
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

Dan's Flatpicking in Michigan
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/flatpicking.htm

Dan's Magic in Michiga !
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/magician

Dantronix!
http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/testwave.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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                        Fox News Article On Mars Face

From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 08:57:14 -0600
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:57:22 -0400
Subject: Fox News Article On Mars Face


On September 8, Fox News posted an article on the "Mars Face" on
its website at:

http://foxnews.com/science/090800/mars_face.sml

I'm kind of surprised that this hasn't been mentioned on the
List by anyone else yet, since it's a rare event when this sort
of thing gets any coverage at all in the mainstream news media.
While the article was liberally sprinkled with the usual stock
phrases about "believers" and so forth, the reporter who wrote
the article did seem to try to be "fair and balanced," as Fox
News likes to advertise itself.

The reporter, Patrick Riley, titled his article "After 25 Years,
Martian 'Face' Still Raises Questions," but whoever posted the
article tacked on an additional, and incredibly idiotic, title:
"Little Green Men Looking At Us." Now that the article is old
news, it has been retitled, with equal idiocy as: "Conspiracy
Theory."

What apparently caused the subject to come to the attention of
the Fox News reporter was the furor over Mark Kelly's
enhancement of the Face, which shows what would have to be a
clearly artificial representation of a humanoid face if it is
accurate.

(BTW: I think for the most part, it probably is accurate, as I
explained in a web page article I wrote on the subject in
August:

http://www.vgl.org/webfiles/mars/face/newface.htm

That web page got more than 6,000 visitors in a single day, thanks to
mentions made to it by George Filer in his news letter and by
Sightings.com.)

Fox News has one of those "unscientific" polls attached to the
article so that people can register their opinion as to whether
its artificial ("made by aliens," is the actual flippant
wording), natural, or "not enough data to decide." Despite the
front-loaded bias of the Fox News editors in the article's title
and disagreement over the validity of the Kelly enhancement
expressed by Mark Carlotto in the article, the "made by aliens"
vote has consistently exceeded the "natural" vote by a margin of
8% (38 to 30) for more than a week.

The poll may be unscientific, but it was enough to upset the
devotees of CSICOP, who issued a "Media Alert" on their web site
about the Fox News article:

http://www.csicop.org/list/listarchive/msg00106.html

The "Alert" cites the (to them) alarming poll standings, which
at the time showed "aliens" beating "natural" by a margin of 5%.

CSICOP complains that the news media is giving "credibility and
coverage to maverick theories" merely by publishing an article
that is hardly an unqualified endorsement of the artificiality
theory. It's not any kind of endorsement. The beliefs of CSICOP
apparently have so little basis in their vaunted "rationality"
that they fear the free dissemination of information by the news
media is enough to sway public opinion to entertain ideas that
their dogma does not allow.

The Fox News article and the response to their poll (which I'll
bet was quite a surprise to the Fox News editors) make it clear
that the controversy over Cydonia and NASA's mishandling of it
is not going to go away any time soon, despite all the lies and
phony enhancements from JPL's spin doctors. It will remain until
NASA decides to address the issue openly and honestly. The only
way for them to do that is by acquiring images of greater
scientific value (not images taken off-nadir under hazy
conditions like the first MGS Face image). And no more Catbox
enhancements, please. With the exception of CSICOP, most people
aren't going to fall for that trick a second time.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:24:28 -0300
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:09:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >>An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >>the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >>meteors' located at:

 >>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

 >Dear Todd, List:

 >Interesting, indeed. Is anyone aware of a "crater" or other
 >evidence of impact or outgassing on the ground for this event?
 >If there isn't such evidence, the incident would seem not to be
 >associated with a "geophysical meteor".

Hi Bob,

To consider a meteor here is just muddying the waters. The
length of the sighting, and/or the time to take a photograph
precludes a meteor from the getgo. Please don't make the mistake
of thinking that because it was in Canada it was therefore in
the remote arctic. Also with a meteor of this size, where's the
trail, the outgassing and all of the other telltales of a
meteor?

Ball lightning perhaps, but why give the naysayers another
feeble explanation for the sighting by even proposing a meteor?

Best,

Don Ledger









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:19:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:11:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Young


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:28:04 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:05:32 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Roger,

 >There's no need to dismiss important evidence just because it
 >doesn't point in the desired direction. You can count several
 >years of growth on the lower limb of that out-of-focus tree on
 >the lower right of photo #57

Jim, List:

How does one estimate a year's worth of tree growth? Could be a
good technique to keep in mind when estimating the date of other
photos. Would appreciate the info.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                  Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:25:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:12:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Young


 >Fox News has one of those "unscientific" polls attached to the
 >article so that people can register their opinion as to whether
 >its artificial ("made by aliens," is the actual flippant
 >wording), natural, or "not enough data to decide." Despite the
 >front-loaded bias of the Fox News editors in the article's title
 >and disagreement over the validity of the Kelly enhancement
 >expressed by Mark Carlotto in the article, the "made by aliens"
 >vote has consistently exceeded the "natural" vote by a margin of
 >8% (38 to 30) for more than a week.

 >The poll may be unscientific, but it was enough to upset the
 >devotees of CSICOP, who issued a "Media Alert" on their web site
 >about the Fox News article:

Lan, List:

Are you suggesting that this sort of "survey" which simply asks
for anybody interested enough in the article to respond is
"scientific"?

Clear skies,

Bob Young

Devotee of the Fox Network








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:26:07 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:15:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:28:04 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:37:30 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:05:32 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Previously I wrote:

 >>Who says the model and the branches would have to be the same distance
 >>from the camera? The branches could be within a foot of the camera and
 >>the model could be, say, five to ten feet from the camera and still get
 >>the effect seen in the shot. You make no point by including the out of
 >>focus branches as some kind of "proof". They mean nothing, Jim.

Jim replied:

 >There's no need to dismiss important evidence just because it
 >doesn't point in the desired direction.

That's good advice, Jim. You should practice what you preach.

Moving on, Jim guesses at the following:

 >You can count several
 >years of growth on the lower limb of that out-of-focus tree on
 >the lower right of photo #57, and can estimate its length as
 >extending a foot or two out from the thicker mass of branches.

Ahhhh. So now we're required to estimate something that we don't
know. The simple truth is that you really don't know how big the
branch is or how far from the camera it really was.

Let's continue.

I wrote:

 >>Now, when shooting in daylight hours, even on a cloudy day, the
 >>aperture will close down enough to bring almost everything into
 >>focus regardless of what the focus is set at.

Jim replied:

 >Now you have the aperture closing down by itself! This camera
 >had no built in light meter with aperture adjust, and Meier
 >didn't use one. Meier was once quizzed about the aperture, and
 >as I recall he said he never bothered to vary the aperture,
 >whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
 >usually somewhat smoggy days.

 >But even if you don't trust what he said, what you say simply
 >isn't true for the camera in question. The depth of field
 >typically isn't great enough to bring an object 6 or 8 feet from
 >the camera into sharp focus when the focus is centered on a
 >distance of 100 feet, say. Instead, the depth of field then
 >would more typically range from 20 feet to 1000 ft.

First off, this is wrong. A closed down aperture appropriate for
"sunny days" or even "smoggy days" will, indeed, provide plenty
of depth of field and WILL cover a range from about 6 feet to
infinity regardless of where the focus is set within that range.

Second, I never said the aperture was automatic and closed down
by itself. This is a childish deversion to the larger quation at
hand. More importantly, you just made my entire point by showing
that the aperture was "appropriate for sunny days". This means
that the aperture was closed down, Jim. How it got there is
academic. The depth of field generated by this setting is all
that matters; not where the lens was focused at.

In an effort to educate Jim about this, I wrote:


 >>And this is the
 >>real point, here. Early pin hole cameras had no focus of any
 >>kind. This is because they had enough depth of field to bring
 >>everything into focus. However, they were limited to daylight
 >>shots or shots with long exposures. The element of focus was
 >>added for convenience so that shots at wider apertures (no
 >>pinhole) could be obtained. However, the mechanics of depth of
 >>field still apply. Focus or not, if you close down the lens (as
 >>necessary during daylight shots) then you will gain depth of
 >>field and things in both the distance and foreground will come
 >>into clarity regardless of WHERE the focus setting on the lens
 >>is at.


Obviously missing the point, Jim replied:

 >Yes, we all know that, Roger, and that Meier's camera was not a
 >pinhole camera.

Another childish diversion. Where in God's green acre did I ever
say that Meier's camera was a pinhole camera? What I clearly
said is that if the aperture is closed down enough (and you have
confirmed that it was) then most everything will come into focus
regardless of where the focus was set. Therefore, your position
regarding the camera's near infinity setting on the lens means
nothing. You ask us to make assumptions regarding the branch in
the foreground (as if that were important) yet you ignore proven
laws of optics.

This is illustrated by the following where I wrote:

 >>Remember,
 >>focus doesn't just "stop" at a given point in space.

Jim replied:

 >Roger, we've all known that.

However he brushes this aside and goes off in another direction:

 >But do you know what "field of
 >view" means? What do you think the camera would see if you put a
 >1.5 foot square piece of cardboard in front of the camera, just
 >one foot away? Would it be just a little square occupying only a
 >small fraction of the frame? Or would it not block all the view.
 >Now, how much farther would you need to back it off before it
 >occupied only 3% or 5% of the area of the photograph? Think
 >about it, please?

First things first, Jim.

I am not here to debate the size of Meier's models. It is enough
that I know that they were models. How far away they would have
to be is academic since the camera had enough inherent depth of
field to pull off the shot as long as the model was just big
enough to stay within the field of view as well as the area of
focus provided by the aperture setting (which, as you pointed
out, was closed down for daylight shots).

You are at an extreme disadvantage here, Jim. Just about all I
do is effects shots, most of which use foreground miniatures. I
am well aware of what "field of view" means as well as "depth of
field" and "infinity" and all the other terms you sling around
so carelessly.

So far, here's how things stack up:

1) You don't now how big the limbs in the foreground really are.

2) You don't know what aperture Meire's camera was set at.

3) However, you DO know that it was "appropriate for sunny days"
which means that it would be closed down. Such a setting would
increase the depth of field and overcome any focus issues.

4) Despite this fact you maintain that, even though Meier's
camera was focused at "near infinity", it was unable to focus on
distant hills and trees.

5) You then contradict yourself by stating, "the depth of field
[on Meier's camera] would more typically range from 20 feet to
1000 ft." I've got news for you, Jim. 1000 feet IS infinity on
every camera lens I have ever seen. Therefore, the hills and
trees would also be in focus. This is not my opinion, but fact.

5) You also maintain that, because Meier's camera was focused at
"near infinity", it was unable to focus on anything close to the
camera despite the increased depth of field provided by an
aperture "appropriate for sunny days".

Tell me, Jim. Could Meier's camera focus on ANYTHING?

This is all a waste of time. However, I will play your game once
more. You mentioned "field of view" as if it had some
significance to you. As this term applies specifically to the
view allowed by a given focal length, tell me: What was the
focal length of the lens used by Meier to produce all his
photos?

I ask this because earlier your wrote:

 >what you say simply
 >isn't true for the camera in question. The depth of field
 >typically isn't great enough to bring an object 6 or 8 feet from
 >the camera into sharp focus when the focus is centered on a
 >distance of 100 feet, say. Instead, the depth of field then
 >would more typically range from 20 feet to 1000 ft.

I assume you MUST know the focal length of the lens used if you feel the
above data is correct. Just what lens shares the depth of field
characteristics you describe? Tell me and I will look up the stats on
the depth of field charts that I use every day in my work and we can put
this baby to bed.

Beyond that, it would seem that Meier had a very unique camera; one that
ignored the laws of optics and couldn't focus anything other than UFO's.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:46:57 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:17:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:38:32 -0700

<snip>

 >Perhaps someone can point out the date of the first book
 >reference to the Oz effect that he knows of.

<snip>

Hi,

The term I use is 'Oz Factor' and it is simply a means to
describe a set of symptoms consistently described by witnesses
that include time losing meaning, all ambient sounds
disappearing and a shift in consciousness that seems to lock the
witness and experience in a one-to-one that is temporarily
dislocated from normal, mundane reality.

Heres how I define it in 'The Little Giant Encylopedia of UFOs'
(Sterling, New York, 2000)

'Oz Factor: Set of symptoms described by close encounter
witnesses that suggest they have entered an altered state of
consciousness. Includes distortion to the passage of time and
apparent disappearance of ambient sounds, such as bird songs.
Often a prelude to a CE 4, but also found in psychic experiences
of a not strictly UFO nature, such as the NDE (near death
experience).'

It has cropped up in cases from day one and often been refered
to (or parts of these symptoms have been). I do so in my first
book (UFOs: A British Viewpoint - l979).

I first used the term to suggest a combomation of effects in
articles in l981 and first wrote about it in a book in l983
('UFO Reality').

I should add that there has been a debate on the UFOIN list
lately as to whether this term (that I only ever came up with to
help myself assess data BTW) helps or hinders. There is some
feeling that it is a misleading concept because it implies a
discrete phenomenon when it only really relates to known
psychological responses.

My argument is that I use it not to define any explanation
behind its occurrence but merely to recognise the suggestions of
an ASC and the combined effects that are consistently reported.
It is clearly a clue to our understanding - as is its cross
occurrence in other paranormal phenomena. It may be
psychological. It may be physical (eg triggered by energy fields
effecting the mind). It may be a consequence of distortions in
space-time reality itself. It may even be all three.

The appearance of the Oz Factor in a case simply sends up a flag
for me to indicate a potentially less significant case often has
hidden depths. That - over the years - has proven its real value
to me.

Hope this helps.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

             CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Viscount, Saskatchewan

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:36:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:22:24 -0400
Subject: CPR-Canada News: Update #1 - Viscount, Saskatchewan


CPR-CANADA NEWS
The E-News Service of Circles Phenomenon Research Canada

http://www.egroups.com/group/cprcanadanews
http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada

September 24, 2000

_____________________________


UPDATE #1 - VISCOUNT, SASKATCHEWAN CROP CIRCLES


Following is a field report on the Viscount, Saskatchewan crop
formation (September 12) from Dennis Eklund, Saskatchewan director
for CPR-Canada.

Additional ground images from Dennis have also been added to the
report on the web site:

http://www.geocities.com/cpr-canada/viscount00.html


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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                 Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:37:58 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:24:35 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge? - Mortellaro


 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 16:01:08 -0500
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Roger Prokic <rprokic@pobox.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:35:45 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:09:50 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Evans

 >>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:36:53 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledge?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously, I wrote:

 >>Without starting a CSETI debate, let me again point out that
 >>communcation is a two way street. It doesn't matter what form of
 >>communication that an advanced race uses to talk to each other,
 >>be it thought-beams, laserlight, microwave, sign language, morse
 >>code or whatever. What is important is what they decide to use
 >>to communicate with US.

 >Roger replied:

 >>I think the likelihood of an ET visitor wanting to chat with us
 >>Earthlings is as likely as you or me trying to chat with some
 >>cannabalistic natives. I wouldn't know why anybody would do this
 >>either. But, it's more likely that surveillance from a safe
 >>distance would occur.

 >Roger, Roger!

 >You may very well be right. Why _would_ anyone out there want to
 >talk to us? However, my point is that if they do, then they're
 >smart enough to know that it's easier for them to adopt our
 >primitive communication techniques than for us to adopt theirs.
 >This may very well mean that they _would_ use RF since that's
 >what we use. Why come all this way and make it harder than
 >necessary. After all, if RF is so primitive, then the technology
 >shouldn't be beyond them.

 >However, I am going to back out of this thread. I don't want to
 >muddy the waters by starting a CSETI debate when Roy originally
 >asked a completely different question regarding flashing lights
 >and claims by contactees. Sorry for the detour, Roy.

 >And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming....

 >Roger and out.

Roger, Roger, Col., Major, EBK,

Sounds a little like a standard MASH greeting, don't it?

Anyway, here's another two cents worth. No one is more
fascinated by what's out there, coming in here, on the RF
spectrum, than me. I've been quietly listening on my own on the
spectrum from the highest to the lowest of frequencies for 50
years. Sometime, as with UpDates, I cannot resist answering a CQ
and jumping right in to chew the rag with someone out there in
the void. In college, we bounced signals off the moon at what
then was the highest frequency anyone could imagine amateurs or
even professionals using.

1296 MHz. Course, they was Megacycles in them days.
(sigh)

Anyway, I wanted you to know that my love of communications
exists to this day. And in the face of my criticism of CETI to
which I insist on maintaining, I am doing my own little CETI on
the side. It's a wonder what you can do with computers these
days. They make fantastic receivers. Did you know that?

Here comes the "but." But I for one (and this is _my_ personal
opinion only), I am really totally unconcerned with listening to
people out there who still use RF. What I do is out of curiosity
and love of the art of communications. But what I am interested
in is communicating with those who've past RF up a long, long
time ago. Entities who can travel long distances, defy the
paradigms of our world, make contact with some of us. I want to
be in CONTROL of myself. What better way of maintaining control
of me than by finding out what makes "them" tick...
communicating with "them" is more important to me than waiting a
hundred years to get an answer back from our "CQ" on the
Hydrogen band.

So, Roger, when you wrote ...

 >This may very well mean that they _would_ use RF since that's
 >what we use. Why come all this way and make it harder than
 >necessary. After all, if RF is so primitive, then the technology
 >shouldn't be beyond them.

Perhaps some of us have not gotten the point. If they _did_ want
to communicate with us, they _would_ use RF or some other form
of communications familiar to us.

Since they do not, they liely do not wish to communicate with
most of us. That's my point. And as usual, I take the loong way
around.

Roger, Roger?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                     Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:43:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:27:15 -0400
Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK - Hatch


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:35:47 -0700
 >From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK

 >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 03:08:07 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: UFO Images From The UK

 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:03:52 -0700
 >>>From: Dan Geib <DanGeib@ArtGomperz.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: UFO Images From The UK

 >>>Hello

 >>>I recently received some images from someone in the UK. The UFO
 >>>appears to be very similar to the Haines Vancouver Island case.
 >>>I do not vouch for authenticity, just wanted to share what I
 >>>have received. Too large to impose directly thru the mail, so if
 >>>interested go to the "Want to see a UFO?" Section at UFO
 >>>Folklore!

 >>>http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/framemst.html

 >>>They are under the Year 2000 section and the link is called
 >>>UFOs from the UK

 >><snip>

 >>Maybe its just me, but I couldn't find the image.

 >>I got lost in some sort of lookup routine etc.

 >>Could you simply drag down a link from the actual page itself?
 >>Its easy in Netscape, I don't know what browser you are using.

 >Larry,

 >Sorry for the difficulty in navigation the direct URL is:

 >http://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/ufo/ufopic.htm

 >Dan

Hello Dan:

Your new link went to the photos right away.

The original (wide field/small object) could be an airplane
fuselage to my eyes, but the blowup certainly suggests some sort
of frisbee disk, i.e. a cross section of the rim would be
rounded instead of a sharp edge.

The upper central portion (dark) suggests a shallow dome unlike
a standard frisbee, and the object appears shiny or metallic.

Its a pity this cannot be authenticated or else refuted somehow.
Without some verification it could be just another photo-prank,
like so many others thrown out to get a reaction.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:28:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Hey, your turn to give me a break. I've never said that Korff
 >>was the only debunker of Meier. One of the earliest was Bill
 >>Moore, with whom Korff as a youngster associated.

 >>Jim D.

 >It's time to end this delusion, Jim. Apparently, you have so
 >much invested in the Meier dribble you will never admit you are
 >wrong. The preponderance of evidence proves the Meier case is a
 >fraud. I hope your continual defense of Meier has not suckered
 >more consumers into spending money for the Meier fraud Material.

 >But for your highly educated mind, let's take it a step further.

 >You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >settle the controversy.

 >Nathan G. Daniel

Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

Such a panel would settle nothing. Well, except for shifting a
million bucks here or there, and making certain parties feel
better.

You were just joshin us, right?

-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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

               Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:00:20 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:30:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked? - Myers


 >From: Patrick Killeen <p.killeen@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:11:41 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked?

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Ghostwolf/Hoagland Website Hacked?
 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:30:57 -0700

 >>Did anyone catch Coast to Coast last night when Siegel said that
 >>someone had hacked into Ghostfraud and Hoaxland's website for
 >>their 'conference'? Siegel said someone had posted something
 >>else and I'm interested in knowing what was put up - the site is
 >>now fixed.

 >>Any help is appreciated, thanks!

 >99% of all intrusions appear on this site:

 >http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/index.html

 >If it's not there, it probably didn't happen!

 >Glad to see that theatre isn't dead in the double naughts!

 >Patrick


Patrick,

I checked out the site and Ghostfraud and Hoaxland's conference
page isn't listed at all. Was it a publicity stunt? I wouldn't
put it or anything else as shameless past those creeps.

Regards,

Royce J. Myers III
eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open
Mind...or your silly publicity stunts...
eXpos News    http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame   http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 14:46:19 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:35:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:38:32 -0700

 >>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 18:39:53 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:57:06 -0700

 >>>>Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:51:36 -0500
 >>>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>>>Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:03:39 -0700
 >>>>>Fwd Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:27:08 -0400
 >>>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>>Has anybody seen Meier's beamship film where the ship disappears
 >>>and then instantly reappears? If you'll notice that the wind is
 >>>blowing and there is a tree limb or some kind of plant limb to
 >>>the left of the frame. When the ship disappears the limb
 >>>instantly stops moving as the ship reappears. This is blatant
 >>>stop motion photography. The Meier case is dead and anyone that
 >>>believes in it is needs some serious help...
 >
 >>Royce,

 >>Yes, that's the Berg-Rumlikon sequence of 12 June, 1975. Have
 >>you ever read witnesses' accounts of the "Oz" effect? Suddenly
 >>no animal or bird sounds, no wind. This film shows this UFO
 >>phenomenon in operation. Meier described it to his interviewers
 >>while the film was being replayed and video-taped, back around
 >>1980(?) or so. It commenced when the beamship  suddenly
 >>disappeared and ceased when it reappeared a half minute or so
 >>later. Of course, he didn't call it the Oz effect -- I don't
 >>think Jenny had described it and named it that until later --
 >>and Meier wasn't then reading a lot of UFO books.

 >>This "film" is a video of a copy of 7 segments of original film
 >>Meier took on 7 occasions that were spliced together, which
 >>Meier had loaned out to a studio in Munich. He received what he
 >>thought was the same film back only after prodding them for
 >>several months. It was Stevens who later discovered it was only
 >>a copy, and not the original Meier had sent them. Meier found
 >>that they had cut out sections here and there and respliced it.
 >>But according to Meier, this particular sequence had not been
 >>cut and spliced by them (or by him).

 >>Perhaps someone can point out the date of the first book
 >>reference to the Oz effect that he knows of.

 >Actually, the piece is in the Genesis 3 video on the Meier case.

Yes, that's where those of us who have seen it got it from.

 >The narrator clearly states that the ship is disappearing and
 >then reappearing. It isn't a cut and splice technique, it is -
 >what I siad it was earlier - blatant stop motion. Nobody can
 >defend that piece of footage as anything other than that.

This is a statement of belief that aliens shouldn't be able to
do anything we can't begin to understand.

 >Meier filmed his little model, stopped the film, took it out of
 >the frame, began filming for a second more, stopped it again,
 >placed his model back in the frame and began filming.

This is your assumption. Let's keep in mind it's an assumption,
because those investigators who have spent many hours and days
with Meier found him to be totally honest, and no hoaxer.
Perhaps some 8mm movie-film experts (Malcolm FTL movie camera)
will let us know if during both film stoppage and restart
there's any slow-down in frame exposure rate for a few frames
that would lead to overexposure and a need for subsequent cut
and splice.

 >The branch
 >in the frame proves this without question. Branches being blown
 >by the wind do not just automatically stop moving in an instant...

I don't "like" that any more than you do. But that's another
assumption. I believe that some witnesses' reports of the Oz
effect have said it came on suddenly. It's really foolish to
assume that a piece of way-way advanced technology that can
suddently disappear from sight, can zoom through the air at Mach
XX without creating a sonic boom, and whose aliens in some cases
can pass through solid walls, etc., cannot also generate the Oz
effect.

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      Re: Time Travel Articles? - Hall

From: Mark Hall <capn_black@msn.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:16:53 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:34:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Time Travel Articles? - Hall


Hi,

Many thanks for the advice that some of you have given me for
our coming time travel related UFO article that is coming
shortly.

Cheers,

Mark Hall (Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom) Editor 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 >
   Sep > Sep 24

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:17:38 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 19:37:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

As new material, you wrote:

 >The Meier Case is like a piece of Swiss Cheese: it's full of
 >holes and it smells!

 >It's time to end this delusion, Jim. Apparently, you have so
 >much invested in the Meier dribble you will never admit you are
 >wrong. The preponderance of evidence proves the Meier case is a
 >fraud. I hope your continual defense of Meier has not suckered
 >more consumers into spending money for the Meier fraud Material.

Nathan,

I really was hoping that you'd have something substantive to
say, something with some meat to it, especially where Korff's
book mentions your input.

 >But for your highly educated mind, let's take it a step further.

 >You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >settle the controversy. ...

Hmmm. Suppose most of the "neutral" panel members don't think
that UFOs could exist or be real. Suppose they already hold the
view that, if they do exist, they should be like 21st-century
space ships that cannot exhibit any of the effects we call "high
strangeness", with any witnesses who claim UFOs can make abrupt
right-angle turns, etc., being assumed to be deluded or hoaxers.
I don't think you'd find neutrality amongst these polarized
issues. Or would you, e.g., accept Phil Klass on the panel, as
he has said he'd be delighted to have a UFO land in his
backyard?

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                 Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Fleming

From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 17:38:28 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:32:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face - Fleming


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:25:14 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Fox News Article On Mars Face
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Fox News has one of those "unscientific" polls attached to the
 >>article so that people can register their opinion as to whether
 >>its artificial ("made by aliens," is the actual flippant
 >>wording), natural, or "not enough data to decide." Despite the
 >>front-loaded bias of the Fox News editors in the article's title
 >>and disagreement over the validity of the Kelly enhancement
 >>expressed by Mark Carlotto in the article, the "made by aliens"
 >>vote has consistently exceeded the "natural" vote by a margin of
 >>8% (38 to 30) for more than a week.

 >>The poll may be unscientific, but it was enough to upset the
 >>devotees of CSICOP, who issued a "Media Alert" on their web site
 >>>about the Fox News article:

 >Lan, List:

 >Are you suggesting that this sort of "survey" which simply asks
 >for anybody interested enough in the article to respond is
 >"scientific"?

Uh, notice where I said the poll was "unscientific"? In case you
didn't know, "unscientific" means the opposite of "scientific".
Hope that clears up your confusion.

What I'd really like to see is the topic being covered in the
"mainstream" news thoroughly and objectively and _then_ maybe a
scientific poll of public opinion by Gallup or Zogby. But
instead of the silly "made by aliens" question, a more
intellilgent question should be asked, such as: "do you think
NASA should order that more images of Cydonia be taken to
attempt to resolve the question of artificial landforms in that
region of Mars?" You might not like those results any better
than you like the Fox News poll.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 16:45:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:34:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 14:46:19 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:38:32 -0700


<snip>

 >>Actually, the piece is in the Genesis 3 video on the Meier case.

 >Yes, that's where those of us who have seen it got it from.

 >>The narrator clearly states that the ship is disappearing and
 >>then reappearing. It isn't a cut and splice technique, it is -
 >>what I siad it was earlier - blatant stop motion. Nobody can
 >>defend that piece of footage as anything other than that.

 >This is a statement of belief that aliens shouldn't be able to
 >do anything we can't begin to understand.

No, that's not what the statement says.


 >>Meier filmed his little model, stopped the film, took it out of
 >>the frame, began filming for a second more, stopped it again,
 >>placed his model back in the frame and began filming.

 >This is your assumption. Let's keep in mind it's an assumption,
 >because those investigators who have spent many hours and days
 >with Meier found him to be totally honest, and no hoaxer.
 >Perhaps some 8mm movie-film experts (Malcolm FTL movie camera)
 >will let us know if during both film stoppage and restart
 >there's any slow-down in frame exposure rate for a few frames
 >that would lead to overexposure and a need for subsequent cut
 >and splice.

 >>The branch
 >>in the frame proves this without question. Branches being blown
 >>by the wind do not just automatically stop moving in an instant...

 >I don't "like" that any more than you do. But that's another
 >assumption. I believe that some witnesses' reports of the Oz
 >effect have said it came on suddenly. It's really foolish to
 >assume that a piece of way-way advanced technology that can
 >suddently disappear from sight, can zoom through the air at Mach
 >XX without creating a sonic boom, and whose aliens in some cases
 >can pass through solid walls, etc., cannot also generate the Oz
 >effect.

 >Jim D.


Jim, you're reaching for some way to validate Meier's claims and
you're reaching far. This piece of film is stop motion -period.
Meier and anyone else can claim all they want that his UFO model
caused some sort of effect in order to make the branch suddenly
stop moving. However, common sense and a common set of eyes
prevail here. Hell, when the UFO reappears the frame of the
camera has shifted a bit showing that it was stopped, moved
slightly during the process and then turned back on. This isn't
about the 'Oz' effect, its about a third rate special effect
employed in the perpetration of a UFO hoax.

As for the ivestigators that spent all that time with Meier, how
much money did they make on this?

Regards,

Royce J. Myers III
eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open
Mind... or your need to believe in UFO cases that are obvious
hoaxes...
eXpos News   ttp://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame   http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS
you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of
the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hale

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:01:53 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:37:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Hale


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:26:07 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >I am not here to debate the size of Meier's models. It is enough
 >that I know that they were models. How far away they would have
 >to be is academic since the camera had enough inherent depth of
 >field to pull off the shot as long as the model was just big
 >enough to stay within the field of view as well as the area of
 >focus provided by the aperture setting (which, as you pointed
 >out, was closed down for daylight shots).


Hi Roger,

My penny's worth here:

What do you make of the Brit & Lee Elder along with Wendelle
Stevens, investigation and subsequent Metal Analysis of the
Meir UFO Films carried out in the U.S.?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                Re: John Carpenter Does it Again - 2 - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 20:59:49 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:42:18 -0400
Subject: Re: John Carpenter Does it Again - 2 - Gates


 >From: Gary Hart <geehart@frontiernet.net>
 >Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:47:59 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: John Carpenter Does it Again - 2

 >>>Mike Farrell recently wrote:

 >>>How many times can we say "shame on you, Mr. Carpenter??!"
 >>>And shame on Constance Clear for jumping on Carpenter's
 >>>bandwagon without knowing the facts of this case.

 >This in reference to:

 >>>Email from JOHN CARPENTER (to one of his friends):

 >>>>There is a good point to be made about "good evidence" not
 >>>>being allowed and researchers being discredited. Constance
 >>>>Clear, MSW, also believes this is one reason I am under
 >>>>attack by people I have never met or heard of before.

 >>>>John

 >List Members,

 >I made a phone call to Constance Clear, MSW, LCSW (as with John,
 >a state-licensed position) and discovered the following:

 >She _was_ aware of the discussion of John's unethical activities
 >and did not appreciate being dragged into the controversy since
 >she had _not_ made any statement such as John attributes to her.

 >Constance was aware of the video he mentions but has not seen
 >it. Seems that John is just making things up to suit his own
 >needs and provably so. I contacted Ms. Clear suspecting this was
 >the case.

If this information is correct, we will likely next hear (from
the various defenders) after this message:

Well Ms Clear is all part of the evil ex-wife conspiracy out to
get JC.

Ms Clear (it will be said) is evil and lying and somehow got
corrupted after speaking with John.....

John said that he contacted her and since she denied it, she
must be lying because everything John says is the gospel truth
never to be doubted.

Well all of that even if true doesn't truly matter.....

Well, what John really meant to say was.....

etc etc

The truth simply is that apparently Clear never saw the Video,
and _if_ she _ever_ sent a message in the first place....

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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:09:14 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:46:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Young


 >From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:24:28 -0300
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >>>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >>>An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >>>the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >>>meteors' located at:

 >>>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

 >To consider a meteor here is just muddying the waters. The
 >length of the sighting, and/or the time to take a photograph
 >precludes a meteor from the getgo. Please don't make the mistake
 >of thinking that because it was in Canada it was therefore in
 >the remote arctic. Also with a meteor of this size, where's the
 >trail, the outgassing and all of the other telltales of a
 >meteor?

 >Ball lightning perhaps, but why give the naysayers another
 >feeble explanation for the sighting by even proposing a meteor?>>

Don, List:

I agree that the description doesn't sound like a meteor.

I was responding to Todd's input, about Andrei Ol'khovatov's URL
about "geophysical meteors", and asking if there is any evidence
for this type of phenomena, here. Ol'khovatov suggests that
these things are outgassings of some sort from the Earth, not
actually meteors. I think that he lists a lot of sightings which
are likely meteors, though.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                        Defense Satellite UFO Photo?

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:44:04 -0400
Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?


Over 20 years ago a Defense Meteorological Satellite Program
satellite recorded a very strange image while not far from the
FSU  (Former Soviet Union).

Starting in 1985 this was publicized as a photo of an object at
45,000 ft traveling at 4000-5000 mph and leaving several
contrails. Ok, it looks like a "sport model" without wheels.
But who needs wheels at 45,000 ft. altitude, anyway?

Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite photo of a
True UFO (TRUFO)?

What do you think?

I invite your comments

http://brumac.8k.com/DMSP/DMSP.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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                       UFO 2000 Symposium, Lima, Ohio

From: Jan Sypherd <ufoohio@wcoil.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:43:07 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:53:21 -0400
Subject: UFO 2000 Symposium, Lima, Ohio


                     UFO 2000

A Symposium of the Mutual UFO Network is to be held in Lima,
Ohio on Sunday November 5, 2000 at The Veterans Memorial Civic &
Convention Center of Lima/Allen County.

7 Town Sq.
Lima, Ohio
45801

Box Office: (419)-224-1552
Fax:        (419)-224-6964
E-mail:     vmccc@alpha.wcoil.com
             www.metroevents.com/vmcc

Coordinator of Event: Jan M. Pheneger
ufoohio@wcoil.com
www.ufoohio.com

Guest Speakers of Symposium Are,

Dr. Bruce Maccabee
Stanton Friedman
Budd Hopkins
Nancy Talbott
John P. Timmerman

Doors open at 12:00 Noon
Symposium starts at 1:00 -10:00 pm.
Talk Show Host: Ric Bratton of  WLIO TV- Channel 5

For ticket information contact the
Veterans Memorial Civic & Convention Center Box Office.
Tickets: $25.00 per/person with general seating.

Holiday Inn Hotel Accomodations Available on
Interstate 75
Lima, Ohio  Exit Rt. 81
Call 1-800-Holiday

or,

Wingate Hotel adjoining Civic & Convention Center
175 W. Market Street, Lima, Ohio 45801
Phone: 419-228-7000
Fax: 419-228-9752
Reservations Toll Free 1-800-228-1000
Parking garage available conecting Hotel, and
The Veterans Memorial Civic & Convention Center







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 18:42:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:16:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:19:51 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Jim, List:

 >How does one estimate a year's worth of tree growth? Could be a
 >good technique to keep in mind when estimating the date of other
 >photos. Would appreciate the info.


Bob,

It depends on everything, of course -- species, climate, soil,
rainfall, branch location. The tops of growing fir trees
typically grow around 1-2 feet per year, branches perhaps half
as much. Fir needle lengths can even be helpful.

Jim D.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:47:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:17:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:26:07 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:28:04 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 11:37:30 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:05:32 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Previously I wrote:

 >>>Who says the model and the branches would have to be the same distance
 >>>from the camera? The branches could be within a foot of the camera and
 >>>the model could be, say, five to ten feet from the camera and still get
 >>>the effect seen in the shot. You make no point by including the out of
 >>>focus branches as some kind of "proof". They mean nothing, Jim.

 >Jim replied:

 >>There's no need to dismiss important evidence just because it
 >>doesn't point in the desired direction.

 >That's good advice, Jim. You should practice what you preach.
 >Moving on...

Before moving on, Roger, let's remember that if just a part of
the branches in question were only a foot(!) from the camera,
the camera's full field of view would be totally blocked by
those branches. Thus they were a lot farther away from the
camera than that.

To get a fair estimate of the blurry tree limbs' distance from
the camera, consider the branch extending out of, and drooping
down from, the denser mass of branches in the lower right of
photo #57 (left-hand picture in my website array of 7
thumbnails). Although it's blurry due to being out of focus, one
can see the spruce needles on the individual branches. (This is
probably, though not certainly, a picea abies tree, or Norwegian
spruce, the two forestry profs told me.) A typical length of the
spruce or fir needle is 1". Then the needle-covered twig width
one would see, with needles extending out both sides (or all
sides), is 2". Upon making both measurements from the uncropped
photo, one finds that the length of that limb is around 15 times
the needle-covered twig width, or around 2.5 feet. (I had
guessed around 1.5 ft in a previous post.)

The same limb's left-to-right width, subtended along the
horizontal, is less, about 16 inches. This subtended width
occupies 13% of the 35mm film's width (or length in the film's
along-the-roll direction). Then knowing the camera's focal
length of 42 mm, one finds this blurry limb's distance from the
camera as having been 16 feet. This uses the "camera" equation:


Width of object on 35mm film   Actual width of object
---------------------------- = ----------------------
   focal length in mm           Actual distance from camera


If the beamship and adjacent tree had been models, I think
they'd have to be at least twice as far away as the blurry tree
limbs to have been in the real good focus they are in. This
would require a saucer model of width about 33 inches. This is
nothing that could have been hauled around undetected by Meier
on his Moped, not to mention much other model-support equipment
a hoaxer would need.

 >...Jim guesses at the following:

 >I wrote:

 >>>Now, when shooting in daylight hours, even on a cloudy day, the
 >>>aperture will close down enough to bring almost everything into
 >>>focus regardless of what the focus is set at.

 >Jim replied:

 >>Now you have the aperture closing down by itself! This camera
 >>had no built in light meter with aperture adjust, and Meier
 >>didn't use one. Meier was once quizzed about the aperture, and
 >>as I recall he said he never bothered to vary the aperture,
 >>whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
 >>usually somewhat smoggy days.

 >>But even if you don't trust what he said, what you say simply
 >>isn't true for the camera in question. The depth of field
 >>typically isn't great enough to bring an object 6 or 8 feet from
 >>the camera into sharp focus when the focus is centered on a
 >>distance of 100 feet, say. Instead, the depth of field then
 >>would more typically range from 20 feet to 1000 ft.

 >First off, this is wrong. A closed down aperture appropriate for
 >"sunny days" or even "smoggy days" will, indeed, provide plenty
 >of depth of field and WILL cover a range from about 6 feet to
 >infinity regardless of where the focus is set within that range.

Evidently, Meier had the aperture relatively far open for that
day's photographs. I suspect he did know about the need to open
it up some for a cloudy, overcast day.

 >Second, I never said the aperture was automatic and closed down
 >by itself. This is a childish deversion to the larger quation at
 >hand. More importantly, you just made my entire point by showing
 >that the aperture was "appropriate for sunny days". This means
 >that the aperture was closed down, Jim. How it got there is
 >academic. The depth of field generated by this setting is all
 >that matters; not where the lens was focused at....

The evidence of the blurry tree having been some 16 feet away
indicates to me that the aperture was not in a sunny-day
closed-down position after all. I believe we need to go by the
evidence more than by Wendelle Stevens' or Meier's recollection
of 20 or more years ago.

I think you will need to assume that the spruce needles were
only 1/2" or so in length, or that one need not double the
distance to the blurry tree to obtain excellent focus, or both.

Jim D.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:22:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer


 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                   Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Krause

From: Scott Krause <SKrause272@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:31:41 EDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:21:25 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Krause


 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >Hi Everyone,

 >I was pondering on this thought the other day when I was
 >reminded about it on the List.

 >It concerns the communication aspect of Contact UFO cases, such
 >like the Alagash incident, mentioned on the list recently.

 >When carrying out our investigations, is there a tendency for us
 >to overlook things that are staring us in the face?

 >*Let me expand on this.

 >In a lot of contact cases throughout the years, contact was
 >triggered by the flashing of lights, from the people on the
 >ground to the object in the sky. (Please note I do realise CSETI
 >uses a similar action to the above)

 >Now what I  want to ask is, if the object returns the flashing
 >pattern i.e. 3 flashes from you - 3 flashes returned by object.
 >If beings of some kind are not on board the observed object, and
 >the object is returning the flashes' is it within the
 >possibility of programmed devices to understand and to know when
 >a flash is sent by the observers to the object itself, so it
 >then knows to return a flash?

 >How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >source?

 >Would this possibly suggest some kind of pre-programmed device
 >inside such an object? Or are we to think that the object, is an
 >intelligence within itself?

 >And for those who may differ on contact cases and their reality,
 >if neither of the above is the answer' then what makes an object
 >return the light flashes?

 >Interested in any light thrown on this one!


There were 2 incidents in one of Strieber's books of 3 knocks on
he roof to wake people inside and of a town awakened by 3 knocks
and little people running around the houses... any connection?
And if there is any link why the number 3? hummmmm

Scott Krause







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:17:40 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:32:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Hey, your turn to give me a break. I've never said that Korff
 >>>was the only debunker of Meier. One of the earliest was Bill
 >>>Moore, with whom Korff as a youngster associated.

 >>It's time to end this delusion, Jim. Apparently, you have so
 >>much invested in the Meier dribble you will never admit you are
 >>wrong. The preponderance of evidence proves the Meier case is a
 >>fraud. I hope your continual defense of Meier has not suckered
 >>more consumers into spending money for the Meier fraud Material.

 >>But for your highly educated mind, let's take it a step further.

 >>You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >>will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >>escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >>scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >>Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >>Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >>settle the controversy.

 >Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >Such a panel would settle nothing. Well, except for shifting a
 >million bucks here or there, and making certain parties feel
 >better.

 >You were just joshin us, right?


No, Brian. I'm not joking. But if such an event were to take
place who do you suggest sit on the panel? UFO people? Most of
them with phony credentials. How about photographic experts
alone? That would establish or deny the integrity of the
photographs. Let's have real photo experts tell us if those
ships are real objects.

Are you a supporter of Meier, Brian?

I didn't have a very nice impression of the scientists I met
when I was a faithful supporter of the Meier case.

I didn't like being insulted for being naive and gullible, but
as time passed, and we conducted an investigation to prove the
case true, we discovered that the arrogant scientific type was
correct--a variety of deceptive methods were used by Meier to
dupe gullible people, myself included.

Many of the Meier believers have been our customers. I've
learned from them that they are mostly people searching for the
truth. Many feel disenchanted with religion, have a need to fill
an inner void for spiritual fulfillment, and they question their
human origins.

It is our belief that Meier created his UFO photos to be a frame
work to draw attention to his wacked out philosophy-- a
philosophy that includes adaptations of Hinduism and Star-Trek.

According to Meier, the American publishers of his material
robbed him of his U.S. Copyright, his photos and films. Our
opinion is that the publishers refined, cropped and manipulated
photos, embellished the story of the Pleaidians, deleted
materials that would indicate to most people that the case was
bogus, and developed an obvious hoax into a palatable, work of
art--Contact from the Pleiades etc. The Meier materials are
designed to entrance searching minds, fill their inherent need
for spiritual fulfillment amaze, titillate, stupefy, and lead
them into believing the myth of Billy Meier and the Pleaidians
(soon to be a rock band.)

We have dozens of letters from angry consumers who have
purchased the Meier materials--they want to sue the publishers
and Meier for fraud. Point is--this field has no credibility
because it fails to identify phonies and weed them out. In the
end, its the consumer who gets the shaft, while Meier and his
estranged publishers benefit from shafting the public.

So, Brian, who do you suggest? Jim Dilletoso and Wendelle
Stevens as panel members? How about Hoagland or Greer? Art Bell,
or Mike Seigel? If not scientists, then what, psuedo-scientists?
They fill the UFO field.

If you read our earlier post our team was composed of two Meier
supporters besides myself. We turned when we discovered the
hoax. We have nothing to gain, and have lost money by removing
the Genesis Publishing materials from our line up over the
years, having exposed Meier for for what he is.

Jim D. has an interest in rewriting the Bible because he's
turned off with his religion. He's vested into the Meier case so
tight he can't see the light because enlightenment will destroy
his illusion and he'll lose his work and whatever notoriety and
monetary profits he hopes to gain.

Skeptics bother me, but I like to keep one or two of them around
just to listen to their views--it keeps me balanced.

A skeptic told me, "when you want to change the world as we know
it, the burden of proof is on you."

Case item after item has shown that the Meier case has failed to
meet that burden of proof.

What suggestions do you have, Brian?

Why not ask Royce (UFO Watchdog) for his opinion?








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 02:01:22 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:36:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:17:38 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 12:38:04 -0700
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:39:58 -0700
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >As new material, you wrote:

 >>The Meier Case is like a piece of Swiss Cheese: it's full of
 >>holes and it smells!

 >>It's time to end this delusion, Jim. Apparently, you have so
 >>much invested in the Meier dribble you will never admit you are
 >>wrong. The preponderance of evidence proves the Meier case is a
 >>fraud. I hope your continual defense of Meier has not suckered
 >>more consumers into spending money for the Meier fraud Material.

 >I really was hoping that you'd have something substantive to
 >say, something with some meat to it, especially where Korff's
 >book mentions your input.

 >>But for your highly educated mind, let's take it a step further.

 >>You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >>will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >>escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >>scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >>Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >>Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >>settle the controversy. ...

 >Hmmm. Suppose most of the "neutral" panel members don't think
 >that UFOs could exist or be real. Suppose they already hold the
 >view that, if they do exist, they should be like 21st-century
 >space ships that cannot exhibit any of the effects we call "high
 >strangeness", with any witnesses who claim UFOs can make abrupt
 >right-angle turns, etc., being assumed to be deluded or hoaxers.
 >I don't think you'd find neutrality amongst these polarized
 >issues. Or would you, e.g., accept Phil Klass on the panel, as
 >he has said he'd be delighted to have a UFO land in his
 >backyard?


Meat? Hey, Jim... you're a vegetarian. You don't like meat, or
reality.

You know the Meier case is a joke, but you have to defend it
like a maniac because you have a vested interest in it. You
don't care if people get ripped off do you? You believe it's
okay to defraud consumers?

You won't accept the testimony of your colleagues in this forum.
You're a contributor to the hoax too, aren't you, Jim? Didn't
you write a book authenticating the Talmud Jmmanuel? Don't you
benefit from having a cult following read your work.

You were quoted years ago having said about the Talmud Jmmanuel
approximately this:

"no serious Bible scholar will ever take the Talmud Jmmanuel
seriously without the original Aramaic manuscript."

So why do you?

There is no original Aramaic manuscript. Only stories about how
a manuscript was destroyed, etc. from a known liar--Billy Meier.
Isn't it odd, the originals of almost everything have been
destroyed.

Meier's Matters of Convenience:

1. The original negatives of the hundreds of Meier's
photos--conveniently tossed in the fireplace by Meier's wife.

2. The negatives could easily determine hoaxed photos, but
they're conveniently not around.

3. The original manuscript of the Talmud--conveniently destroyed
in a fire. The translator of the Talmud--conveniently killed and

4. Conveniently, no verification that the guy ever existed.

Jim, weren't you disenchanted with your religion, found the
Meier material felt inspired and suddenly saw an opportunity to
rewrite the Bible and get back at those stuffy Presbyterians?

You want meat? No matter what meat you're fed, you're not going
to swallow. How could you go any other way?

Here's a morsel for you:

I personally interviewed Ken Dinwiddy (sp?) of DeAnza labs.
According to Dinwiddy, Dilletoso walked into DeAnza labs
claiming that he was going to buy a computer for his company. He
presented one or more of the Meier photos and asked if the
computer was capable of splashing colors here and there. DeAnza
performed the task of colorizing, not analysis. Dilletoso took
off with the photos without buying the computer. Soon after, the
photos appeared in the Meier books. I don't have the book with
me to give a direct quote, but if I remember correctly, the book
Contact from the Pleaides had an explanation stating something
like this:

...the colors surrounding the ship are energy fields being
emitted from propulsion system of the beamship...the analysis
was performed by DeAnza labs. DeAnza labs stamp mark is seen on
the photo to give credibility to the photo.

Wendelle Stevens? Here's Steven's scientific analysis:

...from the hundreds of Meier photographs, we took 4 that looked
the best and we were left with an assumption that if the 4
checked out, then the rest must be real."

Stevens only tested 4 photographs. The test methods are
questionable. And the conclusion is that if 4 passed the test,
the rest must be real. (What?)

That is not how scientists tell me they test and validate something.

First: Photographs of unconventional extraterrestrial technology
that are foreign to our world cannot be validated without having
a real comparative sample by which the tests are conducted.

Second: Photo analysts can determine if the object in a
photograph is a large, real size object, not necessarily
extraterrestrial.

No need to respond with your counter arguments.

Take the one million dollar challenge.

We can get professional photographic experts instead of
scientists.


Signing off,


N. Daniel

Buy the way, Jim, what did Meier say about the way "J's" are
written or pronounced in Aramaic? Do you speak Aramaic? Ever
read Aramaic? Ever hear Aramaic spoken? Can you write anything
in Aramaic?









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                UFO Sighted By 3 Children In Castellon, Spain

From: Scott Corrales <lornis1@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 06:18:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:39:52 -0400
Subject: UFO Sighted By 3 Children In Castellon, Spain


Dear Friends,

There's almost something comforting about a good old fashioned
UFO sighting.

Scott Corrales
Institute of Hispanic Ufology

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


SOURCE: El Periodico On Line
DATE: 09.24.00

Three Children Saw Two UFOs Flying Over The Provincial Capital

Three children from Castellon (on Spain's Mediterranean Coast)
sighted two UFOs during the evening of September 21. They were
identified as Serafin Andreu, Antonio Jose Alvarez and Gil
Salvador, who were playing between Zaragoza and Amadeo Primero
Streets when they witnessed the approach of a luminous sphere
that flew over Ribalta Park. According to their indications, the
sphere passed swiftly over the city. A few minutes later, the
childern were in Huerto Sogueros Plaza when they again saw the
luminous object. The children explained these events to the
"Policia Armada"

SOURCE:
:http://www.elperiodico.com/online/apuntador.asp?data=ed000924&idioma=CAS
&publicacion=castellon&urlname=http://www.elperiodico.com/EDCASTELLON/ED0
00924/CAS/CARP01/tex088.asp

# # # #

Translation (C) 2000. Institute of Hispanic Ufology.
Special Thanks to Gloria Coluchi









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                      TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.25.00

From: Paul Anderson <psa@direct.ca>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 05:41:27 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:41:50 -0400
Subject: TMP News: Weekly Briefing 9.25.00


TMP NEWS
The E-News Service of The Millennium Project

http://www.egroups.com/group/tmpnews
http://persweb.direct.ca/psa

September 25, 2000

_____________________________


WEEKLY BRIEFING
A Weekly Summary of Current News and Reports

9.25.00



NASA'S MOST FANTASTIC PROPOSAL: SELF-REPLICATING INDUSTRY
ON THE MOON BY 1999

New details on a previous study by NASA in 1980 to land a 100
ton solar- powered robotic factory on the Moon, which would
automatically mine the soil around it, build a clone of itself
in one year, with each clone building another one every year and
so on, exponentially producing a thousand clones in ten years
and a billion in thirty years...

http://www.harvest-moon.org/aasm/index.htm


AFTER 25 YEARS, MARTIAN 'FACE' STILL RAISES QUESTIONS

A new article and public poll on the Face on Mars by FoxNews,
showing that in the minds of the public, the origin of this and
other enigmatic objects on Mars remains unknown, and the issue
deserves continued investigation, much to the chagrin of NASA...

http://foxnews.com/science/090800/mars_face.sml


NASA'S 'ENHANCEMENT' OF THE FACE ON MARS: DELIBERATE FRAUD

Cydonia researcher Mac Tonnies outlines how the new photo of the
'Face' on Mars, the now famous 'catbox' image taken by NASA in
1998, was misleading and an inaccurate representation of what
the object actually looks like, while other independent imaging
analysts like Mark Carlotto have produced properly rectified
versions of the original raw image, showing the Face to still
conform very closely to the previous images taken by Viking in
1976, onlynow with more detail...

http://persweb.direct.ca/psa/faceenhancement.html


LARGE NEW ICE DEPOSIT FOUND ON MARS

What may be the largest near-surface underground ice deposit
found so far on Mars has been discovered in the Solis Planum
region near Valles Marineris; the deposit, thought to be the
size of Arizona could provide needed water for future manned
missions...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_ice_000920.html


ASTRONOMERS PINPOINT BLACK HOLE AT CENTER OF MILKY WAY

Astronomers have pinpointed with unprecedented accuracy an
immense black hole with a mass of more than 2 million suns at
the center of the spiral of stars that is the Milky Way galaxy.
The researchers have spent four years watching stars spin closer
and faster around the black hole, an illustration of its
powerful gravitational tug...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/21/black.hole.ap/index.html


YOUNG STARS BELCH FIERY GAS IN HUBBLE TIME

Astronomers on Thursday released time-lapse movies dramatizing
the fiery behavior of two young star systems, observations that
could shed light on the genesis of our solar system. The nearby
stars, less than a million years old, issue hot gas in blazing
bursts of thick clouds or narrow jets, often so quickly that
striking changes take place in weeks or months, Hubble
scientists said...

http://CNN.com/2000/TECH/space/09/21/hubble.stars/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 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:00:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Clark


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

Sure, easily. James McDonald.

Jerry










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 25

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:14:19 -0400
Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:20:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

[The following is a comment on the immediate quesiton being
  raised, and is not intended as supportive of the Meier photos]

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >>leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >>UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >-- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk
 ><http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk>


John-

I wouldn't expect to see an official record of this type of
discrimination, but that certainly doesn't mean there isn't an
impact.

In the case of Dr. John Mack an attempt was made to call his
research into question at Harvard, and he was able to weather
that particular storm without giving in to the pressure to cease
his research. But Dr. Mack is a tenured award-winning
psychiatrist, and I suspect that others viewed that as a warning
of what they might face if they swerved too far toward the
fringe.










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:29:41 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:36:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6 - Cecchini


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Remote Viewers: Target EL-6
 >Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:51:56 -0700

 >Did anyone happen to catch Dick Allgire on Coast to Coast?
 >These guys are amazing...

Yes.

I'll try to summarize:

(in paraphrase)

"Remote Viewing the past is easy.
  Remove Viewing the present is a much harder.
  Remote Viewing the future is really, really, really tough."

I'll leave it to the discerning reader to figure out why that
probably is so...

 >one caller asked if Allgire could see the outcome of the
 >current Presidential election and this guy said he couldn't
 >because there were "too many variables." What?

Well, ya see... there's just too much Uncertainty.

If you wait until about 2 or 3 minutes before the results of the
next Presidential election are announced, I'm sure that enough
Schrodinger wave functions will have collapsed to present a
clear enough vision to Allgire, et al, of a sufficiently stable
Future Reality that they will be able to declare with all manner
of Certainty -- thus proving that RV is real, yada yada.

Until then, it's just not fair to demand that Allgire be able to
do more...

Skeptical and under-caffeinated,

Ron










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:38:09 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Tonnies


 >From: Scott Krause <SKrause272@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:31:41 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >There were 2 incidents in one of Strieber's books of 3 knocks
 >on he roof to wake people inside and of a town awakened by 3
 >knocks and little people running around the houses... any
 >connection? And if there is any link why the number 3? hummmmm

This is described in "Breakthrough," and appears to be a genuine
occurrance. The "visitors" apparently have an affinity for the
number nine: 3 knocks (or whatever) spaced equally three times.
Strieber has mentioned that the mechanical spacing of the knocks
he heard was startling.

I would be very intrigued to find references to strange
"knocking" like this in various folklore.

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com)
MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html
Cydonian Imperative: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:30:06 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:40:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:47:33 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:17:59 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:26:07 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Jim writes:

 >Before moving on, Roger, let's remember that if just a part of
 >the branches in question were only a foot(!) from the camera,
 >the camera's full field of view would be totally blocked by
 >those branches. Thus they were a lot farther away from the
 >camera than that.

<snip>

 >If the beamship and adjacent tree had been models, I think
 >they'd have to be at least twice as far away as the blurry tree
 >limbs to have been in the real good focus they are in. This
 >would require a saucer model of width about 33 inches. This is
 >nothing that could have been hauled around undetected by Meier
 >on his Moped, not to mention much other model-support equipment
 >a hoaxer would need.

If, if, if, if, if...

Jim, this is all guess work. I asked a simple question: What was
the focal length of the lens used by Meier to shoots his photos?
If we know that, then we can better estimate the size of the
limb. Anything short of that is just speculation. If you don't
know or have no intention of answering that question, then there
is no need to continue this discussion.

Moving on, I had written:

 >>First off, this is wrong. A closed down aperture appropriate for
 >>"sunny days" or even "smoggy days" will, indeed, provide plenty
 >>of depth of field and WILL cover a range from about 6 feet to
 >>infinity regardless of where the focus is set within that range.

Jim now recants, claiming:

 >Evidently, Meier had the aperture relatively far open for that
 >day's photographs. I suspect he did know about the need to open
 >it up some for a cloudy, overcast day.

However, he had originally claimed:

 >>>[Meier] never bothered to vary the aperture,
 >>>whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
 >>>usually somewhat smoggy days.

Incredibly, Jim now states:

 >
 >The evidence of the blurry tree having been some 16 feet away
 >indicates to me that the aperture was not in a sunny-day
 >closed-down position after all.


So now the blurry tree is 16 feet away?!!!

Jim you aren't making things any better for your position. If
you haven't figured it out by now, the farther things are from
the camera, the LESS likely they will be out of focus if the
aperture is wide open.

Let's see...

First Meier never adjusts the aperture, then he does. First the
aperture is closed down but unable to focus on distant hills or
trees. Now the aperture is open and unable to focus on a tree 16
feet away!

Will all due respect, you seem to be changing your story to suit
your needs.

Again, since you've made definitive statements regarding the
charateristics of Meier's camera and lens, you must know what
focal length he was using. Please provide us with that info and
I will publish the depth of field stats for the list. If I am
wrong, I'll say so. Will you?

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                            Trent Photos Blowout!

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:41:54 -0400
Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!


Hello, one and all...

I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
convinced that they're fake.

Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
other photos. (most important!)


PS: The guy doing the research is named Joel Carpenter. He's
pretty sharp and in no way related to John Carpenter. Let's try
and keep the two unconfused in future posts on this subject.

Have fun!

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:56:10 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:01:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >>leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >>UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

Well lets make it simpler. Nathan used the term "leading
scientists". By "leading scientist" I would infer one at least
occasionally noted in the news in his field to the public at
large. So how about starting by providing us a list of "leading
scientists" with a publically stated serious - repeat, serious -
interest in UFOs?

Bet its a short list. Wonder why?

-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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:25:56 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:03:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Myers


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Over 20 years ago a Defense Meteorological Satellite Program
 >satellite recorded a very strange image while not far from the
 >FSU  (Former Soviet Union).

 >Starting in 1985 this was publicized as a photo of an object at
 >45,000 ft traveling at 4000-5000 mph and leaving several
 >contrails. Ok, it looks like a "sport model" without wheels.
 >But who needs wheels at 45,000 ft. altitude, anyway?

 >Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite photo of a
 >True UFO (TRUFO)?

 >What do you think?

 >I invite your comments

 >http://brumac.8k.com/DMSP/DMSP.html


Bruce,

I really don't know what to think about the photo. It looks like
it could be a cloud mass since its shape is irregular and it
appears to have some holes in through - particularly at the left
side of what would be thought of - in my opinion - the
windshield or cockpit. The color appears to be consistent with
the blue background showing at least two shades of blue,
possibly three. Of course, we could say it was the 'Oz' effect
at work here...

The (I'm starting to hate this word) contrails are interesting
but again could anything. It seems to me to benothing more than
another in a long line of photos that could be interpreted as
UFOs or clouds and I don't think any real conclusion could be
drawn to either. At this point, I'd say its a cloud formation.
Again, I'm not an expert in this field (aka: my disclaimer if
I'm wrong.).

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
(beCAUS you demanded it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the
Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:34:14 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:06:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:17:40 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >[responding to Jim Deardorff]

 >>>You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >>>will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >>>escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >>>scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >>>Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >>>Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >>>settle the controversy.

 >>Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >>leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >>UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >>Such a panel would settle nothing. Well, except for shifting a
 >>million bucks here or there, and making certain parties feel
 >>better.

 >>You were just joshin us, right?

 >No, Brian. I'm not joking. But if such an event were to take
 >place who do you suggest sit on the panel? UFO people? Most of
 >them with phony credentials. How about photographic experts
 >alone? That would establish or deny the integrity of the
 >photographs. Let's have real photo experts tell us if those
 >ships are real objects.

Frankly, I don't think its possible to create such a panel
today. The requirements are impossible to meet:

   * Scientists accepted by all sides as being totally
    open-minded on the UFO question, no pre-dispositions,
    with no possibility of social or institutional
    consequences to themselves regardless of their conclusions,
    whose conclusions everyone would accept.

The problem is that scientists are also people with what let's
call worldviews. These can be religious, philosophical or what
have you. Its very hard for anyone, scientists included, to
claim to be unbiased about something like Meier which can have
such a tremendous impact on one's worldview. In fact, sometimes
the rhetoric on this list looks suspiciously like thinly
disguised worldview (belief system) defense. A jaundiced view of
literally every tidbit of evidence, and a repetitive tendancy to
shoot at the messenger are often good clues.


 >Are you a supporter of Meier, Brian?

Meier says some interesting stuff; his detractors say some
interesting stuff.

I'm a supporter of digging out the truth about this interesting
space we inhabit. To put it another way, I like to think of
myself as someone with perhaps a slightly more flexible
worldview than many folks, though I too probably have some
elastic limits.

I neither support nor oppose Meier; I look as best I can at
evidence and context. I don't trust diehard skeptics or
believers; both tend to have pre-existing worldviews to defend
to the death. I haven't decided on Meier yet. I'll decide when
the facts are all in and clear as a bell :-) Don't wait up.


 >Many of the Meier believers have been our customers. I've
 >learned from them that they are mostly people searching for the
 >truth. Many feel disenchanted with religion, have a need to fill
 >an inner void for spiritual fulfillment, and they question their
 >human origins.

 >It is our belief that Meier created his UFO photos to be a frame
 >work to draw attention to his wacked out philosophy-- a
 >philosophy that includes adaptations of Hinduism and Star-Trek.

Well, once you start playing with something as fundamental as
someone's worldview, in most cases I suspect it becomes nearly
impossible to proceed in a neutral, openminded way.

Your panel won't work. Its an attempt to rationally examine an
issue that pummels too many people's belief systems. The
panellists probably won't be able to examine it rationally, and
whatever conclusion they reach won't settle a thing. (Did Condon
settle anything?)

Just for kicks, though, if you want a name, I'm game: Dr. Bruce
Maccabee. A U.S. Navy research scientist, he knows his stuff.
Probably has a more flexible worldview than most. If anyone on
this list can lay claim to the title of photo expert, then he
can. Of course he'll be unacceptable to certain list elements
here. But that'll apply to any name submitted.

Sometimes worldviews and rational inquiry just don't mix. And
with Meier, you're dealing with a major worldview issue.

-Brian C.

"Sad to say, but that's the way it goes"
   Sergio Mendez / Brasil '66






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

             Ted Phillips on IRC Chat Friday 9/29/00 at 9 PM EDT

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:54:12 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:09:38 -0400
Subject: Ted Phillips on IRC Chat Friday 9/29/00 at 9 PM EDT



UFO Research List - http://www.ufoworld.co.uk/

Ted Phillips...Center for Physical Trace Research.... to be
guest speaker Friday 9/29 at 9 PM EDT on the IRC Undernet
channel #chariots. He will be doing approximately 2 hours of
questions and answers in a real-time chat forum.

The Center for Physical Trace Research was established June 1,
1998 by Ted Phillips to provide a central repository for the
receipt, study, and distribution of UFO landing events involving
physical residue. Phillips has worked on hundreds of such cases
since 1969 with the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek and the Center for
UFO Studies, as well as with Mutual Unidentified Flying Object
Network, Incorporated, MUFON.

http://www.angelfire.com/mo/cptr/

For those who aren't already making use of real-time
communication via IRC, you can get to IRC Undernet via a webpage
link. All you have to do is type in a nickname, hit enter, and
you'll automatically be transported into the chat channel. Just
remember that on Undernet, a nickname cannot consist of more
than 9 characters.

Ah, the wonders of the Internet! :)

You can find direct links to #chariots at either of the
following webpages:

http://www.jilain.com
http://www.UFO-NexXus.org

This rare opportunity for an informal, real-time talk with one
of Ufology's best is being sponsored by UFO-NexXus Radio. You
can access the webstream at:

http://208.161.214.168:8000/listen.pls

We look forward to seeing you all there!!

Bobbie

Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
  --->backwoods of Mississippi
  --->USA
  --->planet Earth
  --->somewhere in the cosmos

http://www.jilain.com
http://www.ufo-nexxus.org
IRC Undernet #chariots
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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:42:06 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:11:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >>example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >>a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >Sure, easily. James McDonald.

 >Jerry

MacDonald's case is tragic, but it's a little bit more
complicated than an individual being denied funding for academic
work because of an objective interest in UFOs. There were a lot
of personality clashes and politics involved, which a very well
sumarised in your Encyclopedia

It was also thirty years ago. Apart from Mack (who is on the
fringe of mainstream UFO research, keeps his job and does not
seem to be suffering from any after-effects), have there been
any other, more recent, cases?

Is perhaps the main reason why many scientist have been
reluctant to get involved in UFO research is because they have
decided that there is very little chance, after sixty years, of
any significant scientific findings emerging from it?

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:30:10 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:13:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:14:19 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >[The following is a comment on the immediate quesiton being
 > raised, and is not intended as supportive of the Meier photos]

 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >>We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >>example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >>a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >>-- John Rimmer Magonia Magazine www.magonia.demon.co.uk

 >John-

 >I wouldn't expect to see an official record of this type of
 >discrimination, but that certainly doesn't mean there isn't an
 >impact.

 >In the case of Dr. John Mack an attempt was made to call his
 >research into question at Harvard, and he was able to weather
 >that particular storm without giving in to the pressure to cease
 >his research. But Dr. Mack is a tenured award-winning
 >psychiatrist, and I suspect that others viewed that as a warning
 >of what they might face if they swerved too far toward the
 >fringe.

I did say 'serious'! Mack is pretty fringey when it comes to UFO
research. The fact is that, even so, in the end he kept his job
and, as I recall, got a fair amount of support on an 'academic
freedom' line, despite many of his ideas being well outside the
scientific consensus.

There are many scientists who move into contentious areas. The
whole history of psychic research is full of established
scientists who have gone out on a limb to exlore ESP,
clairvoyance, survival, autokinesis, etc., and have done so
without sacrificing their careers. Possibly some colleagues may
think them a little 'flakey' but scientists allegedly being
denied funding because of their interest in psi just does not
seem to be an issue.

Why should it be any different in ufology?
--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                        A Few TV Listings - 08-25-00

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:24:28 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:17:04 -0400
Subject: A Few TV Listings - 08-25-00


Tue 26 8:00 AM SCI-FI
Sightings

Reported sightings of UFOs over Israel; <snip>


Tue 26 9:30 AM SCI-FI (30 min)
Beyond Reality: A Return Visit

A runaway is led by visions of her mother, who disappeared
during a wave of UFO sightings. Laura: Shari Belafonte.


Tue 26 11:00 AM APL (30 min)
Lassie: The Lassie Files APL

Lassie solves UFO sightings.

[ed: !?!?!? how could I resist...
  ...and I don't know what APL is, nor do I care.]


Tue 26 9:00 PM WSBK/6 (60 min)
Danger in Our Skies: The New UFO Threat 6 WSBK

Footage of recent UFO sightings over large metropolitan areas,
including Phoenix and Mexico City, features interviews with
witnesses, air traffic controllers and physicists. Hosts: Jim
Forbes, Alison Holloway. Release Year: 1998

[ed: WSBK/6 is a local Boston station.]


Thu 28 8:00 AM SCI-FI
Sightings

An investigation into alleged U.S. Government attempts to build
flying saucers; <snip> reported UFO sightings over Mexico City;


Fri 29 8:00 AM SCI-FI
Sightings

Segments include a videotape of an alleged UFO; <snip> debate on
the "alien autopsy" tape; sightings of Bigfoot in Ohio.


Fri 29 8:00 PM PAX (60 min)
Encounters with the Unexplained : What Are Crop Circles?

"What Are Crop Circles?" investigates theories surrounding these
mysterious patterns that appear in corn fields in the middle of
the night. Theories include: extraterrestrials, electromagnetic
fields, clever hoaxers. Jerry Orbach hosts.











   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein

From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 01:48:30 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:19:36 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein


 >From: Scott Krause <SKrause272@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:31:41 EDT
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>I was pondering on this thought the other day when I was
 >>reminded about it on the List.

 >>It concerns the communication aspect of Contact UFO cases, such
 >>like the Alagash incident, mentioned on the list recently.

 >>When carrying out our investigations, is there a tendency for us
 >>to overlook things that are staring us in the face?

 >>*Let me expand on this.

 >>In a lot of contact cases throughout the years, contact was
 >>triggered by the flashing of lights, from the people on the
 >>ground to the object in the sky. (Please note I do realise CSETI
 >>uses a similar action to the above)

 >>Now what I  want to ask is, if the object returns the flashing
 >>pattern i.e. 3 flashes from you - 3 flashes returned by object.
 >>If beings of some kind are not on board the observed object, and
 >>the object is returning the flashes' is it within the
 >>possibility of programmed devices to understand and to know when
 >>a flash is sent by the observers to the object itself, so it
 >>then knows to return a flash?

 >>How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >>people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >>source?

 >>Would this possibly suggest some kind of pre-programmed device
 >>inside such an object? Or are we to think that the object, is an
 >>intelligence within itself?

 >>And for those who may differ on contact cases and their reality,
 >>if neither of the above is the answer' then what makes an object
 >>return the light flashes?

 >>Interested in any light thrown on this one!

 >There were 2 incidents in one of Strieber's books of 3 knocks on
 >he roof to wake people inside and of a town awakened by 3 knocks
 >and little people running around the houses... any connection?
 >And if there is any link why the number 3? hummmmm

 >Scott Krause

Ok Scott and listfolks,

If we are speculating on aliens emulating our primitive forms of
communication, then I suppose three knocks is pretty primitive.
In his book, Whitley Strieber was writing from a frightened
mind. The miserable Communion movie made abduction and the
little people seem like a weird joke.

I posted on the list the other day hoping that the guys in
Allagash, the CSETI folks, and regular folks when flashing
lights at UFOs had the good sense to flash the flashlights in
morse code. Tonight another thought burrowed up from my brain.
If the SETI project is listening for repeatable exotic radio
wave signals from far off celestial realms there may be aliens
doing the same in our direction. Surely aliens far away may
possibly have the capacity to send observation probes, if not
occupied ships, to observe us by listening to our radio waves.
Along with the babble of voices, video, and data, cw messages in
morse code would be observed and analyzed. Would it be easier to
analyze the patterns and possible meaning of morse code signals
rather than the spoken babble? If they emulate that as a simple
means of our communication perhaps they are signaling cw in
morse code (dot and dash high pitched beeps from a code key).

When I was a teenager in the early '60s I obtained my novice
amateur radio license. I was restricted to only transmitting
code. I spent many wee morning hours tapping my thoughts out to
people in far off places. Now I've graduated to spending most
morning wee hours reading UFO Updates. Where did I go wrong to
end up here? I also used to scan all the bands of long, short,
and medium waves for new weird sounding signals I never had
heard. Being the prankster, I used to point my 12" music
loudspeaker out my window overlooking the neighborhood and let
out a short, high volume burst of that signal, so that at 3AM
somebody would be awakened and think that a UFO was present. I
kept the signals short so they could not be traced and I only
sent them when my parents were out of town. If you think I was
weird, my next door neighbor Mark would get up on a roof wearing
a halloween mask, tap on the window, scare the Hell out of the
neighbor he just awoke and run like the dickens. I guess if I
told that to MUFON years ago when I applied to be a field
investigator they should have disqualified me. Later, if I
received a call and investigated what turned out to be a stupid
prank like I had pulled, I would have smacked that kid on the
spot. Fortunately I never received a prank or hoax call and I'm
not a violent person.

Where were we? Oh yeah, maybe I should regress and go back to listening to and
trying to decipher strange code signals in the wee
morning hours while reading Updates. The aliens may be trying to contact us by
Morse code. I am asking Jim Mortellaro, our communications expert, whether
Gripple would be an aid to such an endeavor, and whether he would be able to
kick it off until I get a new receiver?

What do you think?

Josh
joshin' at the aliens










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:17:41 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:20:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 16:45:10 -0700

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 14:46:19 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:38:32 -0700

 >>>The narrator clearly states that the ship is disappearing and
 >>>then reappearing. It isn't a cut and splice technique, it is -
 >>>what I siad it was earlier - blatant stop motion. Nobody can
 >>>defend that piece of footage as anything other than that.

 >>This is a statement of belief that aliens shouldn't be able to
 >>do anything we can't begin to understand.

 >No, that's not what the statement says.

But that's what it means.

 >>>Meier filmed his little model, stopped the film, took it out of
 >>>the frame, began filming for a second more, stopped it again,
 >>>placed his model back in the frame and began filming.

 >>This is your assumption. Let's keep in mind it's an assumption,
 >>because those investigators who have spent many hours and days
 >>with Meier found him to be totally honest, and no hoaxer.
 >>Perhaps some 8mm movie-film experts (Malcolm FTL movie camera)
 >>will let us know if during both film stoppage and restart
 >>there's any slow-down in frame exposure rate for a few frames
 >>that would lead to overexposure and a need for subsequent cut
 >>and splice.

 >>>The branch
 >>>in the frame proves this without question. Branches being blown
 >>>by the wind do not just automatically stop moving in an instant.

 >>I don't "like" that any more than you do. But that's another
 >>assumption. I believe that some witnesses' reports of the Oz
 >>effect have said it came on suddenly. It's really foolish to
 >>assume that a piece of way-way advanced technology that can
 >>suddently disappear from sight, can zoom through the air at Mach
 >>XX without creating a sonic boom, and whose aliens in some cases
 >>can pass through solid walls, etc., cannot also generate the Oz
 >>effect.

 >Jim, you're reaching for some way to validate Meier's claims and
 >you're reaching far. This piece of film is stop motion -period.

Repeating an assumption doesn't alter it into a fact.

 >Hell, when the UFO reappears the frame of the
 >camera has shifted a bit showing that it was stopped, moved
 >slightly during the process and then turned back on. This isn't
 >about the 'Oz' effect, its about a third rate special effect
 >employed in the perpetration of a UFO hoax.

It definitely seems to be the Oz effect. Meier mentions, when
showing the film to those who were video-taping it, that there
were no sounds, along with no breeze, during this period of
time. Others who later mentioned the Oz effect also noticed no
sound, which includes no sound of the wind or breeze in the
trees.

When the craft reappears, only the twig suffered a tiny
discontinuity in movement, not the camera frame. The background
all along the edges of the frame doesn't change. The twig had
remained motionless during the Oz period, and when this period
of time was over, abruptly resumed its motions in the wind as if
the actual wind had not been absent. Or *as if* it had been cut
and spliced. The Japanese who analyzed it, looking for any signs
of such splicing at those points, found none.

It's the March, 1976, film segment showing the 3 craft, two of
which disappear and then reappear, which shows a frame change at
the same time as the disappearance of the two smaller craft. I
don't know whether or not this segment received cuts, removal
and splice at the hands of the Munich studio at this point. It
need not have, as you should know, since the "masters of
deception" are quite capable of doing such tricks themselves, in
order to supply the negative skeptic with a crutch with which to
maintain their existing mental outlook (Note: I didn't say
"belief system".).

Sorry to have to repeat the obvious, but we've read witnesses'
accounts of where their camera clicked on all by itself, taking
a shot of a UFO that perhaps wasn't even seen at the time; of
UFOs hovering over nuclear bases with the nuclear armaments
subsequently disclosed to have been disarmed or made inoperable.
And there's the flickering black spot that appeared on the
window glass of Ed Walters' office along with a thumping noise
while Ed had noticed a UFO circa a mile away and took photos of
it (the "Thumping" photos) -- the third photo was taken without
Ed having pressed the shutter button; the black spot and
thumping noise disappeared just before the UFO itself
disappeared. All this is action at a distance -- paranormal
stuff, and should not be swept under the rug on a UFO list.

So it would have been a simple paranormal piece of cake for
Meier's aliens, being highly advanced technologically and
otherwise, to cause Meier's movie camera, then mounted on its
tripod, to slightly alter its orientation at the instant the two
craft disappeared.

The motivation for their having done little tricks like this
from time to time should be obvious. If they hadn't, the
negative skeptics would have nothing to cling to, and the whole
UFO coverup could have come unraveled decades before the aliens
would deem it appropriate.

If you wish to ignore the obvious, Royce, plus ignoring all the
witnesses who know first hand that Meier is no hoaxer, that's
your perogative. But it's not logical, sensible or scientific to
ignore the most important data.

Jim D.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:08:43 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:24:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 02:01:22 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:17:38 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>I really was hoping that you'd have something substantive to
 >>say, something with some meat to it, especially where Korff's
 >>book mentions your input.

 >...Meat? Hey, Jim... you're a vegetarian. You don't like meat, or
 >reality.

 >You know the Meier case is a joke, but you have to defend it
 >like a maniac because you have a vested interest in it. You
 >don't care if people get ripped off do you? You believe it's
 >okay to defraud consumers?

Nathan,

I'm still waiting for some meat; something other than quips,
irrelevancies and false claims having no logical support.

It's deplorable to see people being subject to these false
claims, and some swallowing them, because they don't have the
time or initiative to investigate it all for themselves and
learn the details of what Stevens, the Elders, Kinder and others
have investigated. Or in some cases because they don't wish to
be subject to verbal abuse for having checked out Meier's
supportive witnesses and finding them to be honest, and
reporting back on it.

 >You won't accept the testimony of your colleagues in this forum.

Testimony? As if from witnesses? Go to the witnesses themselves
if you wish testimony. Don't go to the non-witnesses!

 >You're a contributor to the hoax too, aren't you, Jim? Didn't
 >you write a book authenticating the Talmud Jmmanuel? Don't you
 >benefit from having a cult following read your work.

Do you need to subject the List to this kind of drivel, Nathan?
I could, in turn, rant on and on about how you're a contributor
to the Meier-case coverup. How about getting down to brass tacks
instead?

The Talmud of Jmmanuel (TJ) speaks for itself. Anyone with
enough time can look into it thoroughly, like I did, and notice
the hundreds of points where the Gospel of Matthew reads along
like the TJ except for alterations of one or several words, one
or several sentences, and omissions or additions of whole chunks
of text. Then one asks, could a hoaxer have done this, using
Matthew? If so, how would such a hoaxer know to make alterations
that would fix up some 440 verses that New Testament scholars
have criticized as being questionable or non-genuine, when a lot
of these criticisms didn't come out in print until after 1978,
when the TJ was first printed in German? I've marked with an
asterisk in my mttjindx.htm file the alterations that are
particularly striking as much too creative yet natural to the
flow of the TJ's teachings for any hoaxer to have accomplished.

 >You were quoted years ago having said about the Talmud Jmmanuel
 >approximately this:

 >"no serious Bible scholar will ever take the Talmud Jmmanuel
 >seriously without the original Aramaic manuscript."

 >So why do you?

To correct your approximation, the first "serious" should read
"reputable." Don't we all know that "reputable" scientists are
the ones who avoid looking into the UFO phenomenon seriously?
They wish or need to maintain their reputations.

In my website, you should have noticed the reasons why such scholars avoid
study and discussion of the TJ. These are:

1) It is heretical in several ways;

2) Its originals are no longer extant;

3) It indicates that certain gospel events were UFO related, and
the  UFO topic is taboo for scholars to discuss openly in print
or on the Web;

4) It is connected with an alleged UFO contactee, and even many
ufologists shun contactees;

5) It is sensational, and scholars shy away from the
sensational, or from what they perceive as radical;

6) Certain verses, if taken out of context, may seem pro-Aryan
or anti-Semitic;

7) It indicates that Jmmanuel had been a long-range prophet, not
just short-range; and

8) It indicates that Matthew had come first, not Mark.

Any one or two of these will turn off the "reputable" NT
scholar.

 >There is no original Aramaic manuscript. Only stories about how
 >a manuscript was destroyed, etc. from a known liar--Billy Meier.

That's your assumption. It can't explain why the TJ's
translation contains Aramaisms. The Aramaisms, and other
indications of having derived from an ancient text, strongly
support the TJ's genuineness. And your claim can't explain how
the TJ has close parallels to a lot of Matthean verses yet is
not subject to scholars' criticisms of Matthew at these same
points. You are trying to turn Billy Meier into a super-brain
superior to any known Gospel scholar or combination of scholars,
as well as a one-armed magician who could deceive some 25
supportive witnesses, produce hoaxed photos with no accomplice
ever coming forward to take credit and show the world how he did
it, produce metal samples unexplainable by human technology,
produce a length, loud sound recorded on two tapes in front of
witnesses that upon later analysis was found could not have been
generated by any sound equipment anywhere around, etc.

 >Isn't it odd, the originals of almost everything have been
 >destroyed.

Not at all. It would have been very odd if the originals of the
TJ had not been destroyed somewhere along the line, once it was
brought to the attention of certain officials. As you should
know, its heresies, if the scrolls had not been destroyed,
would, upon study by paleographers and radio-carbon daters, have
caused a terrific problem for Christianity, and to a lesser
extent, for Judaism as well (if such scholars would have been
willing and able to publish their findings).

 >Meier's Matters of Convenience:
 >
 >1. The original negatives of the hundreds of Meier's
 >photos--conveniently tossed in the fireplace by Meier's wife.

Where did you come up with that? A few were destroyed that way,
most were not. Wendelle Stevens is quite sure that the 40
Beamship slides of Meier, from which he had internegatives made
in a photo processing shop in Winterhur in early 1978, were
originals, as they were marked as the originals are. An
exception was the Schmarbuel-Maiwinkel series in which the
Mirage jet chased the beamship repeatedly; it had come back from
the developers with left-to-right reversed, indicating they
could not be originals.

 >2. The negatives could easily determine hoaxed photos, but
 >they're conveniently not around.

Meier still has them. He's long been aware that if he gave them
up for analysis, he'd never likely receive the originals back.

 >3. The original manuscript of the Talmud--conveniently destroyed
 >in a fire.

Nothing convenient about that. The air raids on the Lebanese
refugee camp at that time killed and wounded a lot of people.

 >The translator of the Talmud--conveniently killed and

It was convenient only to future debunkers. It wasn't convenient
for Isa Rashid and his family, which were assassinated along
with him, Meier was told.

 >4. Conveniently, no verification that the guy ever existed.

Meier has the verification, but has never released the
information on Rashid's background and surviving relatives, lest
they in turn be assassinated. He kept Rashid's name secret until
learning that Rashid had been killed, and could then reveal it,
as it is such a common name. If you're a ufologist, you should
realize that more often than not, the investigator of a UFO
sighting keeps the witnesses anonymous at their request. But you
expect Meier to reveal that which could be even more dangerous
to Rashid's relatives? Some of the assassination attempts
against Meier were no doubt made because he's also a witness to
the original TJ.

 >Jim, weren't you disenchanted with your religion, found the
 >Meier material felt inspired and suddenly saw an opportunity to
 >rewrite the Bible and get back at those stuffy Presbyterians?

No, Nathan. I was never a firm believer or fundamentalist, but
just went along with it until the Meier case shook me out of my
complacency. Then I learned what NT scholars had to say, and of
their fractious views. They're really in no better shape than
ufology is.

 >You want meat? No matter what meat you're fed, you're not going
 >to swallow. How could you go any other way?

So you accept defeat from the beginning, eh?

 >Here's a morsel for you:

 >I personally interviewed Ken Dinwiddy (sp?) of DeAnza labs.
 >According to Dinwiddy, Dilletoso walked into DeAnza labs
 >claiming that he was going to buy a computer for his company. He
 >presented one or more of the Meier photos and asked if the
 >computer was capable of splashing colors here and there. DeAnza
 >performed the task of colorizing, not analysis. Dilletoso took
 >off with the photos..

...you mean the analyses he made from the photos he brought in
with him...

 >..without buying the computer. Soon after, the
 >photos appeared in the Meier books. I don't have the book with
 >me to give a direct quote, but if I remember correctly, the book
 >Contact from the Pleaides had an explanation stating something
 >like this:

 >...the colors surrounding the ship are energy fields being
 >emitted from propulsion system of the beamship...the analysis
 >was performed by DeAnza labs. DeAnza labs stamp mark is seen on
 >the photo to give credibility to the photo.

I've searched for a quote like this in Genesis III's vols. 1 and
2, but couldn't find it. Perhaps you or someone else can spot
it, report the reference and page, and quote it verbatim. All I
could find was, besides the results of analyses done by
Dilettoso, the words "Courtesy of De Anza Systems" on the one
enlarged photo. You'd need to get Dilletoso's side of the story
also if you wished to make a fairer judgment on whether or not
he was under obligation to have purchased the computer from
Dinwiddie after testing it out, and utilizing it, on a photo he
was interested in.

 >Wendelle Stevens? Here's Steven's scientific analysis:

 >...from the hundreds of Meier photographs, we took 4 that looked
 >the best and we were left with an assumption that if the 4
 >checked out, then the rest must be real."

 From correspondence with Stevens, and from his books, I've
learned that he could not afford to have computer analyses done
in those days on more than four photos. The four he picked were
from four different dates/locations so that he could get a
variety of situations with differing sun angles, etc. They were
also chosen on the basis of clarity or sharpness, with the UFO
being as close as possible to the camera.

 >Stevens only tested 4 photographs. The test methods are
 >questionable. And the conclusion is that if 4 passed the test,
 >the rest must be real. (What?)

If he had checked out 10, you'd say the same thing, with "10"
substituting for "4". Eh what? There were some 500 that needed
to be checked out. However, it's still true that if only one of
the photos is proven genuine (as in the case where the abies
alba tree could not have been any model tree), with other photos
still in dispute, then the assumption that the case is a hoax is
false. Or is a hoaxer supposed to have built some UFO models,
and with one of them attracted a genuine UFO that had exactly
the same appearance as the model?

 >First: Photographs of unconventional extraterrestrial technology
 >that are foreign to our world cannot be validated without having
 >a real comparative sample by which the tests are conducted.

I guess that means that the Pleiadians/Plejarens are supposed to
give up one of their (real) beamships that they used with Meier
to certain government scientists as a sample to study and
photograph. Then if you could ever learn about their studies,
and obtain copies of their photographs, you could compare those
with Meier's photos, for validation. Somehow that sounds like
too fanciful a dream to expect to be fulfilled.

 >Second: Photo analysts can determine if the object in a
 >photograph is a large, real size object, not necessarily
 >extraterrestrial.

Using Stevens' 2nd-generation photo material (1st generation
being Meier's originals or slides), that's already been done on
the basis of increasing distance of the beamship in a particular
case causing the crafts' edges to occupy an increasing number of
pixels relative to its width with increasing distance from the
camera, doing the same using various trees in the same frame,
noticing the distance at which both have approximately the same
definition of edge, and measuring the distances to the various
trees. Qualitatively it's been done from two other series of
photographic copies, noticing that the craft becomes lighter in
appearance (sometimes called the haze effect) with increasing
distance.

 >No need to respond with your counter arguments.

OK, will stop here.

 >N. Daniel

 >Buy the way, Jim, what did Meier say about the way "J's" are
 >written or pronounced in Aramaic?

He's never thought that they were part of Aramaic, but was
informed by one of his ET contactors that they were part of an
old Lyran alphabet in which the J symbol was prononced as i,j,
or y. (Immanuel is pronounced about the same in any language,
whether English or Aramaic -- that's what transliteration of
names involves: using letters that will preserve as closely as
possible the name in its original tongue.) So "Jmmanuel" is
pronounced as "Immanuel." The J symbol has the "i" sound.

 >Do you speak Aramaic? Ever
 >read Aramaic? Ever hear Aramaic spoken? Can you write anything
 >in Aramaic?

Have never claimed to. Have just read several books on Aramaisms
relative to the Gospels. The authors knew Aramaic well.

   Jim Deardorff

http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/mttjindx.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                        Re: eier-Hoax Claims - Sandow

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:33:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:25:44 -0400
Subject: Re: eier-Hoax Claims - Sandow


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >>We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >>example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >>a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >Sure, easily. James McDonald.

 >Jerry

David Jacobs's academic career has been hurt by his UFO
committment.

And David Pritchard, the MIT physicist who (with John Mack)
organized the 1992 abduction conference at MIT, told me that he
was worried about the effect his UFO involvement might have on
his standing in his field, his standing in his department, and
his funding.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Model Buiiding, Adamski, Meier, & Others

From: GT McCoy <gtmccoy@harborside.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:52:51 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:28:05 -0400
Subject: Model Buiiding, Adamski, Meier, & Others


Hello, all this is in response to the now abundant comments on
various models of both Brooder and Hubcap.

First, I have visited Meiers website Twice in the last few
days: www.figu.ch/us/ a curious thing has happened. The infamous
Saucer circling the "fir" tree sequence has been changed.What
was one four shots are now two,also, my fertile imagination,
remembers numbers at the top of the photos now they seem
cropped. Could the game be afoot?

Second, I am not a photographer by trade or hobby. What I do do
as a hobby (for 35 some years) is build models, Trains, Planes,
and Automobiles, oh and the Battleship Oregon, one of those
ongoing projects. So I know something about scale and distance.
I have, years ago (1969 to be exact ) did attempt pinhole
aperture photography thanks to an article in an ancient 'Scale
Modeler Magazine. with satisfying results. Though like other
great works they were lost to antiquity and a nasty divorce.
Roger's comment on pinhole photography is correct, as even I who
could screw up a Brownie shot could do it.

Thirdly, upon visiting Meier's site, under "poof, er, proof"
upon arriving at the "Photographs", the first photo is a,
rendition of a "Beamship" in 1975. This is an insult to the
Modeler's art . Sorry .I could have done better at 10 years,
with two pie plates, the bottom of a Kool- Whip container and a
little glue. The edge of the saucer is a bit uneven, also.

Fourthly I have photographed Aircraft, both flying and Static.
None of the Meier photographs have a "real" quality . Yes. there
are things in the photos that provide "Perspective" but not what
I would call a 'viable reality' if you will.

Look up a Aviation Mag, say a real good one like Wings/Airpower
or Fly Past and/or Air Enthusiast. Look at say, a WW2 photo of
say a B-17.(I've been around several as both Airtanker and
Display Aircraft.) Now look at a modern Photo of a B-17 say, the
"Sally B" or the " 1 oh 1" Yep, it's a B-17 all right, dents,
oil stains and the scuff marks on the tires._Real_ in other
words. the you're at an Airshow get climb around one, you know
the what the plane is, the smells the sounds, etc.All that would
indicate the Real McCoy, -pardon the pun.

Now we have here people who have claim to have been for a ride
in a UFO Adamski for one Meier for another. Hey Semjase how
about a couple of "Bumps and Circuits as our British Friends put
it! Billy gets to go how about someone else? There have been
others, but you get the picture. Hey, I got a good candidate:
Phil Klass, aviation writer too. but I digress.

My point: A real mechanism will, invariably be a little messy,
unless the Pleadians/Venusians/Trafalmadorians don't
eat,sleep,defecate among other things that Humanoids do.No one
has ever had an description of the interior of a saucer that
would indicate that no one lives there. Clean, neat, no Ju Ju
fruit cartons on the floor, and just where is the Head,Biffy, or
Crapper. Who keeps it clean? Who works on it? do they use
coveralls, just like why hasn't anyone been a Plumber in a
previous life in Atlantis-no answer why,it just is.

Yes, I am being critical, some things can't go on without
taking a stand. and I don't come from skeptic's view point, but
one who has seen a real ''nuts and bolts" UFO -panel lines
included. I don't whose it was but it was somebody's . "Hey
Ridley keep chewing, I got a paper clip here that just might
work!" could be just as likely line as "Take me to your leader."
when I saw that thing stop. then start again.-We may never know.

GT McCoy -Frustrated Spaceman










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 03:46:44 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:31:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Orford Ness Lighthouse 'UFO' - Easton


In response to some recent claims concerning the relative
visibility of Orford Ness lighthouse and its beam, I trust the
following information will be of assistance:

[Originally posted to UFORL]

From: "James Easton" <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
To: "UFO Research List" <UFORL@listbot.com>
Subject: Re: Rendlesham...
Date: 12 September 2000 01:58

In answer to a previous question, what colour was the Orford
Ness beacon, we do of course have an apparent first hand
confirmation. According to Ed Cabansag, "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".

The following may help to further understand events, especially
in their original perspective and relates to previously
unpublished material from last year. Some concerning the
lighthouse will be familiar, however, no harm in confirming a
few facts.

1. Extracts from conversation with Bernard Edwards, the Lights
List Officer, re Orford Ness lighthouse [my questions/responses
are prefixed by 'JE:'] -

..it's light number 2258 if you want a future reference for
it...

...let me just see what the characteristics are now... it's a
flashing white light and there's also a fixed red and a fixed
green... the red covers a certain arc and the green covers
another certain arc.

JE: Which of the lights would be visible from inshore?

Well... the red sector goes from shore, clockwise round to 210
degrees true, there is another red sector from 038 degrees to
049 degrees, which is a nine degree arc and there's a green
sector from 047 degrees to shore.

Now, any angle in-between those, it obviously doesn't shine
over.

The white light... it doesn't tell me here, but I would imagine
that's all round, but maybe it's blanked inshore a bit, because
lighthouses tend to upset local people.

Now, when you draw out those bearings, you must remember they
are bearings as a mariner would see the lights from seaward, so
it's no good putting a dot on the paper for the light and
drawing a bearing down to the south-west of 210. It is the
mariner looking from the north-east, down a bearing of 210
towards the south-west and there he sees the light.

JE: Is there any reason this white light, or the beam, might be
described as yellow or yellowish-white, as opposed to just plain
white?

A white light can look yellowish and a yellow light can look
whitish.

JE: What might cause that, could it be the Fresnel lens?

I don't honestly know, it may be something to do with the
atmospherics at the time. Was it in the winter?

JE: Yes, this particular observation was in December.

You see, lights do alter if they get a bit of ice on the lens,
you know, a bit of frosting. I'm not saying that was the
reason... [End]


2. Extracts from conversation with Keith Seaman, responsible for
maintenance of the automated Orford Ness lighthouse and who
knows the UFO story well:

...when you get right into the forest, the beam actually
traverses through the forest...

...you're getting well down [towards the coast] then, because as
I pointed out at the time, the lighthouse beam does not go any
further inland than the coast; the coast curves, it doesn't
follow a dead straight line and you obviously get a little bit
of overthrow from the beam.

I've looked after the lighthouse since 1994, I wasn't involved
with it at the time [December 1980], but I'm fully aware of all
the equipment that was in there and where the light shone and
that hasn't been altered since 1914.

JE: Has the light which shines inland been dimmed or reduced in
any way?

The range and possibly the intensity has been reduced since,
that happened in 1990.

JE: Another possibility which came up was that the Shipwash
lightship may have been a factor.

The Shipwash was certainly there at the time.

JE: It's been replaced since then by a buoy, hasn't it?

It has been replace by a buoy, but at the time the Shipwash was
there, but it was some miles further out and my understanding of
that is that it was blanked off towards the land anyway, because
it wasn't necessary to shine the light towards the land because
you'd already got the lighthouse there.

The lighthouse is blanked off to a certain area, it's not a
completely visible light all the way round the 360 degrees, it's
blanked off towards the land. And that's when the light
disappears, because it's screened off.

JE: So, the lightship at that time, would just have been a
plain, white light as well?

Yes, but it had a very different flash sequence.

There were two lightships out there at the time, there was the
Gabbit as well, which was a lot further out.

JE: I'm not aware of that one.

That was off Felixstowe. [End]


In view of the landscape and lighthouse alterations since
December, 1980, a previously mentioned, 1997 public statement
from Chris Armold is perhaps worth considering again.

As noted, Armold was the security policeman who, after the first
incident, reported concerns of an aircrash to the local Suffolk
Constabulary. He wrote:

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]

Armold is a vital witness and apparently one of only three
security policemen, the others being Burroughs and Chandler, who
directly participated in both night's events.

I've recently been discussing the case with him and hope to
shortly be able to publish his more detailed account.

What's important and may not be generally appreciated, is how
Arnold went back with Burroughs to the 'site' of that inaugural
'UFO' scare and it was from this vantage point he could see
"lights in the distance and it appeared unusual as it was a
sweeping light", plus, "some strange colored lights in the
distance".

In recent correspondence, I asked:

EASTON: Significantly, in July 1997, you mentioned there were
'some strange lights' in the distance, whose origin could not be
determined. Can you recall what those lights looked like -
indeed, anything about them at all - colour, size, whether they
were flashing or moved, etc.

ARMOLD: Yes, there were what we initially interpreted as
'strange lights' and in my opinion and contrary to what some
people assert, at the time almost none of us knew there was a
lighthouse at Orford Ness. Remember, the vast majority of folks
involved were young people, 19, 20, 25 years old. Consequently
it wasn't something most of the troops were cognizant of. That's
one reason the lights appeared interesting or out of the
ordinary to some people.

After it was discovered that a lighthouse was out there, the
'strangeness' of the lights evaporated. The lights were
primarily white and were very small, far off in the distance.
Occasionally one would see a shade of blue or red but I
attribute that to refraction from stained glass windows in a
local church in addition to the fog and weather at the time. The
lights did not move in erratic fashions nor did they move
towards us or act in any manner which violated the laws of known
physics. [End]

So, of immense significance, according to Armold some distant
red and blue lights were still visible from the 'landing site'.
However, according to Penniston, the red and blue lights
encountered earlier were attached to a small craft which had, by
that time, zoomed off into the night sky. [END]


[From Ian Ridpath and posted with Ian's full permission]

Sparks seems to think that the fact that the lighthouse dips
below the horizon as one moves into the farmer's field somehow
disproves that Col Halt (or anyone else) could have chased it
for two miles. Au contraire: it simply confirms what Halt said
on the tape, namely that he lost sight of it and then made
sighting again "at the far side of the second farmer's field".
 From Halt's time markers on the tape, it seems there was quite
an interval between passing the farmer's house and re-sighting
the light. (Note, however, that he says: "We've passed the
farmer's house and are crossing the next field" as though the
two events were almost consecutive - no suggestion of a long
walk along the lanes as proposed by Robert McLean).

He also tries to make a point about magnetic deviation, but
simply ends up confirming the figures we already have. What he
says is: "Contrary to erroneous skeptic information the magnetic
declination or correction from magnetic to true bearings was
-5.2 degs, not -10 degs, according to the NOAA Geomagnetic
Synthesis program and Historical Declination database for Dec
28, 1980, at 52-05 N, 1-30 E, zero elevation. With these two
5-degree errors by skeptics -- in the bearing to Orfordness and
in converting Halt's compass readings from magnetic to true --
skeptics have conveniently improved their case by a total of 10
degrees."

Now, we have to distinguish between true north and grid north,
since most of us are working from OS maps and true north at that
location is 2 degrees 50 minutes west of grid north. In
addition, at the date of the sighting magnetic north was about 8
degrees west of grid north. Deduct 2*50 from 8 and you have a
deviation of magnetic north from true north of -5.2 degs, as
quoted by Sparks from NOAA info, confirming my info from the OS.

On the other hand, his own measurement of the azimuth of the
lighthouse from East Gate as 85 degrees is clearly wrong.
(Coincidentally, the azimuth is virtually identical from East
Gate and from the alleged landing site). Where he gets the "5-
degree errors by skeptics" from I don't know. My own value for
the azimuth of the lighthouse (measured from the OS map) was 91
degrees from grid north, which converts to a magnetic bearing of
99 degrees, using the figures above.

As an amusing aside, had Sparks followed his own logic to its
inevitable conclusion, he would have realized he had just proved
that the lighthouse should have been some 30 degrees to the
*left* of Halt's bearing to the UFO, rather than to the right
where Halt claimed to have seen it. [END]


[Also from Ian and forwarded with permission]

I see from the latest postings to UFO Updates that David Rudiak
has done some research and undergone a rather remarkable (and
principled) change of view about the visibility of the Orford
Ness lighthouse.

He posts a link:

http://www.debenweb.co.uk/img/suff/orfd/orf10.jpg

to a photo of the lighthouse.

It so happens that on my last trip to the area I took a photo of
the lighthouse from almost exactly the same position as the one
at the above URL. Hence I can state with confidence that this
photo was taken from somewhere very near to (and most probably
on) the jetty that sticks out into the River Ore from the
riverfront at Orford. If you have the relevant Pathfinder map,
you should see a dotted line marked 'Ferry V' crossing the River
Ore at this point. In fact, it looks to me as though the line of
sight of this photo is almost exactly along this dotted line.

A glance at a map will show that the position from which this
photo was taken is to the NNW of the lighthouse. I do recall
seeing the direct flash of the beam even from this position on
the riverfront, but it is probably the very northerly limit of
visibility. Perhaps Robert McLean could confirm this. In any
case, it is clear from the photo that the lamp is not entirely
blocked from view by shielding at this point. This makes sense,
since direct visibility of the light would be valuable to boats
in the River Ore.

Hence, Rudiak has neatly provided evidence for everyone on the
UFO Updates list that the beam is indeed directly visible well
to the north of west, and no southerly adjustment of the
position of the presumed landing site is necessary. [END]


[Originally posted to UFORL]

From: "Robert McLean" <robert.mclean2@virgin.net>
To: "Rudiak, David" <DRudiak@aol.com>; "UFO Research List"
<UFORL@listbot.com>
Subject: Rendlesham: Visibility of Orfordness Lighthouse
Date: 25 September 2000 22:37

(The contents of this message are non-confidential and can be re-
posted.)

There was some discussion a few weeks ago on UFO UpDates about
the visibility of the Orfordness Lighthouse from the "accepted
landing site", and how this could be possible, given that the
rear, or landward, face of the lighthouse is blacked-out with a
"shield". See for example:

http://personal.riverusers.com/~tanseyj/orford.jpg

and

http://www.debenweb.co.uk/img/suff/orfd/orf10.jpg


On 23/09/00 I went over to Orfordness for the afternoon. The site
is run by the National Trust, and you get there by taking a small
boat that leaves from the Orford pier, exactly where the debenweb
photo was taken.

The Orfordness Lighthouse is, of course, visible from the
"accepted landing site" in Rendlesham forest, the  location of
which on Ordnance Survey maps is at grid ref TM364490 - I've seen
it there and so have lots of others. (N.B. Please ignore the
circular logic: - The "accepted landing site" is believed to be
at grid ref TM364490 mainly because the lighthouse is visible
from there!)

In August I walked along the coastal path north from Orford.
Simply out of curiosity, I used my binoculars to find the point
along the path where I appeared to be directly "behind" the
lighthouse, i.e. centered on the shield. It is possible to do
this, because the shield follows the diamond pattern of the
window panes. When you are directly in line facing the shield,
you can see two small triangles of glass at the left and right
sides of the lantern.

The point on the path from where these triangles of glass looked
to be equal was at grid ref TM436499, which is about 1750 m
inland of the lighthouse. The lighthouse is at grid ref TM450488�
(you measure to the base of the lighthouse symbol on the OS map)
and so the centre of the shadow cast by the shield is at an angle
of 308 grid north, or 310.4 true north. This line passes no
closer than 750 m NE from the centre of Orford. The centre of
this shadowed area is not centered on Orford, but very nearly
bisects the angle formed by the change in direction of the
coastline at the lighthouse. If it wasn't for this change in the
direction of the coastline, the Orfordness lighthouse would not
be visible inland the way it is.

The difference in angle between the centre of the shield and the
line to the accepted landing site is 37. (The error on this
number will be low, probably within 2, because it is possible
to compare accurately the size of the triangles of glass as
mentioned above.)

When I was at Orfordness, I walked around the lighthouse. There
are 16 of the diamond-shaped panes of glass around the
circumference of the lantern, and only 3 of these are blacked out
around the mid-vertical circumference of the shield. The shield
therefore extends a minimum of 33.75 from the centre of the
shadow cast by the shield, which is 37-33.75=3.25 short of the
angle to the accepted landing site.

There are three similar Fresnel lenses inside the lantern
arranged as an equilateral triangle which rotates fully in 15
seconds, giving one flash every 5 seconds. Each of the lenses is
quite large, with a diameter maybe one-half of the lantern. The
lighthouse beam therefore fades gradually as it turns across the
edge of the shield.

To work out the rate at which the beam fades, and the percentage
of light visible at the accepted landing site, you'd have to know
the cross-sectional intensity profile of the beam, and well as
the angle formed by the diamond panes at the edge of the shield.
The beam is probably most intense at its centre. The diamond
pattern is "tall". So a good estimate would be that the beam
intensity at the accepted landing site is about one-half what it
would be out to sea.

The range of lighthouse at sea is stated by Trinity House to be
19 nautical miles. Since the accepted landing site is 8.5 km from
the lighthouse, it is easy to see why the flash of the lighthouse
is still bright at the accepted landing site at night, even when
half of it has been obscured by the shield.

Robert McLean
[END]


To reiterate; when Burroughs, Cabansag and Penniston originally
pursued some unidentified lights, in the early hours of 26th
December, 1980, we know that the following occurred:

"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.

"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 [Central Security Control] 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" - Cabansag.


On the night of 27th December, Halt was investigating a report
that the 'UFO was back' and was at the 'landing sight' when it's
recorded on his microcassette:

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. The light's still there and all the
barnyard animals have gone quiet now.

[...]

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.

[...]

HALT: 3:05. We see strange strobe-like flashes to the... rather
sporadic, but there's definitely something there. Some kind of
phenomenon.
[END]

Incidentally, thanks to Robert McLean, we now know what the
'strobe-like phenomenon' almost certainly was - it's still
visible from the same vantage point, 'at the far side of the
second farmer's field'. I'll leave that aside for now though, I'm
not sure Robert wants to disclose this outwith UFORL at present.

As previously noted, Halt's publicised recollection is how the
initial red [yellow] light observed then exploded into five white
lights and was never seen again. That's evidently not what
happened - as I'm sure Halt will now acknowledge - the white
lights were a separate sighting (again, we now know what they
almost certainly were) and the 'red' light was in fact seen once
more, this time unmistakable "clear off to the coast" and still
flashing.

In 'Rendlesham Unravelled', I wrote:

Science writer Ian Ridpath proposed a more mundane explanation,
that Halt had been deceived by the nearby Orford Ness lighthouse
and Shipwash lightship and these were responsible for the
'phenomena' witnessed.

Halt's tape recording also noted the 'eye' had a dark centre,
only visible when using the 'starlight scope', an image
intensifier. Using the intensifier to view a bright object may
have produced this 'burn out' effect.

Subsequent comparisons between the timing of the 'flashing red
light' from Halt's recording and the Orford Ness beacon,
indicated the lighthouse was indeed an obvious source.

Jenny Randles, one of Britain's foremost authors on the
'unexplained', has written extensively about the case and was one
of the first to investigate the rumours, long before Halt's memo
surfaced.

In her latest book, 'UFO Crash Landing?', she writes:

"Once the men entered the woods on foot and headed towards the
clearing, the option that they saw the lighthouse certainly
increases in strength. I have stood and watched it several times
at night".

"Being inside a forest several miles inland, a lighthouse beacon
would not be the first thought to explain a low-level pulsing
glow. Because of the way the land slopes, the lighthouse sits on
the horizon and appears almost on the ground - just as described
on the Halt tape".

"At the site, the lighthouse does pulse like a winking eye, just
as Halt explains on the tape. The pulses can even be timed as the
beacon rotates (taking about five seconds) and there is a
comparison with part of the tape where the men notice that the
light briefly disappears and then shout, 'There it is again', as
it reappears. This match is quite striking if you judge film of
the lighthouse alongside the audio of the tape. Finally, the
bearing given by the men for the location of the UFO as they walk
toward the coast closely mirrors that of the Orford lighthouse as
seen from the landing site.

Frankly, the first time I saw the lighthouse at night I was 80
per cent convinced that this was the explanation. When I first
heard the Halt tape this conviction rose to 90 per cent. It only
plummeted after talking to eye-witnesses like John Burroughs who
were actually out there, although I did have some concern because
the lighthouse appears as nothing more than a tiny pulsing light,
not a massive red object throwing down beams towards the ground".

Although Halt has repeatedly stated the lighthouse was also
visible and not the source of the pulsating red light with a
"yellow tinge" - exactly like the lighthouse beacon - Ian Ridpath
reiterated to me his belief that Halt was deceived by the beacon
from the adjacent Shipwash lightship and mistook this to be the
recognisable lighthouse.
[END]

As Jenny only subsequently appreciated, Burroughs had been
involved in that abortive two mile pursuit of a 'lighthouse' - a
fact he had never revealed.

Also, as Halt confirmed in a later interview with Salley Rayl,
the light he observed was indeed a tiny, pulsating light:

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.

RAYL: But not a craft that could hold a human being, for example?

HALT: No. It couldn't have been. But it appeared to [be] under
some kind of intelligent control.
[END]

On the question of whether it could have been the lighthouse he
observed - I highlighted this in 'Resolving Rendlesham':

Halt was asked [by Salley Rayl] 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.

Jenny has provided me with a detailed sketch of the location,
based on her visits and setting out where the lighthouse,
lightship and the then prominent blue lights from the NSA
building at Orford Ness all lay in relation to the 'clearing' and
farmer's house. etc.

 From the clearing which is supposedly the 'landing site', the
lighthouse is shown by Jenny to be directly in line with the
farmer's house, with the lightship distinctly further to the
south-east.

This early familiarity with the site is important as a number of
factors have changed since then, the lighthouse isn't now so
noticeable inland, the NSA facility is no longer operational and
the lightship has been replaced by a buoy.
[END]

I hope this all proves to be a definitive explanation of the
factors to be considered regarding these events, which are, of
course, cited as pivotal evidence why scientists and the media
should pay serious attention to claims of encounters with
extraterrestrial civilisations.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                          Filer's Files #38 -- 2000

From: George A. Filer <Majorstar@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:49:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:31:54 -0400
Subject: Filer's Files #38 -- 2000


Filer's Files #38 -- 2000,  MUFON Skywatch Investigations
George A. Filer,  Director,  Mutual UFO Network Eastern
September 25, 2000, Sponsored by Electronic Arts, C. Warren
Webmaster http://www.filersfiles.com. - Majorstar@aol.com.

UFO REPORTS NUMEROUS IN NORTHEAST UNITED STATES

ASTRONAUT GORDON COOPER'S UFO FILMS

In recently published memoirs "Leap of Faith: An Astronaut's Journey into the
Unknown", by USAF Colonel L. Gordon Cooper (Ret.) recounts how he chased UFOs
over Germany in his F-86.  Following this experience, Cooper was very open
minded about UFOs.  He writes, "I knew an Air Force master sergeant assigned
to a team that received an emergency call-out from Washington D.C., to the
Pacific southwest (not Roswell.)  He told me they reached a canyon and found
a wreckage at the site.  According to his friend -- and I had been around him
enough to consider him a reliable guy -- a metallic disk-shaped object had
crashed, and sitting atop the wreckage were two very human-looking fellows in
flight suits, waving at  them.  They were hustled away, and the sergeant
never found out who they were or what happened to them."

As a captain stationed at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., on May 3, 1957, he
became aware that a metallic, saucer-shaped craft had landed (silently)
sometime after   8:00 a.m. on base property.  He alleges that the event was
filmed   by a startled technical film crew on assignment 50 yards away, the
craft zooming out of sight when the photographers tried to approach it for a
better camera shot.  Cooper writes that, upon learning of the incident, he
telephoned appropriate Pentagon officials, who ordered him to have all the
film developed (but not printed) and to ship it immediately to the Pentagon.
He adds that, before complying, he chose to peek at some of the negatives,
which confirmed the existence of the "saucer" as described to him by the film
crew.  Cooper notes that he heard nothing more about the film or the results
of any investigation.  Thanks to Dwight Connelly

ARE UFOs PROTECTING EARTH FROM ASTEROIDS?

The newly-discovered Near-Earth asteroid 400 meter space rock (NEA) 2000 RD53
passed our planet on September 17, 2000, without danger of collision.  Harv
Howard writes, "Perhaps the UFOs are not only observing earthly natural
perils, but are actually saving us for now and for a long time in the past
from the impacts of asteroids that would have otherwise cleaned our plow.  As
for pulsars: when they were first discovered by an English grad student (her
mentor took the credit), the knowledge was kept secret for several months
because it was first assumed that they were intelligent signals.  Their
characteristics do exactly fit the model proposed for a Type III civilization
as proposed by N. S. Kardashev.  But then, he proposed his three types of
civilizations to explain the earlier discovered quasars which were also
thought to be beacons from advanced civilizations.  My personal feeling is
that they are indeed exactly what Kardashev described, but the minds of most
humans cannot accept such a fantastic reality beyond what we humans are
capable of ourselves.  Since neither phenomena could be hidden from the
public nor innocent scientific investigators, they had to be acknowledge; but
yet were explained away as unique and totally natural.  After all, what
humans would want to believe that there are powers out there with virtually
god-like abilities?  Thanks to Harv Howard,  hhoward@ecpi.com

GIANT SUNSPOTS COULD FIRE FLARES AT EARTH

Impact an interplanetary shock wave struck Earth's magnetosphere on September
15, 2000, at 0500 UT (1:00 AM EDT).  Geomagnetic effects were mild and there
were no reports of widespread aurora.  However, the largest sunspots seen in
nine years are currently on the surface of the sun, and with each rotation of
the sun, they spend a little time aimed directly at the Earth.  Known as
Sunspot Group 9169, the blotch on the surface of the Sun covers about 6
million square kilometers (12 times larger than the surface of the Earth).
The group appeared a few days ago, and so far, it has behaved itself, but it
could generate a huge coronal mass ejection in our direction.  These result
in spectacular Auroras, the incandescent colored night light occurring
primarily in high latitudes of both hemispheres.  This sunspot activity may
generate aurora shows, with visibility perhaps reaching as far south as the
Gulf of Mexico.  You might take a peak at the night sky during the next few
weeks, when ever the viewing is good and get a peak at the most dazzling show
in decades.  Fortunately our atmosphere protects us from most of the
geomagnetic effects.  You might watch for UFOs as well since activity seems
to be increasing.

NEW YORK RECTANGLE SHAPED UFO

NEW YORK CITY - Peter Davenport reports that on September 8, 2000, the
witness says,  "My workmate and I were sitting at lunch in the cafeteria in a
Manhattan building over looking Central Park.  We saw a police helicopter
circling the park because of the UN meeting of world leaders.  Then, I saw a
reddish/amber object which seemed stationary at first, but then began to move
very slowly.  I kept looking and the object now was showing a bright white
color.  I pointed that to my workmate and we decided to focus on the object
and the helicopter.  It wasn't long before we noticed that the flying object
was actually moving in a circular fashion, traveling and spinning, that was
evident because we could see the bright white color and then reddish/amber.
Sometimes it appeared this was a two-colored object and  sometimes one.  We
became more curious when we realized that this thing was really moving
upwards and getting smaller and that we now would only recognize the bright
white color.  We knew it was not a balloon, nor a helicopter, nor any other
object that we can recognize.  We suggested it might be a flying saucer and
we both laughed.  I still do not know what the heck this thing was but I know
I had never seen anything like it before.
NEW YORK CITY -- A second report was received on September 8, 2000,
describing a rectangle shaped object spinning around, changing colors
constantly from red to white.  New York police helicopters circle around the
area, but they failed to see the object.  The witness believed
they are looking down on the city instead of up at the object.  Object are
climbing upwards and gets further away.  Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC
http://www.ufocenter.com/

NEW JERSEY FLYING TRIANGLE UFO

WALDWICK - I spoke on the phone with Brian McCrudden who says, "Some of my
family and friends have witnessed strange lights and a triangle shaped craft
in the sky starting on September 5th and continuing thru September 8, 2000."
All sightings happened at night.  The footage I shot is an object that
changes form very fast.  It looks like a worm at times.  It jumps all over
the place changing into different shapes.  And at two different times it
emits a green wave of light that is on the film.  On September 7th my friend
and I saw an extremely bright object moving over the tree tops.  The light
from the object lit up the woods below like it was day light.  We live on
White's Pond and have seen many strange UFOs.  One object looked like a
burning candle with a golden yellow center.  It moved right over where we
were standing.  Frankly we got scared and my friend an I ran like hell back
to the house.  The objects seem to be circling our area.  Brian indicated
their home is on the standard flight path into Newark and they are use to
seeing standard planes, but these are very different.  Thanks to
bjmccrud@aol.com and Larry Clark nymufon@nycap.rr.com.

NEW JERSEY FLYING RECTANGLE

WAYNE -- I have investigated the Debra Yetman case more thoroughly and the
witness has provided more detailed information concerning her May 15, 2000,
UFO sighting.  Debra filled out the MUFON forms and wrote:  "Sitting in my
backyard, 2:30 in the afternoon, I was reading Linda Moulton Howe's book "Glim
pses of Other Realities, Vol. II".  I don't know what made me look up other
than wishing to myself how much I wish I knew for sure if these are real
occurrences.  I still remember the absolute shock I felt because they were
not like anything I ever read or heard about from other people.  They were
just above the tree line so you could see it was not a bird, kite, balloon or
plane.  Two solid black objects moving at a 'fast pace.'  There was no
lights, no sound, nothing else to see!  It was so close, I could see that
they appeared totally solid from my ground point of view.  One came right
after the other moving in the formation I drew.  They were probably the size
of (in length) of a small car.  The objects flew over the house then my yard
and me!  They then flew over the trees in my yard which are very high, 75 to
100 feet tall continuing out of sight once over those trees.  My reaction was
shock and disbelief in my own eyes, because I could not imagine what they
were.  Still I can't except they must be UFOs.  There was no chance to run
and get a camera, it happened so fast.  The dog was scared and wanted to go
in.  She didn't bark, but ran to the door with her tail between her legs.  I
went with her, and got scared and stayed inside for awhile.  No one else was
home.

Editors Note:  During September there have been almost nightly sightings in
this general area of Northern New Jersey only ten miles west of New York
City.  Debra made a nice drawing of the two black objects that were rectangle
in shape.  Assuming they were twenty feet long they were about two feet thick
and three feet wide.  Moving north east at 50 mph they flew directly over the
witness at an altitude of 100 feet.  They look similar to the shape of a two
by four.  This particular odd shape flying wing has been seen in New Jersey
before.  One was see flying over Teterboro Airport by aircraft engineers and
by police in Medford.  This general area has had sightings periodically for
fifty years.

PENNSYLVANIA TRIANGULAR PATTERN LIGHTS

HERMITAGE -- On September 9, 2000, my two friends and I were hanging out in
the one friends backyard, which is actually located on the main business
strip of our town.  They were sitting at a picnic table and I was standing.
I was talking when I looked up, I saw something fly overhead between two 40
feet trees.  I quickly turned and took a few steps to my left and watched the
object disappear into the night sky.  My friends got up from the table and
asked, "Did you see that?"  We discussed what we saw and each drew pictures
of what we saw.  It did not appear to be flying at an altitude greater than a
couple hundred feet.  It was absolutely silent.  We all saw the same thing.
It was moving west to east but not at a moderate speed.  It did not bank like
a plane would and swiftly moved to the right.  It consisted of three
rectangular lights, gold-amber in color, not terribly bright, but
distinct--no halos or blurriness to them.  It was hazy that night.  The
rectangles were in a triangular pattern, one on top, two on the bottom as if
there was one for each point on a triangle.  Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC
http://www.ufocenter.com/

PENNSYLVANIA ROD SHAPED UFO

BETHLEHEM -- Margaret Kichline writes,  "This morning, September 16, 2000,  I
went outside to see some deer that were in our neighbors back yard at 6:45
AM."  I walked around the back end of our wooded property checking out things
and saw an object traveling very fast, that was silvery white-rod shape.  I
ran into my house to get my binoculars.  The object looked strange with no
wings at all.  It was about an inch to 2 inches in size without the
binoculars and it made no sound.  The object had a faint white blinking light
in the center.    I followed it until I couldn't see it anymore going toward
the airport in the clear blue sky.  I watched it halfway through it's course
and saw a low flying airliner crossing in another direction.  It was very low
and I could see it in detail without binoculars.  Thanks to Margaret Kichline
vixalien@enter.net (Margaret Kichline)

DELAWARE FLYING TRIANGLE

WILMINGTON - On September 16, 2000, a mother daughter and three grandkids saw
a very strange flying triangle.  In each corner there was a bright white
light.  Each light blinked in turn one after the other.  The object just
hovered there and a very faint humming sound could be heard.  There seemed to
be a little mist or haze around it.  We didn't know what it could be.  After
a while in one corner there were two lights that shone, one bright white and
the other was bright red.  They flashed as the object slowly started to move
away, then in a bright flash of light it was gone.  There was a small trail
of light left behind, but then it soon faded.  Thanks to Peter Davenport
NUFORC http://www.ufocenter.com/

NORTH CAROLINA DISC UFO REPORT A HOAX

MUFON Investigator Rex Peterson writes that the North Carolina story is a
hoax perpetuated by someone who uses various aliases such as Paul Novak,
Grendel 1, Grendel The Martyr, and Sceptic Trooper, etc.  Apparently, Paul
Novak chooses to spend a couple hours unashamedly typing out fake UFO
reports.

Editor's Note:  I have often mentioned, "These are initial reports and need
further investigation."  I admit we have difficulty in determining if someone
is dishonest when sending or calling in a report.  This particular report was
detailed and several typed pages long.  It probably took more than an hour to
write.  Most of the key details of the story such as the loss of life in the
Hurricane Floyd , the flooding on Tar River, NC and other details seemed
accurate.  Our investigations, phone calls, travel costs are at our cost on a
volunteer basis.  The final reports are signed.  We consistently find that
99% of the 300 people a month reporting UFO reports are truthful.  Generally
people are quite excited by their sighting.  These initial reports are
reported has quickly as possible to you the reader, and investigation is done
after the fact usually taking many months.  When ever possible our
investigators interview the persons who wrote the report and have them sign a
form indicating their willingness to stand behind their report.

As an Intelligence officer and flier who spent twenty years in the Air Force
it came to my attention that UFOs are traveling in our skies at high speeds
in disregard for the safety of the flying public.  Almost every major
aircraft accident such as TWA Flight 800 and EgyptAir 990 often involve
reports of UFOs often by hundreds of people.  I personally chased a UFO while
in the Air Force while serving in England.  London Control directed our
intercept of the target UFO that was hovering over the Stonehenge area.  UFOs
are treated very seriously by the government, millions of pages of government
documents have already been released.  My experiences have shown me that this
is very serious to the US and UK.  High ranking retired military personnel in
France, recently released their historic document  "UFOs and Defense: What
Should We Prepare For?" written by the French Association.  Initiated by
four-star General Bernard Norlain, former Commander of the French Tactical
Air Force and Military Counselor to the Prime Minister, COMETA, or "Committee
for In-Depth Studies", is composed of French generals, admirals, engineers,
doctors, physicists, and other high-ranking officials including the Chief of
National Police, and the Research Director of the French equivalent of NASA.
Cooperation between various governments is encouraged.  China has asked for
international cooperation partially do to a UFO and commercial aircraft
collision.

Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the Apollo 14 astronaut who was the sixth man to walk on
the moon, strongly supports such cooperation.  Along with five-star Admiral
Lord Hill-Norton, the former head of the British Ministry of Defense and
Major Gordon L. Cooper, one of America's original seven Mercury astronauts,
Mitchell is calling for Congressional hearings to shed light on the UFO
question. "People have been digging through the files and investigating for
years now.  The files are quite convincing.  Occasionally the skeptic will
attempt to hoax a sighting, but I personally feel they do more damage to
their own cause than they realize.  Our goal is to obtain valid sightings and
to determine exactly what is going on.

GEORGIA FLYING TRIANGLE

LA GRANGE - Researcher John Thompson writes, "I had a person in my office say
that they along with 4 other adults saw a triangle shaped craft, with four
large non-blinking lights Labor Day night.  It was going north towards
LaGrange.  It was very high, and moved at a speed like a satellite.  A large
central brilliant white light on its bottom came on.  The light,
interestingly, faded on and faded off like a dimmer is twirled and then
twirled back quickly.  The light expanded and then rapidly contracted.  After
flying past they heard a "dim humming noise" like a B-2 Stealth bomber makes
which one of the witnesses has seen fly over during an airplane show in
Columbus.  No one thought it was an airliner.  No lights were seen blinking
or of any other color besides white.  It was seen at 10:00 PM on September 4,
2000, on a clear night.  Their drawing of the craft shows a huge diffused
light covering about half of the triangle shaped craft they saw.  The three
other white and much smaller lights were at each corner of the craft.  Thanks
to John Thompson

MISSISSIPPI CONTRAILS WITNESS SILVERY DISC

TUPELO -- On September 16, 2000, a silvery disc flew from west to east
against clear blue sky.  My wife had called me out to view the contrails
crisscrossing the morning sky.  I retrieved my binoculars to try to identify
the aircraft when the disc appeared just below a fresh con-trail.  I pointed
it out to my wife, and she saw it without the aid of binoculars.  The disc
was about 10,000 feet high and the sighting lasted from 20 to 30 seconds.
Thanks to Peter Davenport NUFORC http://www.ufocenter.com/

AZORES UFO REPORTS

LAJES FIELD -- Henry Deitchman writes, "During the many years of my life as
an Air Traffic Controller, it was always a fantasy of mine to one day see a
UFO.  In 1973, my fantasy was realized while working as a controller at the
Radar Approach Control at Lajes Field, Azores Islands in the middle of the
Atlantic.  My first few months there were quiet, but then the Arab/Israeli
War started and the USAF started resupplying Israel with arms.  During the
entire time of the resupply airlift, a few weeks, the radar and tower
controllers encountered not less than one UFO incident per day.  It got so
bad that we even started sending out NAVY P-3 Sub Chasers our electronic
warfare airplanes, covertly, to try to identify where they were coming from,
but all efforts proved useless.  The UFO's would follow our aircraft during
the day and even make low approaches to the runway at night.  None of the
controllers were afraid of collisions, but it did bother us keeping in mind
who we were in control of and who the observers were.  Before you ask, yes,
we did have fun with them.  Occasionally we would turn an F-4 to chase them,
not that we thought we could catch something that fast, but it kept us all
honest and broke the monotony.  All considered, it was a fantastic
experience.  Except the debriefing afterwards by some officers sent in from
the states." Thanks to CAUS and Henry Deitchman

AUSTRALIA MYSTERY CROSS AND PRINTS

Australian researcher Barry Taylor reports a local lady contacted him
regarding a mysterious 'cross' that had appeared on her arm during the night.
  Also, there were mysterious 'finger' print marks on her bedroom mirror.  The
question is, "did the same 'entity' that scratched the cross on her arm,
leave these mysterious finger prints on her bedroom mirror?  A full DNA
sampling of the prints was undertaken with the assistance of the Scientific
Research group 'Phenomena Research Australia.'  The results showed NO Human
DNA, in fact no DNA at all of what could have made these prints.  There was
an unusually high density bacterial culture found in the prints.  This is
also unexplainable.      the physical proof we are looking for that
'inter-dimensional beings ' are visiting Humans in their own homes at night?
Or does it have an 'Earthly' explanation, and all we have to do is find it?
Thanks to Barry Taylor stingray@nor.com.au>        The print images and
details are now posted at: http://www.nor.com.au/users/stingray/latesite.htm

AUSTRALIA GUN SURRENDER INCREASES CRIME

Bill Velek, Pro-Gun Judge and Prosecutor writes:  "I thought you all would
like to see the real figures from Down Under."  It has now been a year since
gun owners were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to
be destroyed by the Australian government, a program costing taxpayers more
than $500 million dollars.  The first year results are:  In Australia
homicides are up 3.2 percent, assaults are up 8.6 percent, and armed
robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!  In the state of Victoria
alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.  (Note that while the
law-abiding citizens turned in their guns, the criminals did not.)  For 25
years we had a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has
changed drastically upward in the past year, since the criminals now are
guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.  There has also been a dramatic
increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.  Australian politicians
are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased after such the large
cost of ridding Australian society of guns.  The Australian experience proves
what happens when guns are taken from the hands of honest citizens.  Gun
control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.  At least 83,000,000 gun
owners behaved peacefully today. Thanks to: Bill Velek
http://www.velek.com/bill/boycott.


WHY OIL AT HIGHEST PRICE SINCE GULF WAR?

Demand for oil is at an all time high causing prices to soar.  Many emerging
nations are using more oil than ever before.  China for example, now uses
33.9 million barrels every day, more oil than the US and Europe combined.
The US produces 12% of the world's oil, yet consumes 26% of it.  During the
last five years, the U.S. demand for oil went from 17.7 million barrels per
day to 19.9 million barrels, a 12% jump, according to the EIA data.  The US
has the ability to produce more oil, but it would require drilling in Alaska.
  Saudi Arabia provides 60% of the oil from the Persian Gulf.  Surprise, IRAQ
is America's SECOND BIGGEST OIL SUPPLIER, 29% of the total American oil
imports from the Persian Gulf.  Perhaps if we quit bombing Iraq, the price of
oil would fall.  It might surprise you to learn that OPEC accounts for about
40% of the world's oil supply.  The US and many European nations went to war
to defend Kuwait and its oil in 1990, but they only provide 10% of the U.S.
Persian Gulf imports.  OPEC is an eleven nation oil cartel that fixes the
price of oil worldwide.  This price -fixing organization is illegal under the
antitrust laws in most advanced nations.  Higher oil prices may be key to the
US election.

WERNHER VAN BRAUN'S FBI FILES

Tim Cooper advises that the CIA and JIOA had created files on von Braun in
1945 and he and his brother were interrogated after they surrendered to the
U.S. Army.  Von Braun was smuggled into Canada by the OSS first, and then
came to the U.S. through Operation OVERCAST.  Approximately 100 of von
Braun's rocket team were secretly working for the U.S. Army's Rocket Division
at White Sands and Fort Bliss from 1945-1947 under a one-year contract which
was periodically renewed.  In 1947 Operation OVERCAST was changed to
PAPERCLIP after it was known  that Truman approved of the recruitment of the
German team.  Von Braun was allowed to cross into Mexico under the
supervision of Army CIC to recruit more  Germans but were later restricted to
Fort Bliss and  White Sands until 1948. Army CIC purged his PAPERCLIP file
before being investigated by the State  Department and FBI and was cleared of
war crimes.  Approximately 200 Nazi scientists were similarly protected from
extradition orders to stand trial at  Nuremberg.  Please see;
http://home.earthlink.net/~rcollins637/reports/von_braun_fbi_file48.htm

THE 11TH GREAT UFO CONGRESS will be held at the Days Inn in Bordentown, NJ on
October 7 and 8, 2000.  Scheduled speakers are Tom Carey -Roswell Crash, Hans
Holzer, Life After Death, Antonio Huneeus UFO Briefing Document,  Don Ecker
The Dark side of the Moon, Vicki Ecker - In search f the Secret Keepers, Mike
Mannion -Project Mind Shift, Pat Marcattilio -The Origins of Civilizations,
James Mosely - A Skeptical Ufologist and Sam Sherman - Edwards AFB Encounter

NEW NASA SHUTTLE VIDEO OF UFOs IN SPACE

Jeff Challender has prepared a new tape of various UFOs that were caught on
recent Shuttle video footage.  Jeff has noticed that when NASA is picking up
UFOs they have tendency to first zoom in to observe the UFO better and then
they cut the feed to the outside world.  Jeff spends hundreds of hours
watching the shuttle broadcasts from space.  He is now an expert on NASA
missions and even those onboard the shuttle are likely to see what Jeff does.
  He has gained his experience from watching numerous shuttle missions and
using Jeff's directions you will be able to learn the difference between
space junk, ice crystals and real UFOs.  Using his experience you can also
learn the difference.  One segment has 24 UFOs watching the shuttle from
space.  I feel confident we could go into a court of law and convince any
jury that there are UFOs moving at high speed around the Earth.  Send $25 to:
Jeff Challender
2768 Mendel Way - Sacramento, California 95833-2011

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 THE 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.

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.  Caution: Most of these are initial reports and
need further investigation.  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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:36:43 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:35:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger

 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:09:14 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:24:28 -0300
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >>>>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >>>>An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >>>>the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >>>>meteors' located at:

 >>>>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

 >>To consider a meteor here is just muddying the waters. The
 >>length of the sighting, and/or the time to take a photograph
 >>precludes a meteor from the getgo. Please don't make the mistake
 >>of thinking that because it was in Canada it was therefore in
 >>the remote arctic. Also with a meteor of this size, where's the
 >>trail, the outgassing and all of the other telltales of a
 >>meteor?

 >>Ball lightning perhaps, but why give the naysayers another
 >>feeble explanation for the sighting by even proposing a meteor?>>

 >I agree that the description doesn't sound like a meteor.

 >I was responding to Todd's input, about Andrei Ol'khovatov's URL
 >about "geophysical meteors", and asking if there is any evidence
 >for this type of phenomena, here. Ol'khovatov suggests that
 >these things are outgassings of some sort from the Earth, not
 >actually meteors. I think that he lists a lot of sightings which
 >are likely meteors, though.


Hi bob,

No sweat. Just catching up.

Don






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 37th Annual National UFO Conference Report

From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@post.cybercity.dk>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 05:54:03 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:35:21 -0400
Subject: 37th Annual National UFO Conference Report


Source: Caller-Times of Corpus Christi, Texas, via the Nando
         Times,

http://www.nando.com/noframes/story/0,2107,500261601-500404264-502439800-0,00.ht
ml

Stig

***

Believers gather at national UFO conference

Copyright � 2000 Nando Media
Copyright � 2000 Scripps Howard News Service

By CYNTHIA HODNETT, Caller-Times of Corpus Christi, Texas

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas (September 24, 2000 1:46 p.m. EDT
http://www.nandotimes.com) - Robert Matthews has believed UFOs
exist ever since a trip to Mexico nearly 20 years ago.

"During the day, I saw a very white beam of light over the
mountains that would appear on and off," Matthews said. "I
really believe that it had to be something unexplainable."

Matthews, of Austin, Texas, was one of more than 100 UFO
watchers attending the 37th Annual National UFO Conference here
this weekend.

"We had conferences in other places, but we wanted to bring it
here," said Doris Upchurch of Corpus Christi, assistant
chairwoman of Mutual UFO Network's South Texas chapter, which
sponsored the event.

James Moseley, the author of several books that document
sightings as far back as the mid-1950s, said he remains somewhat
skeptical about UFOs. "I accept the fact that I have seen them,"
Moseley said. "The trouble with the sciences like 'ufologism' is
interpretation. You have a mystery that is beyond our current
understanding, one that can't be measured more than once."

Other lecturers presented what they call further evidence of a
government cover-up at Roswell, N.M., where some believe two
alien ships crashed in 1947, leaving alien corpses behind.

Stanton Friedman, a nuclear physicist, said an Army Air Force
general who reportedly met with investigators in New Mexico
shortly after the Roswell incident was actually fishing in Port
Aransas at the stated time. "There were a great deal of
fraudulent documents that were used by the government to confuse
researchers," he said. "And it still continues."

Pictures of crop circles supposedly found in Corpus Christi were
on display, as was a reproduction of an alien's fossilized
remains that were supposedly found in the early 1900s, Upchurch
said.

According to Upchurch, the crop circles - a total of seven,
ranging in diameter from 20 to 50 feet - were found in a vacant
lot.

Other speakers included Jerrnimo Flores Cavazos, a reporter who
has investigated UFOs in Mexico for 25 years, and Diana Perla
Chapa, a television director who also researches UFOs in Mexico.

Perla Chapa and Flores Cavazos began a group for UFO watchers
nine years ago after they met near a mountain where a UFO
sighting was reported. Since then, they have done several
television reports on UFO sightings throughout Mexico.

"We don't say we believe in UFOs because it is not a religion,"
Perla Chapa said. "We say we know there are UFOs out there. What
we do is the investigation to promote UFO sightings to the
public. We show them what we have found and we let them make up
their own minds."

Other speakers included Greg Avery, on UFO sightings in the last
30 years, and psychologist Constance Clear, on post-abduction
therapy.

Allowing those with similar experiences to meet and remaining
unabashed in their beliefs is the goal of the conference,
Upchurch said.

"If you ask people whether they have seen a UFO and they are in
an earshot of another person, they will probably deny it," she
said. "If you get them by themselves, they will probably say
yes. It happens more commonly than we would like to think."

**

Copyright � 2000 Nando Media








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 00:30:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:43:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire


 >From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:24:28 -0300
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >>>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >>>An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >>>the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >>>meteors' located at:

 >>>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

 >>Dear Todd, List:

 >>Interesting, indeed. Is anyone aware of a "crater" or other
 >>evidence of impact or outgassing on the ground for this event?
 >>If there isn't such evidence, the incident would seem not to be
 >>associated with a "geophysical meteor".

 >Hi Bob,

 >To consider a meteor here is just muddying the waters. The
 >length of the sighting, and/or the time to take a photograph
 >precludes a meteor from the getgo. Please don't make the mistake
 >of thinking that because it was in Canada it was therefore in
 >the remote arctic. Also with a meteor of this size, where's the
 >trail, the outgassing and all of the other telltales of a
 >meteor?

 >Ball lightning perhaps, but why give the naysayers another
 >feeble explanation for the sighting by even proposing a meteor?

 >Best,

 >Don Ledger

Don, Bob, and List,

The link I provided was not meant to 'muddy' the waters, or the
atmosphere for that matter, concerning the Childerhose case.
Andrei focuses mainly on the tectonic processes within the link
I provided the list. The link was given as food for thought, not
as an explanation for the sighting.

Come on Don, I'm not giving the naysayers any more ammo than
they already have, and personally I don't care what explanation
the 'naysayers' come up with next. Are they going to alter
_your_ perceptions? If you really want to give them some ammo
take the time and read completely the paper I have posted on my
site titled ION BASED CONDUCTIONS IN THE ATMOSPHERE by Richard
Spalding, located at
http://members.home.net/tlemire/ibconduct.html

Again this paper is food for thought, and is not meant as an
explanation for the Childerhose sighting, but it will make you
think!

Bob, as I'm not familiar with the particulars of the case
investigation I can't answer your question concerning evidence
of impact or outgassing occurring during the Childerhose
sighting, but you are right in your reply to Don. Andrei's
theories involve a "non-meteoroidal (i.e. terrestrial) origin"
for the luminous events he speaks of on his website. Impact
sites from geophysical meteors such as these may leave only a
crater with no trace evidence of a 'standard meteorite', however
I do agree with you that his site MAY include what others
consider to be standard meteors. However this is a judgment I'm
not willing to make.

Respectfully,
Todd Lemire
Michigan UFO CENTRAL
http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 01:24:33 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:46:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Hatch


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Over 20 years ago a Defense Meteorological Satellite Program
 >satellite recorded a very strange image while not far from the
 >FSU  (Former Soviet Union).

 >Starting in 1985 this was publicized as a photo of an object at
 >45,000 ft traveling at 4000-5000 mph and leaving several
 >contrails.  Ok, it looks like a "sport model" without wheels.
 >But who needs wheels at 45,000 ft. altitude, anyway?

 >Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite photo of a
 >True UFO (TRUFO)?

 >What do you think?

 >I invite your comments

 >http://brumac.8k.com/DMSP/DMSP.html


Hello Bruce:

I guess I got lost somewhere in all that trigonometry, so I'm
not sure whether to mentally shrink the object from front to
rear ( toward the contrails ) or from side to side.

Ignoring that, it looks to my uneducated eyes like some sort of
table-top electronic device like a fax machine, or perhaps a
measuring instrument used in industrial labs. We have a
film-thickness gauge at work that looks a lot like that.

If its a "car", I am reminded of a 1960s era station wagon in
reverse gear with the tailgate down or a dark rear window ..
i.e. the contrails are coming from the "front".

I haven't a clue what it actually is, but it sure is different!
I'll try to pass the link along to someone better qualified in
these matters in any case.

What are the chances of yet another hoax or prank? Any signs of
that in the photos?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 09:42:09 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:50:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Clark
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims


 >>>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >>We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >>example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >>a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >Sure, easily. James McDonald.

 >Jerry

I think you can see some pretty nasty stuff in Condon's papers.
As for documentation that someone lost grants because of UFO
activity, come now! Do you seriously expect that people would
commit this to paper? In this litigious society that is hardly
possible. More ambiguous phrasing is used. "The board feels your
proposed research is not appropriate in light of our mandate."

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:41:49 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:53:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson



 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:42:06 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >Is perhaps the main reason why many scientist have been
 >reluctant to get involved in UFO research is because they have
 >decided that there is very little chance, after sixty years, of
 >any significant scientific findings emerging from it?

Well, in order to get significant scientific findings one has to
do significant (peer-reviewd, open) scientific research on the
topic first. Point me at some of that regarding UFOs please?

You don't get scientific findings (pro or con) without the
research first. There hasn't been any. Condon doesn't count; we
know Condon had a prepared conclusion before it started.
Arbitrary Air Force pronouncements don't count.

Of course there aren't any significant scientific findings.

I'd say the real reason many scientists have been reluctant to
get into UFO research are _much_ more basic:

   1 Worldview conflict: it can't be so why bother

   2 Personal pressure; fear of ridicule from family, friends

   3 Professional reputation & career to protect

These are each very powerful factors that no doubt would send
most scientists hastily walking down the hall looking the other
way, if (for some bizarre reason) the possibility of doing UFO
research were broached.

The only case where factors 2 & 3 might not apply is in the case
of highly-classified top-secret military research. But then
we'd generally never hear about that anyway, would we?

-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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

               Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:45:58 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:55:59 -0400
Subject: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax


 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:42:06 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

John,

 >MacDonald's case is tragic, but it's a little bit more
 >complicated than an individual being denied funding for academic
 >work because of an objective interest in UFOs. There were a lot
 >of personality clashes and politics involved, which a very well
 >sumarised in your Encyclopedia

Nah, the McDonald case is pretty straightforward: a courageous
scientist who took on the entrenched -- and mostly uninformed --
skepticism of his colleagues and suffered the consequences, one
of which was cancelled funding.

 >Is perhaps the main reason why many scientist have been
 >reluctant to get involved in UFO research is because they have
 >decided that there is very little chance, after sixty years, of
 >any significant scientific findings emerging from it?

Nope. If science has barely paid attention to the subject, it
has no claims to authority about it. Frankly, it's a little
shocking that you seem to think that the average scientist who
rejects the UFO phenomenon knows anything worth knowing about.
That's certainly not the impression one gets from reading
scientific texts or reading newspaper quotes. Apparently, to
paraphrase Orwell, there is a widespread feeling among
scientists that where UFOs are concerned, ignorance is strength.
In any event, most of those scientists (unfortunately rare) who
have bothered to inform themselves have concluded that, at the
very least, the phenomenon is intriguing and deserves more, not
less, scientific attention.

Besides, there is absolutely nothing careerwise, and everything
troublewise, to be gained from it, except (as Condon urged)
horsewhipping. As someone who knew Allen Hynek reasonably well,
I know something of the barriers that face scientists brave or
foolish enough to identify themselves publicly with the UFO
phenomenon. For an excellent discussion of, in his words, "the
many barriers to the conduct of this research," see sociologist
of science Ron Westrum's paper in the recent University Press of
Kansas collection, UFOs and Abductions: Challenging the Borders
of Knowledge.

Meantime, here's a paragraph from Westrum:

"Scientists' careers are a major force in shaping research into
controversial subjects such as UFOs. While curiosity and
idealistic fervor are powerful drivers, few scientists can
afford to be indifferent about the impact of such inquiries on
their future prospects. If involvement in such an area is to
provide career advancement, there must be the promise of
progress and discoveries. Further, involvement by itself should
not decrease scientists' prospect of career success. Yet,
frustratingly, UFO research seems to suffer from both of these
drawbacks. And strong pressures against free inquiry have
sharply limited the activities of scientists in studying UFOs.
Limitation has occurred both by narrowing entry into the field
and by restricting debate within it. The net result of the
social pressures has been less knowledge about UFOs."

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

             Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:07:36 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:58:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax


 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:30:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser

 >>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:14:19 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

John,

 >>I wouldn't expect to see an official record of this type of
 >>discrimination, but that certainly doesn't mean there isn't an
 >>impact.

 >>In the case of Dr. John Mack an attempt was made to call his
 >>research into question at Harvard, and he was able to weather
 >>that particular storm without giving in to the pressure to cease
 >>his research. But Dr. Mack is a tenured award-winning
 >>psychiatrist, and I suspect that others viewed that as a warning
 >>of what they might face if they swerved too far toward the
 >>fringe.

In other words, you would like us to believe that if John Mack
had a sympathetic interest in the abduction phenomenon, openly
acknowledging that it could be what it seems to be (interaction
with nonhuman intelligences) but didn't put a New Age gloss on
it, his colleagues would have opened their arms and encouraged
his inquiries?

Just when, exactly, were you born? Or, more to the point, when
do you think the rest of us were born?

 >I did say 'serious'! Mack is pretty fringey when it comes to UFO
 >research. The fact is that, even so, in the end he kept his job
 >and, as I recall, got a fair amount of support on an 'academic
 >freedom' line, despite many of his ideas being well outside the
 >scientific consensus.

The support for academic freedom was hardly overwhelming. Mack's
experience will stand for a long time as a warning against
sympathetic academic interest in the abduction phenomenon and,
beyond that, the larger UFO phenomenon. All that saved Mack,
after this humilating and damaging episode, was his tenure, his
Pulitzer Prize, and Harvard's political decision that Mack's
dismissal would in the end cause it more trouble than the
embarrassment of having an abducionist on its faculty.

It's interesting that academia supports the Leninists and racial
theorists in its midst with barely a second thought, but nearly
has a fit when one of its own expresses support for the notion
that UFOs are real and otherworldly. You may be the only
observer in the world who didn't get the message.

 >There are many scientists who move into contentious areas. The
 >whole history of psychic research is full of established
 >scientists who have gone out on a limb to exlore ESP,
 >clairvoyance, survival, autokinesis, etc., and have done so
 >without sacrificing their careers. Possibly some colleagues may
 >think them a little 'flakey' but scientists allegedly being
 >denied funding because of their interest in psi just does not
 >seem to be an issue.

This is, frankly, nonsense. The history of psychical research,
which had significant establishment support in the late 19th and
early 20th Centuries (all the way up to the revered William
James), when it was tied to the emerging discipline of
psychology, is not the history of ufology. As far as that goes,
the history of parapsychology is not the history of psychical
research. There is little academic institutional support for
parapsychology left, even when the Parapsychological Association
continues to hold a controversial affiliation with the AAAS --
and that has been loudly challenged by the likes of the powerful
physicist John Wheeler. How many pro-psi papers have Nature and
Science published in recent memory? I believe the correct figure
is somewhere between zero and none.

I am at a loss to understand why you think, reams of writing in
science studies notwithstanding, that textbook science (where
scientists are open to all phenomena of nature) and actual
science (where they are not) are one and the same. This sort of
naivete does not become you, John, unless, as I suspect, you
know better and are exercising the disingenuousness
characteristic of the pelicanist.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:00:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Tonnies


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >Hello, one and all...

 >I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in
 >my opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn
 >from being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my
 >past opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am
 >now convinced that they're fake.

 >Take a look for yourselves:

 >http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

<snip>

While the author if this page does a good job of illustrating
that Trent's camera angle was not what one would expect, one
must keep in mind that he didn't exactly "expect" to be
photographing a UFO.

Before I'd take this site's conclusion as the final word, I'd
want to know more about the immediate conditions (i.e.
psychological: how hurried was Trent? Would his haste in getting
2 good shots make him more or less likely to adopt the posture
suggested in the article? etc) under which the photos were
allegedly taken.

=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com)
MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html
Cydonian Imperative: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:49:23 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:02:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:30:06 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:47:33 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:17:59 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:26:07 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Jim writes:

 >>Before moving on, Roger, let's remember that if just a part of
 >>the branches in question were only a foot(!) from the camera,
 >>the camera's full field of view would be totally blocked by
 >>those branches. Thus they were a lot farther away from the
 >>camera than that.

 >>If the beamship and adjacent tree had been models, I think
 >>they'd have to be at least twice as far away as the blurry tree
 >>limbs to have been in the real good focus they are in. This
 >>would require a saucer model of width about 33 inches. This is
 >>nothing that could have been hauled around undetected by Meier
 >>on his Moped, not to mention much other model-support equipment
 >>a hoaxer would need.

 >If, if, if, if, if...

 >Jim, this is all guess work. I asked a simple question: What was
 >the focal length of the lens used by Meier to shoots his photos?
 >If we know that, then we can better estimate the size of the
 >limb. Anything short of that is just speculation. If you don't
 >know or have no intention of answering that question, then there
 >is no need to continue this discussion.

Hello Roger,

In my previous response to you on this list, you'll find the
focal length as obtained by Stevens and listed in his 1982 book
on p. 400. I had written:

"The same limb's left-to-right width, subtended along the
horizontal, is less, about 16 inches. This subtended width
occupies 13% of the 35mm film's width (or length in the film's
along-the-roll direction). Then knowing the camera's focal
length of 42 mm, one finds this blurry limb's distance from the
camera as having been 16 feet. This uses the "camera" equation:

Width of object on 35mm film   Actual width of object
---------------------------- = ----------------------
   focal length in mm           Actual distance from camera

End of quote. I.e., 42 mm focal length.

 >Moving on, I had written:

 >>>First off, this is wrong. A closed down aperture appropriate for
 >>>"sunny days" or even "smoggy days" will, indeed, provide plenty
 >>>of depth of field and WILL cover a range from about 6 feet to
 >>>infinity regardless of where the focus is set within that range.

 >Jim now recants, claiming:

 >>Evidently, Meier had the aperture relatively far open for that
 >>day's photographs. I suspect he did know about the need to open
 >>it up some for a cloudy, overcast day.

 >However, he had originally claimed:

 >>>>[Meier] never bothered to vary the aperture,
 >>>>whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
 >>>>usually somewhat smoggy days.

This was my recollection of either a phone conversation with
Stevens or of an old e-mail not locatable in my files. After
making a firmer estimation of the distance of the blurry tree
from the camera, using the known focal length of the lens, I now
favor the photo's indications that Meier *did* know enough to
adjust the aperture on his camera, at least between clear days
and overcast days. I'm willing to change my mind on matters if
or when firmer information becomes available. Information based
on a 20 or 25-year-old memory of a detail such as whether or not
an aperture setting was changed for one day's photos out of
hundreds of photos taken that year and the next, whether it
comes from Meier or from Stevens second-hand, can't be
considered very reliable. Unfortunately, Stevens didn't mention
anything about Meier's use or non-use of his camera's aperture
settings during 1975-76 in his 1982 book.

 >>The evidence of the blurry tree having been some 16 feet away
 >>indicates to me that the aperture was not in a sunny-day
 >>closed-down position after all.

 >So now the blurry tree is 16 feet away?!!!
 >
 >Jim you aren't making things any better for your position. If
 >you haven't figured it out by now, the farther things are from
 >the camera, the LESS likely they will be out of focus if the
 >aperture is wide open.

Thus the beamship and abies-alba tree indeed had to be a good
deal FARTHER away than the blurry tree limbs on the right side
of photo #57, to have been in the sharp focus they display. Is
it possible we are agreeing on this? With the aperture
relatively far open on that overcast day, even tree limbs 16 ft
away would not be in good focus.

Perhaps we can get others to make their estimations, based upon
such items as spruce-tree needle lengths. Perhaps the blurry
limb's distance could be shaved down to 10 feet away, or
increased to 20 feet away.

But Roger, I'm concerned about your lack of response to several
of my other points. The trunk of the abies alba tree shown in
Meier's photo #66 (2nd from the left in the thumbnail array in
my front web page) shows two protuberances indicating where
limbs had once grown out before being shed or pruned. Yet you
think that back in the early 1970s model trees were manufactured
and sold that had such an appearance?

And here is a new question for you. Do you think that a model
tree could be plunked down in a meadow some 10 feet away from
the camera, with its trunk showing, without the tallest tips of
intervening or surrounding meadow grass (this was in July)
showing up also? If such a model tree were placed on a special
stand so as to elevate its branches and trunk above the meadow
grass, would not the tallest tips of intervening or surrounding
meadow grass still show up?

    Jim D.
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

             Re: New Jersey UFO Conference - October 7 & 8, 2000

From: tom benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:39:49 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:07:20 -0400
Subject: Re: New Jersey UFO Conference - October 7 & 8, 2000


 >From: Tom Benson <sparkle@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>"@earthlink.net
 >Subject: New Jersey UFO Conference - Addenda
 >Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:12:48 -0300

 >Hi List:

Speakers changes - The Eckers will not be able to speak at this
Conference. New speakers just announced include Preston Nichols
and Peter Moon who will discuss the Montauk Project. Their
recent published book, 'Music of Time', and Preston will also
discuss his experiences with aliens.

Tom Benson










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:38:24 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:32:50 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Cecchini


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 01:48:30 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >If the SETI project is listening for repeatable exotic radio
 >wave signals from far off celestial realms there may be aliens
 >doing the same in our direction.

That may be the case; we (every Intelligence in the
Galaxy/Universe) may all be listening... waiting for the first
species to send out that Cosmic "Hello!"

That's one solution to the Fermi Paradox.

Of course, as we all know, we've been "leaking" EM into Space
for 50 years... but it's of a very lower power & will be very
hard to detect (never mind decipher) by the time it reaches
anyone, and is nothing like a focused, high energy "welcome
beacon" of some sort.

 >Would it be easier to analyze the patterns and possible meaning
 >of morse code signals rather than the spoken babble? If they
 >emulate that as a simple means of our communication perhaps they
 >are signaling cw in morse code (dot and dash high pitched beeps
 >from a code key).

<snip>

 >What do you think?

Anything even remotely like Morse code would be detected almost
immediately by Project Phoenix's algorithms... but before I
begin pontificating about something that I don't know for
certain, I'd add that that'd be an interesting question to ask
them.

The bigger problems facing radio SETI are the questions of where
to look and at what frequency.

... assuming that anyone's even broadcasting using EM, of
course.

... and assuming that there's been sufficient time for the
broad- casting civilization's message to reach here.

As with all things SETI, there are so many "ifs".

That's what makes it both fun... and frustrating.





        Search for other documents from or mentioning: ron.cecchini |





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles

From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:18:24 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:35:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Randles


 >From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@nyc.rr.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:33:53 -0400

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Jerry

 >David Jacobs's academic career has been hurt by his UFO
 >commitment.

 >And David Pritchard, the MIT physicist who (with John Mack)
 >organized the 1992 abduction conference at MIT, told me that he
 >was worried about the effect his UFO involvement might have on
 >his standing in his field, his standing in his department, and
 >his funding.

 >Greg Sandow

Hi,

AS reported in 'The UFOs that Never Were' when Peter Warrington
and I were investigating the Peter Day movie film of an orange
UFO (seen in daylight by two other independent sets of witnesses
at different locations at the same time) we involved numerous
scientists.

Kodak were extremely helpful and (with a lot of support from Ian
Ridpath BTW) we set up a seminar at their London offices to
which several major scientists were involved. This included some
of the top experts in the field of ball lightning, because at
the time it was a legitimate possibility that this film showed
that phenomenon (it didn't).

I think that in camera seminar was possibly unique in that it
had the flavour of the Robertson Panel about it. I always
regarded it as a model for future UFO investigation on key
cases. Aside from six or seven leading physical scientists, the
MoD sent a military munitions expert to suggest various options.
We were able to debate the case for hours and examine various
options. None solved the case (the answer came by a different
route afterwards).

However, what is worth noting is that these scientists were all
interested, disappointed the film could not be considered BL,
had no reasonable answers to offer and one said very clearly -
don't be afraid to call this a UFO that's exactly what it is.  I
should remind these were all names well known in British physics
who probably have never reported their attendance  at such an
event since that day!

So, one by one, I offered them the footage to take back for
further study. They all said no. The general response was along
the lines - there is no way we can take this to our lab. We have
to apply for grant funding and if our bosses / funders hear we
are spending time on UFO cases we will never get it. So, sorry,
no way.

Sadly, a genuinely profitable way to investigate a case -
bringing together investigators, sceptics, the witness, a
leading photo analysis lab, the government UFO investigation
department and numerous top scientists was a dead end. The case
was eventually solved despite this gathering - although it did
at least eliminate some options from the running (such as ball
lightning and a helicopter with an experimental searchlight -
suggested by the man from the MoD).

Also, unhappily, it was a one off - all because of the fears
that scientists had about the stigma of association with UFOs.
But as these scientists showed - there are far more scientists
intrigued by UFO data. But they will only want to discuss it out
of any prospect of damning media interest.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:48:05 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:37:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser


 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:30:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser

 >>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:14:19 -0400
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >I did say 'serious'! Mack is pretty fringey when it comes to UFO
 >research. The fact is that, even so, in the end he kept his job
 >and, as I recall, got a fair amount of support on an 'academic
 >freedom' line, despite many of his ideas being well outside the
 >scientific consensus.

 >There are many scientists who move into contentious areas. The
 >whole history of psychic research is full of established
 >scientists who have gone out on a limb to exlore ESP,
 >clairvoyance, survival, autokinesis, etc., and have done so
 >without sacrificing their careers. Possibly some colleagues may
 >think them a little 'flakey' but scientists allegedly being
 >denied funding because of their interest in psi just does not
 >seem to be an issue.

 >Why should it be any different in ufology?


I think (and this is only an opinion) that ufology probably
triggers a greater reaction than ESP, Telekinesis, etc.,
although all of these contain a certain amount of hoaxing and
fraud (which is probably a major part of the problem). But there
is also an economic factor in the distribution of limited
funding, and I'm not sure that any project along these lines
would garner a great deal of support. IMO, becoming associated
with any "fringe" area of study would put severe limits on one's
ability to market one's skills.

BTW, I think that those who watched what Dr. Mack had to go
through would think twice about touting their interest in things
UFOlogical. Most wouldn't have the background to survive such an
assault, but its also unlikely that they would become so great a
target. For most it would probably never reach that level, if
they found themselves in a similar situation.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not convinced that there's a great
conspiracy afoot to keep valid research at bay, but it's one
more factor to keep in mind as we analyze both the phenomenon
and our reactions to it.

Steve








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:02:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:28:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:34:14 -0500 (CDT)
 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:17:40 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>>>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 02:55:50 -0700
 >>>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>[responding to Jim Deardorff]

 >>>>You and Meier put up one million dollars, and a source I know
 >>>>will put up matching funds. The funds must be placed in an
 >>>>escrow account. A panel of neutral recognized, leading
 >>>>scientists and photographic experts will be selected. All of the
 >>>>Meier materials will be submitted, examined, and tried-- The
 >>>>Billy Meier Case On Trial: Fact or Fiction? A panel will finally
 >>>>settle the controversy.

 >>>Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >>>leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >>>UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >>>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >>>Such a panel would settle nothing. Well, except for shifting a
 >>>million bucks here or there, and making certain parties feel
 >>>better.

 >>>You were just joshin us, right?

 >>No, Brian. I'm not joking. But if such an event were to take
 >>place who do you suggest sit on the panel? UFO people? Most of
 >>them with phony credentials. How about photographic experts
 >>alone? That would establish or deny the integrity of the
 >>photographs. Let's have real photo experts tell us if those
 >>ships are real objects.

 >Frankly, I don't think its possible to create such a panel
 >today. The requirements are impossible to meet:

 >* Scientists accepted by all sides as being totally
 >open-minded on the UFO question, no pre-dispositions,
 >with no possibility of social or institutional
 >consequences to themselves regardless of their conclusions,
 >whose conclusions everyone would accept.

 >The problem is that scientists are also people with what let's
 >call worldviews. These can be religious, philosophical or what
 >have you. Its very hard for anyone, scientists included, to
 >claim to be unbiased about something like Meier which can have
 >such a tremendous impact on one's worldview. In fact, sometimes
 >the rhetoric on this list looks suspiciously like thinly
 >disguised worldview (belief system) defense. A jaundiced view of
 >literally every tidbit of evidence, and a repetitive tendancy to
 >shoot at the messenger are often good clues.

 >>Are you a supporter of Meier, Brian?

 >Meier says some interesting stuff; his detractors say some
 >interesting stuff.

 >I'm a supporter of digging out the truth about this interesting
 >space we inhabit. To put it another way, I like to think of
 >myself as someone with perhaps a slightly more flexible
 >worldview than many folks, though I too probably have some
 >elastic limits.

 >I neither support nor oppose Meier; I look as best I can at
 >evidence and context. I don't trust diehard skeptics or
 >believers; both tend to have pre-existing worldviews to defend
 >to the death. I haven't decided on Meier yet. I'll decide when
 >the facts are all in and clear as a bell :-) Don't wait up.

 >>Many of the Meier believers have been our customers. I've
 >>learned from them that they are mostly people searching for the
 >>truth. Many feel disenchanted with religion, have a need to fill
 >>an inner void for spiritual fulfillment, and they question their
 >>human origins.

 >>It is our belief that Meier created his UFO photos to be a frame
 >>work to draw attention to his wacked out philosophy-- a
 >>philosophy that includes adaptations of Hinduism and Star-Trek.

 >Well, once you start playing with something as fundamental as
 >someone's worldview, in most cases I suspect it becomes nearly
 >impossible to proceed in a neutral, openminded way.

 >Your panel won't work. Its an attempt to rationally examine an
 >issue that pummels too many people's belief systems. The
 >panellists probably won't be able to examine it rationally, and
 >whatever conclusion they reach won't settle a thing. (Did Condon
 >settle anything?)

 >Just for kicks, though, if you want a name, I'm game: Dr. Bruce
 >Maccabee. A U.S. Navy research scientist, he knows his stuff.
 >Probably has a more flexible worldview than most. If anyone on
 >this list can lay claim to the title of photo expert, then he
 >can. Of course he'll be unacceptable to certain list elements
 >here. But that'll apply to any name submitted.

 >Sometimes worldviews and rational inquiry just don't mix. And
 >with Meier, you're dealing with a major worldview issue.

 >-Brian C.


So, it seems that there is no measurement to determine a hoax?
That's why pathological liars and con-artists get a thrill to
enter this field that has no standards. Con-men can make big
bucks spinning tales for dummy consumption.

If I'm not mistaken, Bruce Maccabee did an analysis of some of
the Meier material. I believe it was published in UFO Mag years
ago.

If my memory is correct, prior to Underground Video's effort to
substantiate the Meier case, Bruce Maccabee stated that the
movie footage of the beamship that circled a large "tree" near a
farm house moved like an object hanging from a pendulum.

Our analysis, independent of Maccabee's, showed that the object
only moves within the confines of an object suspended by a
string. It never moves like a piloted object. It only moves like
an object hung by a fishing pole for example.

If you watch the other film footage of three beamships, you'll
note that the objects never fly into view from the far off
distance. The objects make no maneuvers as would jets or
helicopters, they just sit there, giving the illusion of a
hovering craft. Meier gives us the story that they don't fly
like our aircraft, that they just slowed down to give us a
demonstration, to give us photo evidence.

Smart Pleaidians. Duh. Their evidence indicates that they are
tiny beings, maybe an inch tall, in tiny ships several inches
larger than themselves, hanging from a wire. They never fly into
view from the far off distance because they were already hanging
from a wire when Meier turned on his camera. He couldn't make
the models fly in from the horizon because they're miniature
models.

Meier may say, Yes, you right. The Pleaidians can reduce their
size and the size of their crafts for space travel. They have
mastered not only time travel, and space travel, but also the
ability to resize their own molecules. Billy, honey, we shrunk
the Pleaidians.

Royce Meyers is correct when he viewed the sequence with the
tree that is missing a couple of beats like a jump cut. The
camera was started, stopped and started again. That accounts for
the energy effect the narrator of the video claims took place
when the beamship disappeared into hyperspace. I don't have my
notes of the analysis, so here's what I remember of our
opinion--it might me a little choppy-and could be better
explained by our film expert: When the camera stopped and
started again the film appears brighter for a moment. Film crews
get a similar effect when they shoot movies. They run the camera
for seconds until they have "speed", or proper sync in the film
camera to avoid fast motion, and discoloration before shooting a
movie.

Brian, I'm not a skeptic. As a teenager, I saw a UFO that was
reported by hundreds of other witnesses. I know something is out
there. What, I don't know. I hope to always have an open mind to
learn new things, but like the skeptic said: when you want to
change the world as we know it, the burden is on you.

Billy Meier, again, has made a case so grand, with little or no
supporting evidence. Here's a few things many people who bought
the Meier materials did not know:

Did you know that Meier claimed the Pleaidians took him backward
through time to meet a central figure in history--Jesus Christ?

Did you hear that Meier claimed that he was Jesus' savior?
(Meier claimed that one of his pals socked Jesus in the face and
Billy put an end to it.)

Did you know that with the sophistication of Pleaidian
technology, allegedly thousands of years advanced of our
civilization, they did not even have a primitive camera or any
similar recording device to authenticate Meier's trip through
time.

Did you know that the only image Meier claimed the Pleaidians
could come up with of Meier's meeting with Jesus is a pencil
drawing allegedly drawn by a Pleaidian (Asket?).

Now here's a good one, did you know that the hand drawn image of
Jesus, aka Jmmanuel, is the image of none other than Billy
Meier? See Jim Deardorff's book and you'll see the drawing of
Jmmanuel (Jesus Christ)--it's Billy Meier. Duh. It's Billy
Meier. What a joke.

Did you know that according to Meier devotee Randolph Winters,
Billy Meier believes that he is the reincarnated Jesus Christ,
Napoleon, an Egyptian Pharaoh, and four other famous characters
of history?

The American public did not know about all of Meier's adventures
when Meier's materials were edited and published for their
consumption. Edited out were Meier's hoax photos of his time
travel trips that showed dinosaur images taken off TV from
Hollywood sci-fi movies, an ape man stolen from a Time magazine
publication, and on and on and on.

If you get a chance, take a look at Kal Korff's book, Spaceships
of the Pleaides: The Billy Meier Story. Deardoff will say its
all wrong because he's part of Meier's team and has a financial
interest in defending it-- check it out and you may view Meier's
case differently.

N. Daniel

Underground Video
Visit our site: www.ufocoverup.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:00:33 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:38:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:08:43 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:24:06 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

Previously, Jim wrote:

 >I'm still waiting for some meat; something other than quips,
 >irrelevancies and false claims having no logical support.

Okay, Jim. How about what focal length Meier used to shoot his
photos?

I'm still waiting for that "meat"...

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:11:36 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:40:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:17:41 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims


Jim said:

 >But it's not logical, sensible or scientific to
 >ignore the most important data.

You do. So according to your statement you're illogical, not
sensible and certainly not scientific.


N. Daniel

Underground Video








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 13:42:58 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:43:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Myers


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:17:41 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims


 >It definitely seems to be the Oz effect. Meier mentions, when
 >showing the film to those who were video-taping it, that there
 >were no sounds, along with no breeze, during this period of
 >time. Others who later mentioned the Oz effect also noticed no
 >sound, which includes no sound of the wind or breeze in the
 >trees.

Models don't give off the 'Oz' effect...

 >When the craft reappears, only the twig suffered a tiny
 >discontinuity in movement, not the camera frame.

Wrong. The branches stop moving _completely_  because Meier
shuts his camera off to remove his model and then replace the
model and there is a time lapse between...

 >Sorry to have to repeat the obvious, but we've read witnesses'
 >accounts of where their camera clicked on all by itself, taking
 >a shot of a UFO that perhaps wasn't even seen at the time; of
 >UFOs hovering over nuclear bases with the nuclear armaments
 >subsequently disclosed to have been disarmed or made inoperable.
 >And there's the flickering black spot that appeared on the
 >window glass of Ed Walters' office along with a thumping noise
 >while Ed had noticed a UFO circa a mile away and took photos of
 >it (the "Thumping" photos) -- the third photo was taken without
 >Ed having pressed the shutter button; the black spot and
 >thumping noise disappeared just before the UFO itself
 >disappeared. All this is action at a distance -- paranormal
 >stuff, and should not be swept under the rug on a UFO list.

I'm saying there is no 'Oz' effect - you can't make a comparison
between the Meier UFO hoax and a UFO disarming a nuclear
facility. Why? Because one is a hoax and another is not.

 >So it would have been a simple paranormal piece of cake for
 >Meier's aliens, being highly advanced technologically and
 >otherwise, to cause Meier's movie camera, then mounted on its
 >tripod, to slightly alter its orientation at the instant the two
 >craft disappeared.

Of course, the aliens! "Sure Billie, we'll let you photograph
and film our incredible UFO technology, but you can only
photograph Semjase - how about an expanation as to that
photo...a fake is a fake is a fake....

 >The motivation for their having done little tricks like this
 >from time to time should be obvious. If they hadn't, the
 >negative skeptics would have nothing to cling to, and the whole
 >UFO coverup could have come unraveled decades before the aliens
 >would deem it appropriate.

The Meier Hoax has given the skeptics plenty to cling to...


 >If you wish to ignore the obvious, Royce, plus ignoring all the
 >witnesses who know first hand that Meier is no hoaxer, that's
 >your perogative. But it's not logical, sensible or scientific to
 >ignore the most important data.

_Simple_ logical is what you're missing here, Jim. You can't
justify any of the Meier hoax (especially that ridiculous stop
motion shot) with the 'Oz' effect or anything else for that
matter. That's not sensible. Anyone can spew the 'Oz' effect to
defend any hoax claiming it somehow disrupted the properties of
whatever. Next we'll be moving on o that shaking tree footage.
Actually, you might but I will not. It's clear that you believe
the Meier case to the point of being delusional. I'm done with
this thread, Meier is a hoax.


Royce J. Myers III

eXpos: The Watchdog of UFOlogy - "Don't Trip On Your Open Mind...or your
need to believe in UFO cases that are obvious hoaxes...
eXpos News    http://home.sprintmail.com/~rjm3
UFO Hall o' Shame   http://home.earthlink.net/~ufowatchdog
(This may turn into just UFO Dirtbag, a month is short - beCAUS you demanded
it...again! Check out September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich

From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net ()>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:20:57 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:45:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Aldrich


 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:42:06 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:44:37 -0500

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>>We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >>>example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >>>a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

 >>Sure, easily. James McDonald.

 >>Jerry

 >MacDonald's case is tragic, but it's a little bit more
 >complicated than an individual being denied funding for academic
 >work because of an objective interest in UFOs. There were a lot
 >of personality clashes and politics involved, which a very well
 >sumarised in your Encyclopedia

 >It was also thirty years ago. Apart from Mack (who is on the
 >fringe of mainstream UFO research, keeps his job and does not
 >seem to be suffering from any after-effects), have there been
 >any other, more recent, cases?

 >Is perhaps the main reason why many scientist have been
 >reluctant to get involved in UFO research is because they have
 >decided that there is very little chance, after sixty years, of
 >any significant scientific findings emerging from it?


Nope, not just personality clashes. McDonald was also turned
down by his own univesity. This had nothing to do with other
events cited above.  The grant committee just was not going to
fund any UFO research.

He was able to get outside financing from an individual to carry
on.

When you have others writing to presidents of your university
about your activities, that would seem to have an adverse effect
on your research activities.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:53:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Tonnies


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite
 >photo of a
 >True UFO (TRUFO)?

 >What do you think?

 >I invite your comments

 >http://brumac.8k.com/DMSP/DMSP.html

Whatever this is, it appears to have a windshield of some sort!
I'm perplexed... is this an enormous anomaly seen at a great
distance or a small one seen close up?


=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com)
MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html
Cydonian Imperative: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Friedman

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:28:12 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:48:15 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Friedman


 >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 10:36:53 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 02:26:39 +0100
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:09:12 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Goldstein

 >Previously, Josh wrote:

 >>Just think, If some UFOs were robotic probes and some Earthlings
 >>(including CSETI) had limited flashlight communication with
 >>them, I hope they had the good sense to be using Morse code.

 ><snip>

 >>I am glad that forms of communication other than radio waves
 >>from space are beginning to be analyzed from Earth. In my gut,
 >>right or wrong, I have always felt that any civilization more
 >>advanced than ours would have moved beyond radio. My gut may be
 >>wrong, who knows, there may be alien top 40 rock stations out
 >>there.

 >Hi, Josh!

 >Without starting a CSETI debate, let me again point out that
 >communcation is a two way street. It doesn't matter what form of
 >communication that an advanced race uses to talk to each other,
 >be it thought-beams, laserlight, microwave, sign language, morse
 >code or whatever. What is important is what they decide to use
 >to communicate with US.

 >Any race advanced enough to travel here or contemplate a visit
 >has GOT to realize that we do not have the  means to emulate
 >their technology. Therefore, if they are interested in having a
 >chat, they know they have two choices:

 >A) Wait until we get smart enough to learn their language (not
 >likely)

 >or

 >B) Simply apply our more primitive mode of communication and get
 >on with it

 >Does this mean that they are beaming RF waves at us from a
 >distance of millions of light years? Of course not! They would
 >no more do that than we would shout in a tribal dialect from the
 >shores of the US hoping that someone in Africa would hear it. We
 >would simply GO there first, then start the conversation in
 >their native language. After a while, the tribe would learn our
 >language, as well.

 >Ultimately, it doesn't matter if ET's decide to send a probe
 >first or just show up. What is important is to remember that WE
 >are the limiting factor in the whole scheme of things. If ETs
 >want to communicate, they'll have to come here and learn out
 >lingo; short of that, nothing's going to happen.


Why would anybody bring up distances of millions of light years?
There are 1000 stars within 55 light years of which 46 are
similar to the sun. There are about 200 Billion within 80,000
LY.I really think we should consider our neighborhood, not the
universe.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

Roger Evans wrote:

 >Hello, one and all...

 >I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >convinced that they're fake..

 >Take a look for yourselves:

 >http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >other photos. (most important!)


 >PS: The guy doing the research is named Joel Carpenter. He's
 >pretty sharp and in no way related to John Carpenter. Let's try
 >and keep the two unconfused in future posts on this subject.>


(NOTE: this harkens back to a long series of posts re the Trents
on UpDates back in May and June)

Of course, if you decide based on this evidence that the photos
are a hoax that is your prerogative.

However, it is much more complex than just noting Joel's
suggestion that Trent photographed a truck mirror hanging from
the overhead wires.

My research initially concentrated on analyzing the photos to
determine (a) whether or not there was direct evidence of a hoax
(e.g., an image of a string from from the overhead wire to the
top of the UFO), and (b) whether or not William Hartmann
(astronomer) of Condon Report fame was blowing smoke when he
claimed that his brightness analysis of the bottom of the UO
(unidentified object) in the first photo indicate that the UO
was a distant object and hence large.

The result of my investigation was (a) no clear photo evidence
of hoax and (b) yes, after corrections were taken into acount
(veiling glare and the ratio of brightness of a vertical white
surface as compared to a horizontal white bottom surface....
read the paper to find out what this means) Hartmann was correct
in his distance calculations. However, as I pointed out, it
PROBABLY would be possible to construct a model,probably from
paper, that could be consistent with the brightness calculation.

Then I went on to consider many other aspects of the Trent case.
Joel's web site links to the McMenamin's web site where they
posted my first paper but none of the other work. His web site
also links to a no-longer existent "page4" on my web site.

The correct address to see both major papers on the Trent case
plus lots of updating material is brumac.8.com  Now click on
"PAPERS" and then scroll down to the Trent case. There are three
entries. The first entry in the "trent list" of papers is the
photometric analysis paper,. The second entry is an appendix to
the first paper. The third entry provides supplementary
informaion, much of which Joel used to construct the back yard
model.


I have some problems with Joel's presentation.

1) the first photo of Paul Trent DOES show the left (southwest)
corner of the house at the right hand side, although the
negative as it presently exists (and as it existed at the time
of the Condon report) has been cut slightly at the right side so
the the roof image is no longer there. OK, so you ask, how do
you know it was originally there?

Answer: the 'Telephone Register' (newspaper) versions of this
pictures are 'wall to wall' uncropped and show the house roof in
both photos. Apparently some 'nasty slashes' occurred to the
negatives between 1950 and 1967. The right edge of th first
photo and the left edge of the second photo were cut by someone
years and years ago. (no, the cut edges do not fit together) and
only the newspaper reproductions provide the complete photos.

This has an impact on Joel's computer model (scroll down on his
page) where he shows the field of view of the first photo (white
rectangle) superimposed on Hartmann's 1967 photo of the scene.
Note that Joel's field of view rectangle on the SECOND photo
does show the corner of the house.

2) I don't think the camera was as low as Joel assumes based on
my estimate of where, on th photo, was the horizon. My estimate
of the horizon was based on a USGS map and trying to locate the
tops of hills several miles away and observing that the contour
illustrations of those hill tops were at some elevation above th
Trent farm elevation. Assuming that I got the correct elevations
for the hills actually shown in the picture, then the elevation
estimates were a couple of degrees. The horizon level estimation
was then based on working backward from this: mark about 2
degrees down from the top of the mountain (image) on the film
and "that's the horizon". Unfortunately the USGS map does not
show elevations accurately enough to allow certainty that the
angular elevation of the mountain was "exactly" where I
estimated. I might have been correct. But I certainly would
allow an error of 6" to 1 ft in my estimate. This is important
for Joel's argument that the camera was excessively low, My own
guess would be that the camera could have been 4 ft above
ground. Don't know how tall Trent was, but if his eyes were at
5.5 ft, then they would be about 1.5 ft above the "waist level"
viewfinderat 4 ft, and not as low as what appears to be 3 ft in
Joel's illutrastion.. Unfortunately we don't know how Trent
typically held the camera to take pictures and hence we don't
know how he would be most likely to be holding the camera if
taking a picture of a slowly moving object at some distance
under these circumstances.

Bottom Line I would place the altitude of the camera 6" to 1
foot higher than Joel.


3) My positions for the camera were based on measurements made
on the original negatives plus a long chain of reasoning that
was needed (at the time, 24 years ago) to make up for missing
data. Then in 1981 information from the aerial survey became
available and recently "ground truth" measurements became
available. By using information contained within the photos
themselves (fortunately the house roof appears in BOTH pictures)
I reconstructed the positions of the camera relative to the
house and garage. I do not believe that Hartmann's locations are
correct. By the time Hartmann arrived the local scenery had
changed considerably (in 17 years). It appears that a lot of the
features of the scene in the 1950 photos had disappeared by the
time of the 1967 photo by Hartmann. Hence me may well have
failed to locate the exact positions of the camera.

Bottom line: I accept my locations to within a foot.

4) Joel writes: "It is difficult to understand why Trent would
have walked well into his back yard and either squatted, kneeled
or stooped awkwardly in order to aim his camera up from a very
low level at a slow moving object thousands of feet away. The
overall geometry of the positions suggests that he was
attempting to frame a nearby object in such a way as to maximuze
the amount of sky around it and enhance its apparent altitude."

As I pointed out above, I do not accept the idea tha the camera
was "extra low" at the time of the photos. 3.5-4 ft wuld be more
reasonable, I think,.

Whether you accept my positions or Hartmann's it is true that
Trent walked southward into the back yard quite a distance. This
could be because he had decided to photograph his hanging model
in such a way that it would be silhoutted against the distant
mountains and framed between the house and garage.

Or it could be because he came on the run and, not knowing
exactly where to look, he ran toward where his wife had been
standing, or near there (She had been coming from behind, i.e.,
south of, the garage and was walking toward the back door of the
house.). Perhaps the momentum of his rapid motion out the back
door carried him farther south than needed.

5) Joel is the first to suggest a truck mirror (other
suggestions have been garbage can lid light shade, pie tin,
paper model, etc.). None of the truck mirrors he suggests has
exactly the same aspect ratio (length to width) or the same
off-center "pole" (attachment post on the back of th mirror).
Also, a mirror hanging downward and photograped from below to
give a (nearly, but not exactly!!!) elliptical bottom image as
in photo 1, would provide a mirror reflection of the ground. The
image of the bottom of the UO is large enough so that a mirror
reflection of the ground should have been apparent.

6) There is much more to this case than just the photo analysis.
I have long pointed out that it would be possible to fake the
photos. My own "preference" would be for a paper model. This
wuld require the desire, the time, and the cleverness needed to
make up a photo and a story to go along with it. the skeptics
have pointed out "inconsistencies" in the Trents' stories as
reported in the early newspaper accounts. These inconsistencies,
they say, indicate a hoax in which the ostensible witnesses
didn't get their stories straight. ON the other hand, if each
interview had produced exactly the same information from both
witnesses (although interviewed separately) the skeptics would
have cried "HOAX!" because no one could remember things that
perfectly and different people recall different aspects of the
same event.

Anyway, we have the Trents' whole life story to look at now,
since they died several years ago. Anyone wishing to express an
informed opinion of the case should read what I have written and
also get a copy of the only video interview of the Trents, made
in 1995 (2 years before Evelyn died). Contact Terry Halstead at
halstead@pobox.com. Considering that this is the only video
interview of two of the most famous people in UFO history (I bet
that the trent photos have been published more than any others)
-- whether you think them nasty hoaxers or down-to-earth honest
people - this is a UFO collector's item. At the very least the
skeptics will want this video so that they can refute Mrs.
Trent's statements, one by one, and demonstrate how she managed
to bamboozle literally dozens of investigators, interviewers and
just plain interested people for nearly 50 years!










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:00 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:53:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Maccabee


 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:1:08 -0700 (PDT)
 >Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite
 >>photo of a
 >>True UFO (TRUFO)?

 >>What do you think?

 >>I invite your comments

 >>http://brumac.8k.com/DMSP/DMSP.html

 >Whatever this is, it appears to have a windshield of some sort!
 >I'm perplexed... is this an enormous anomaly seen at a great
 >distance or a small one seen close up?

I tried to point out that if it was a "man-sized satellite" then
it was unusually close and less than 50 ft in extent.
Otherwise. it was... (not ours)









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                 Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:59:59 EDT
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:18:09 -0400
Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege? - Mortellaro


 >From: Josh Goldstein <clearlight@t-online.de>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 01:48:30 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>From: Scott Krause <SKrause272@aol.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 01:31:41 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 04:52:49 -0700
 >>>From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: 3 Flashes To Acknowledege?

 >>>I was pondering on this thought the other day when I was
 >>>reminded about it on the List.

 >>>It concerns the communication aspect of Contact UFO cases, such
 >>>like the Alagash incident, mentioned on the list recently.

 >>>When carrying out our investigations, is there a tendency for us
 >>>to overlook things that are staring us in the face?

 >>>*Let me expand on this.

 >>>In a lot of contact cases throughout the years, contact was
 >>>triggered by the flashing of lights, from the people on the
 >>>ground to the object in the sky. (Please note I do realise CSETI
 >>>uses a similar action to the above)

<snip>

 >>>How can an object know it is being flashed if there are no
 >>>people on board the object to register a signal from a ground
 >>>source?

 >>>Would this possibly suggest some kind of pre-programmed device
 >>>inside such an object? Or are we to think that the object, is an
 >>>intelligence within itself?

 >>>And for those who may differ on contact cases and their reality,
 >>>if neither of the above is the answer' then what makes an object
 >>>return the light flashes?

 >>>Interested in any light thrown on this one!

 >>There were 2 incidents in one of Strieber's books of 3 knocks on
 >>he roof to wake people inside and of a town awakened by 3 knocks
 >>and little people running around the houses... any connection?
 >>And if there is any link why the number 3? hummmmm

 >Ok Scott and listfolk,

 >If we are speculating on aliens emulating our primitive forms of
 >communication, then I suppose three knocks is pretty primitive.
 >In his book, Whitley Strieber was writing from a frightened
 >mind. The miserable Communion movie made abduction and the
 >little people seem like a weird joke.

 >I posted on the list the other day hoping that the guys in
 >Allagash, the CSETI folks, and regular folks when flashing
 >lights at UFOs had the good sense to flash the flashlights in
 >morse code. Tonight another thought burrowed up from my brain.
 >If the SETI project is listening for repeatable exotic radio
 >wave signals from far off celestial realms there may be aliens
 >doing the same in our direction. Surely aliens far away may
 >possibly have the capacity to send observation probes, if not
 >occupied ships, to observe us by listening to our radio waves.
 >Along with the babble of voices, video, and data, cw messages in
 >morse code would be observed and analyzed. Would it be easier to
 >analyze the patterns and possible meaning of morse code signals
 >rather than the spoken babble? If they emulate that as a simple
 >means of our communication perhaps they are signaling cw in
 >morse code (dot and dash high pitched beeps from a code key).

 >When I was a teenager in the early '60s I obtained my novice
 >amateur radio license. I was restricted to only transmitting
 >code. I spent many wee morning hours tapping my thoughts out to
 >people in far off places. Now I've graduated to spending most
 >morning wee hours reading UFO Updates. Where did I go wrong to
 >end up here? I also used to scan all the bands of long, short,
 >and medium waves for new weird sounding signals I never had
 >heard. Being the prankster, I used to point my 12" music
 >loudspeaker out my window overlooking the neighborhood and let
 >out a short, high volume burst of that signal, so that at 3AM
 >somebody would be awakened and think that a UFO was present. I
 >kept the signals short so they could not be traced and I only
 >sent them when my parents were out of town. If you think I was
 >weird, my next door neighbor Mark would get up on a roof wearing
 >a halloween mask, tap on the window, scare the Hell out of the
 >neighbor he just awoke and run like the dickens. I guess if I
 >told that to MUFON years ago when I applied to be a field
 >investigator they should have disqualified me. Later, if I
 >received a call and investigated what turned out to be a stupid
 >prank like I had pulled, I would have smacked that kid on the
 >spot. Fortunately I never received a prank or hoax call and I'm
 >not a violent person.

 >Where were we? Oh yeah, maybe I should regress and go back to
 >listening to and trying to decipher strange code signals in
 >the wee morning hours while reading Updates. The aliens may be
 >trying to contact us by Morse code. I am asking Jim
 >Mortellaro, our communications expert, whether Gripple would be
an aid to such an endeavor, and whether he would be able to
 >kick it off until I get a new receiver? >What do you think?

 >Josh
 >joshin' at the aliens

Dear Josh, Listers and EBK,

Definitely do not listen to wierd stuff whilst sloshed Josh. It
makes it hard to find the door. And think about your new
receiver being a 75A4. Made by Collins Radio in the fifties and
sixties, this is the finest piece of radio gear I've ever owned.
Better than the newest digital stuff, even better (my opinion)
than digital filtering, as this sucker's got ceramic filters. I
could not afford one when I wanted it, it cost me lots more to
buy now than when new and even more to get into a proper state
of tune. But it's worth it. A really good comparison would be CD
vs. vinal records. No comparison. My old 33's are much better
than any CD. I wouldn't trade my linear tracking turntable for a
CD to save my life. Too bad you can't put them in automobiles.

Seems to me that the only advantage of digital radio receivers
and transmitters is size, wieght and heat. As for quality of
operation, gimme toobs any day. And that's a fact. You can
always turn the AC on in the summer and turn the heat off in the
winter. When you tune up on 80 CW, listen to that chirp calling
CQ. It's a Heathkit DX-40 and a Collins 74A-4. Now that I think
about it, if you _are_ sloshed on Gripple, you;ll never notice
my sloppy fist. I still use a straight key.

It confuses the aliens.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Deschamps

From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:13:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:55:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Deschamps


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Hello, one and all...

 >I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >convinced that they're fake.

 >Take a look for yourselves:

 >http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >other photos. (most important!)

 >PS: The guy doing the research is named Joel Carpenter. He's
 >pretty sharp and in no way related to John Carpenter. Let's try
 >and keep the two unconfused in future posts on this subject.


Dear sir,

Personally, I think you're _way_off_!

Another futile attempt at dismissing a classic UFO case.

What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
four years later?

Another mirror?

Think again.

Cordially,

Michel M. Deschamps








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:14:46 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:58:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas


 >Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
 >other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"...

<snip>

Hi Bruce. Hi everyone.

Bruce, I read your careful analysis of this photo and I think
the assumptions you made and incorporated in your calculations
are reasonable ones. That said, in light of the conflicting and
contradictory testimonies by the pilot who took the photo which
you included in your paper and the newspaper article about UFOs
the pilot wrote which was published in the Toronto Telegram
where the pilot promoted his beliefs that UFOs were real and
extraterrestrial, maybe we should seriously consider other
possible explanations for the UFO in the photo.

I still cannot dismiss the hunch I had when I first saw your
photo which suggested to me that the luminous UFO was simply a
reflection of the Sun inside the aircraft's canopy window. Of
course the UFO would not be as bright as the Sun (a smooth
transparent surface would reflect up to about 5% the sunlight
falling on it depending on the viewing angle off the surface)
and would also appear elliptical in shape because of the
curvature o the canopy window. This is what I observed in your
UFO photo. If this UFO is indeed a reflection of the Sun off a
window, we would also then expect to see a second reflection
from the outside or second surface of the canopy window too. I
propose that the lower rim observed on the UFO is just that. As
proof of this, I suggest one look at another almost identical
photo of a luminous daylight UFO found on page 70 in Peter
Brookesmith's 'UFO The Complete Sightings'.*

Finally, I have to say that if such a bright object was below
the clouds in the skies over southern Alberta, one would expect
many people to have noticed it and a few to have even reported
the unusual sight of a second Sun. Unfortuately, I was unable to
find any such reports (although, interestingly, there is a file
stamped SECRET of a similar Canadian fighter jet also flying in
formation which mysteriously vanished just days before this UFO
incident). If such a bright object was actually close to or
within the clouds themselves, why are not the parts of the
clouds around this luminous UFO brighter like the parts of the
clouds facing the Sun which is to the left? To me this is
further evidence that this UFO could not possibly be a large
distant luminous object but rather a reflection from within the
aircraft itself.

Nick Balaskas

*This was the same and only UFO photo (a negative of a print) I
was able to find when I visited the Canadian Forces Photographic
Unit in Ottawa back in 1996 in my unsuccessful attempt to view
their large but still secret UFO photo collection.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 26

                  Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Cecchini

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:38:27 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:01:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Cecchini


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims]
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:07:36 -0500

 >>>I wouldn't expect to see an official record of this type of
 >>>discrimination, but that certainly doesn't mean there isn't an
 >>>impact.

 >>>In the case of Dr. John Mack an attempt was made to call his
 >>>research into question at Harvard, and he was able to weather
 >>>that particular storm without giving in to the pressure to
 >>>cease his research. But Dr. Mack is a tenured award-winning
 >>>psychiatrist, and I suspect that others viewed that as a warning
 >>>of what they might face if they swerved too far toward the
 >>>fringe.

 >In other words, you would like us to believe that if John Mack
 >had a sympathetic interest in the abduction phenomenon, openly
 >acknowledging that it could be what it seems to be (interaction
 >with nonhuman intelligences) but didn't put a New Age gloss on
 >it, his colleagues would have opened their arms and encouraged
 >his inquiries?

 >Just when, exactly, were you born? Or, more to the point, when
 >do you think the rest of us were born?

Sorry for not editing out the above, Errol, but I had to leave
it in because I'm confused as to how Mr. Clark got from Point A
to Point B.

This isn't an attack! I'm just confused.

First off, I don't see how what was said at the top could be
construed as it was by Mr. Clark.

Second, I think that the point Clark construes, about Mack being
more warmly greeted if he wasn't so "New Agey", is correct!

I don't think it's a stretch to say that many people are indeed
turned off by Mack's New Age-style interpretation of things.

It's a nice message, maybe even one I agree with, etc, but at
least for me the idea of "benevolent space brothers" and so forth
comes across (again, to me) as far more hokey than beings with,
say, more nefarious or wholly personal agendas.

Ron










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:28:11 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:13:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:38:27 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs
 >To: 'UFO UpDates - Toronto' <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims]
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:07:36 -0500

Ron,

 >>In other words, you would like us to believe that if John Mack
 >>had a sympathetic interest in the abduction phenomenon, openly
 >>acknowledging that it could be what it seems to be (interaction
 >>with nonhuman intelligences) but didn't put a New Age gloss on
 >>it, his colleagues would have opened their arms and encouraged
 >>his inquiries?

 >Sorry for not editing out the above, Errol, but I had to leave
 >it in because I'm confused as to how Mr. Clark got from Point A
 >to Point B.

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear to you.

 >I think that the point Clark construes, about Mack being
 >more warmly greeted if he wasn't so "New Agey", is correct!

I disagree. Where his colleagues were concerned, the problem
wasn't his specifically New Agey take on abductions, it was the
simple fact that he found credible the notion that abductions
represent interactions with nonhuman intelligences. The New Age
aspect is mere detail, of significance only to ufologists in
terms of Mack's overall seriousness as abduction proponent. As
you may know, I have been vocally critical of Mack's approach.

David Jacobs, who argues that abductions are real events, has
also suffered in his academic career and been just as bitterly
attacked as Mack has, and his view of the phenomenon is
decidedly _not_ a New Age one.

I hope this clarifies things a little.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Myers

From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:11:47 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:11:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Myers


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Hello, one and all...

 >>I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in
 >>my opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn
 >>from being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my
 >>past opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am
 >>now convinced that they're fake.

 >>Take a look for yourselves:

 >>http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 ><snip>

 >While the author if this page does a good job of illustrating
 >that Trent's camera angle was not what one would expect, one
 >must keep in mind that he didn't exactly "expect" to be
 >photographing a UFO.

 >Before I'd take this site's conclusion as the final word, I'd
 >want to know more about the immediate conditions (i.e.
 >psychological: how hurried was Trent? Would his haste in getting
 >2 good shots make him more or less likely to adopt the posture
 >suggested in the article? etc) under which the photos were
 >allegedly taken.


Another small bit of information - how tall was Paul Trent when
the photos were taken? I don't know if this has been addressed
or not...

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
(beCAUS you demanded it...again! September's UFO Dirtbag of the Month!)







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                            Eros' Square Craters

From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:09:38 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:17:08 -0400
Subject: Eros' Square Craters


For Richard Hoagland

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

.....

From: NASA Science News
Subject: Square Craters

NASA Science News for September 26, 2000

NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft has spotted square-shaped
craters on asteroid Eros, a telltale sign of mysterious
goings-on in the asteroid belt long ago.

Full story at:

http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast26sep_1.htm?list










   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:12:03 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:22:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims]
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:07:36 -0500

 >The support for academic freedom was hardly overwhelming. Mack's
 >experience will stand for a long time as a warning against
 >sympathetic academic interest in the abduction phenomenon and,
 >beyond that, the larger UFO phenomenon. All that saved Mack,
 >after this humilating and damaging episode, was his tenure, his
 >Pulitzer Prize, and Harvard's political decision that Mack's
 >dismissal would in the end cause it more trouble than the
 >embarrassment of having an abducionist on its faculty.


Jerry,

Kinda makes you wonder, in the wake of the Mack affair, how UFOs
and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge (University
Press of Kansas, David Jacobs editor) ever got published,
doesn't it?

 >It's interesting that academia supports the Leninists and
 >racial theorists in its midst with barely a second thought, but
 >nearly has a fit when one of its own expresses support for the
 >notion that UFOs are real and otherworldly. You may be the only
 >observer in the world who didn't get the message.

Otherworldly, yes, but real in a physical, nuts and bolts sense?
In fact, Mack spends a goodly portion of both of his latest
books arguing that UFOs and abductions are beyond the scientific
pale (or is it paradigm?). Hard to interest chemists, biologists
and physicists with that particular approach, I'd say. Harder
still to get a research grant based on such assumptions.

That said, the issue of why even the soft sciences (sociology,
etc) don't devote more time and study to the subject than they
do remains an intriguing one, for which I have no glib and ready
answer. (Hey, they analyze everything else to death!)

But just as we should (and can) accuse science of not doing
enough ufology and abductionology, so, too, can we accuse
ufologists and abductionologists of not doing enough good
science. Re the latter I refer specifically to Hufford's
criticisms/recommendations as published in the MIT Proceedings,
Alien Discussions. Where, among other things, are complete
transcripts of abductee interviews, retrieved consciously or
with the use of hypnosis?

My two cents.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      [lunascan] Square Craters on Eros

From: Larry Klaes <lklaes@bbn.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:21:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:19:37 -0400
Subject: [lunascan] Square Craters on Eros

------

Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:56:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: baalke@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Square Craters
To: undisclosed-recipients:;


http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast26sep_1.htm

Square Craters
NASA Science News

NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft has spotted square-shaped
craters on asteroid Eros, a telltale sign of mysterious
goings-on in the asteroid belt long ago.

September 26, 2000 -- In the pantheon of cosmic geometry, curves
rule. Astronomy texts are filled with spiral galaxies,
elliptical orbits, and ring nebulae. There are no chapters on
triangles or rectangles -- after all, who ever heard of a square
planet? Some of the simplest shapes, common in the handiwork of
humans, are just plain rare in space.

Rare, but not impossible...

Last month, astronomers were studying pictures of asteroid 433
Eros when they noticed some unusual craters. Most impact craters
are circular, but these were square!

An overzealous fan of Star Trek might mistake the impact scars
for places where cube-shaped Borg vessels touched down and
lifted off again, but scientists say they are natural -- albeit
unusual -- features.

"These square craters are not just novelties, they tell us
something very interesting," says Andy Cheng of the Johns
Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. Cheng is the
project scientist for NASA's Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous
spacecraft, which is orbiting Eros. "It's an indication that
Eros is permeated with an extensive system of fractures and
faults. Typically on Earth when we find this type of fractured
area, the fractures form intersecting systems. Craters in such a
terrain look square; we call them jointed craters. The best
example is the Barringer Meteor Crater in Arizona."

Square craters add to accumulating evidence that Eros is riddled
with cracks and ridges that extend the entire 33 km length of
the peanut-shaped space rock. "We first saw long grooves in
global pictures of the asteroid when NEAR was entering orbit
around Eros in February 2000," continued Cheng. "Now, if we look
carefully, most of the closeup pictures seem to show signs of
grooves and ridges."

"We have to ask ourselves how these cracks could have formed.
Presumably they are the result of large impacts. The question
is: did these impacts take place after Eros was its present size
and shape or while Eros was part of a larger parent body?"

It's a question that goes to the heart of the asteroid's origin.

Scientists believe that billions of years ago, when the solar
system was young and planets were newly-forming, Eros circled
the Sun in an orbit between Mars and Jupiter. It was a denizen
of the asteroid belt. Since then, collisions with other
asteroids and gravitational perturbations by Mars and Jupiter
have altered Eros's orbit, so that now it comes close enough to
Earth to study with spacecraft like NEAR.

We know a great deal about Eros today, but what was it like at
the dawn of the solar system, before it became a "Near-Earth"
asteroid? Was Eros once part of a moon-sized planet between Mars
and Jupiter, or has it always been an isolated space rock?

"If continued mapping confirms that faults and ridges extend
from one end of Eros to the other, I would consider it to be
strong evidence that Eros is a piece of something that was once
much larger," says Cheng. If all of the rocks in the modern-day
asteroid belt were assembled, they would form a small planet
about 1500 km in diameter -- roughly half the size of Earth's
moon. Such a body might have existed in an orbit between Mars
and Jupiter billions of years ago, before it shattered as a
result of collisions with other planetoids.

But if Eros is a "chip off the old block," there's a new mystery
to consider. When rocky planets like the Earth and its moon (and
maybe the parent body of Eros) are formed, heavier elements sink
to the core while lighter ones remain near the crust. This leads
to a core-mantle structure with distinctive chemical signatures
in each layer.

The looming conundrum is that Eros does not exhibit the chemical
signatures of differentiation. NEAR X-ray spectrometer data show
that aluminum, magnesium, and silicon on Eros have the same
relative abundances that they do in the Sun and in the early
solar nebula. Evidently, Eros was not part of a body that
experienced the Earth-like process of heating and segregation of
metals from silicates to form an iron core and rocky mantle.

"Eros is an example of a very primitive body ... nothing much
has happened to it other than formation and cratering. If you
want the most pristine material in the solar system [where very
little has happened] Eros is a good example," says Joe Veverka,
professor of astronomy at Cornell University, and the principal
investigator for two of NEAR's cameras.

Can Eros be both -- a primitive, undifferentiated body and a
fragment from a long-ago planetoid? It's a possible
contradiction that puzzles researchers.

"Even before we visited Eros we knew that asteroids were a mixed
group -- some appear to be differentiated and some not," says
Cheng. "The largest asteroid of all, 933 km-wide Ceres, is not
differentiated. Yet, we believe it's possible for objects even
smaller than Ceres to melt and chemically segregate. We simply
don't know why some asteroids appear to be more primitive than
others. We have to reserve a little skepticism here and pursue
this mystery."

Cheng says that a global map of Eros's grooves and ridges -- and
possibly more square craters -- will likely shed new light on
the asteroid's history. For now researchers and asteroid
enthusiasts wait with anticipation as NEAR Shoemaker continues
its first-ever and often surprising survey 433 Eros, knowing
that the best answers and most perplexing mysteries may be yet
to come.

For more information about asteroid Eros and the NEAR mission,
please visit the Near-Earth Asteroid Rendezvous mission home
page at http://near.jhuapl.edu. The Johns Hopkins University
Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, MD, designed and built the
NEAR spacecraft and manages the mission for NASA.


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

THE LUNASCAN PROJECT (TLP): An Earth-Based Telescopic Imaging (EBTI)
program using live and recorded CCD technology to document and record
Lunar Transient Phenomena (LTPs).

The Lunascan Project HomePage
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lshomepage.html

The Project's Mission Statement :
http://www.evansville.net/~slk/miss.html









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:39:46 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:32:54 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Evans


 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:49:23 -0700
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:02:35 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

Previously, Jim wrote:

 >In my previous response to you on this list, you'll find the
 >focal length as obtained by Stevens and listed in his 1982 book
 >on p. 400. I had written:

 >"The same limb's left-to-right width, subtended along the
 >horizontal, is less, about 16 inches. This subtended width
 >occupies 13% of the 35mm film's width (or length in the film's
 >along-the-roll direction). Then knowing the camera's focal
 >length of 42 mm, one finds this blurry limb's distance from the
 >camera as having been 16 feet. This uses the "camera" equation:

 >Width of object on 35mm film   Actual width of object
 >---------------------------- = ----------------------
 >  focal length in mm           Actual distance from camera

 >End of quote. I.e., 42 mm focal length.

Yes, having gone back over the previous posts, I see that you
did mention the focal length as being 42mm. I wish I had seen
that earlier as this conversation could have been a lot shorter.
Now, to the matter at hand:

Previously you had claimed:

 >>>>[Meier] never bothered to vary the aperture,
 >>>>whose setting was quite appropriate for sunny days, though
 >>>>usually somewhat smoggy days.

In addition you had written:

 >This was an old Olympus 35 ECR camera. It didn't have any
 >automatic focus adjustment. Its manual focus was stuck real
 >close to infinity. That means it could take sharp picture of
 >objects at intermediate and rather large distances, though not
 >of sharpest quality for the treelines of distant hills.

Then you changed your story, claiming:

 >>>Evidently, Meier had the aperture relatively far open for that
 >>>day's photographs. I suspect he did know about the need to open
 >>>it up some for a cloudy, overcast day.

At present, your story goes:

 >I now
 >favor the photo's indications that Meier *did* know enough to
 >adjust the aperture on his camera, at least between clear days
 >and overcast days. I'm willing to change my mind on matters if
 >or when firmer information becomes available.

_What_ firmer information? You follow the previous statement
with:

 >Information based
 >on a 20 or 25-year-old memory of a detail such as whether or not
 >an aperture setting was changed for one day's photos out of
 >hundreds of photos taken that year and the next, whether it
 >comes from Meier or from Stevens second-hand, can't be
 >considered very reliable.

You seem to have no problem relying on it when it supports your
theory.

 >Unfortunately, Stevens didn't mention
 >anything about Meier's use or non-use of his camera's aperture
 >settings during 1975-76 in his 1982 book.

Again, _What_ firmer information? All the above info indicates
is one simple thing:

You don't know and your story changes when faced with opposition.

Ultimately, you are guessing.

Well, I'm not guessing.

According to American Cinematographer depth of field charts, if
Meier's 42mm lens was set at an aperture "appropriate for sunny
days", i.e. around f22, then everything would be in focus from 8
feet to infinity, even IF the focus were set at infinity. If you
pulled the focus all the way back to 25 feet, you would STILL
have everything in focus from 6 feet to infinity. Even if you
opened the lens to f16, you would have depth of field from 10
feet to infinity with the focus at infinity; 8 feet to infinity
if set the focus at 25 feet. At f11, you still get a range of 11
feet to infinity with the focus set at 25 feet. F8 will produce
a range of about 12 feet to infinity, etc, etc.

Therefore:

Your contention that the camera setting of near-infinity has
some bearing on this discussion is incorrect. Your contention
that the branches and model have to be the same distance from
the camera is incorrect. Your other contention that the model
would have to be a great distance away from the camera is
incorrect. Your contention that the camera was incapable of
focusing on distant trees and hills is incorrect.

And we haven't even discussed what is possible if Meier used a
tripod! ;)

The bottom line is that, even hand held, Meier's camera was
adequate to keep things in focus from about 6 feet to infinity
at best and 12 feet to infinity at the worst and still get
correct exposure. Therefore, the branches could have been well
within the 6 foot range and, therefore in soft focus. The model
would merely have to be big enough to fit the field of view
beyond that range. Kid's stuff.

Finally, you stated:

 >Is it possible we are agreeing on this? With the aperture
 >relatively far open on that overcast day, even tree limbs 16 ft
 >away would not be in good focus.

Wrong on both counts.

As you pointed out, your info isn't very reliable. In fact it is
conjecture, at best, and just plain wrong at worst. In the end
we know 3 things:

1) There is absolutely no technical reason that the Meier photos
    cannot be shots of models.

2) The "turning tree" that you do NOT see is a clear indication
    that it is a model.

3) The 8mm footage is clearly bogus at the most amateur level.

Together, these add up to Meier being a fraud, and not a very
good one, at that.

I have nothing more to add to this discussion.

Roger







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:25:51 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:37:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Lemire


 >From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 00:30:36 -0400
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger

 >>From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca ()>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:24:28 -0300
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:13 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>>Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:47:26 -0400
 >>>>From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
 >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

 >>>>An interesting link worth visiting along the lines of this is
 >>>>the research done by Andrei Ol'khovatov concerning 'geophysical
 >>>>meteors' located at:

 >>>>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Cockpit/3240/gr1997.htm

 >>>Dear Todd, List:

 >>>Interesting, indeed. Is anyone aware of a "crater" or other
 >>>evidence of impact or outgassing on the ground for this event?
 >>>If there isn't such evidence, the incident would seem not to be
 >>>associated with a "geophysical meteor".

 >>Hi Bob,

 >>To consider a meteor here is just muddying the waters. The
 >>length of the sighting, and/or the time to take a photograph
 >>precludes a meteor from the getgo. Please don't make the mistake
 >>of thinking that because it was in Canada it was therefore in
 >>the remote arctic. Also with a meteor of this size, where's the
 >>trail, the outgassing and all of the other telltales of a
 >>meteor?

 >>Ball lightning perhaps, but why give the naysayers another
 >>feeble explanation for the sighting by even proposing a meteor?

 >>Best,

 >>Don Ledger

 >Don, Bob, and List,

 >The link I provided was not meant to 'muddy' the waters, or the
 >atmosphere for that matter, concerning the Childerhose case.
 >Andrei focuses mainly on the tectonic processes within the link
 >I provided the list. The link was given as food for thought, not
 >as an explanation for the sighting.

 >Come on Don, I'm not giving the naysayers any more ammo than
 >they already have, and personally I don't care what explanation
 >the 'naysayers' come up with next. Are they going to alter
 >_your_ perceptions? If you really want to give them some ammo
 >take the time and read completely the paper I have posted on my
 >site titled ION BASED CONDUCTIONS IN THE ATMOSPHERE by Richard
 >Spalding, located at
 >http://members.home.net/tlemire/ibconduct.html

 >Again this paper is food for thought, and is not meant as an
 >explanation for the Childerhose sighting, but it will make you
 >think!

 >Bob, as I'm not familiar with the particulars of the case
 >investigation I can't answer your question concerning evidence
 >of impact or outgassing occurring during the Childerhose
 >sighting, but you are right in your reply to Don. Andrei's
 >theories involve a "non-meteoroidal (i.e. terrestrial) origin"
 >for the luminous events he speaks of on his website. Impact
 >sites from geophysical meteors such as these may leave only a
 >crater with no trace evidence of a 'standard meteorite', however
 >I do agree with you that his site MAY include what others
 >consider to be standard meteors. However this is a judgment I'm
 >not willing to make.


Hi Todd, Bob and list,

As mentioned in my second submission, I was catching up. I must
have came in, in the middle of the thread. Broke off for a few
days last week after some discussion about times and dates, and
flight direction about 10 days ago. I was under the impression
that a meteor was being toted as a possible explanation which
due to the length of the sighting I couldn't buy into.

Best,

Don








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger

From: Donald Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:40:03 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:57:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Ledger


 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:14:46 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >>Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >>brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >>This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
 >>other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"...

 ><snip>

 >Hi Bruce. Hi everyone.

 >Bruce, I read your careful analysis of this photo and I think
 >the assumptions you made and incorporated in your calculations
 >are reasonable ones. That said, in light of the conflicting and
 >contradictory testimonies by the pilot who took the photo which
 >you included in your paper and the newspaper article about UFOs
 >the pilot wrote which was published in the Toronto Telegram
 >where the pilot promoted his beliefs that UFOs were real and
 >extraterrestrial, maybe we should seriously consider other
 >possible explanations for the UFO in the photo.

 >I still cannot dismiss the hunch I had when I first saw your
 >photo which suggested to me that the luminous UFO was simply a
 >reflection of the Sun inside the aircraft's canopy window. Of
 >course the UFO would not be as bright as the Sun (a smooth
 >transparent surface would reflect up to about 5% the sunlight
 >falling on it depending on the viewing angle off the surface)
 >and would also appear elliptical in shape because of the
 >curvature o the canopy window. This is what I observed in your
 >UFO photo. If this UFO is indeed a reflection of the Sun off a
 >window, we would also then expect to see a second reflection
 >from the outside or second surface of the canopy window too. I
 >propose that the lower rim observed on the UFO is just that. As
 >proof of this, I suggest one look at another almost identical
 >photo of a luminous daylight UFO found on page 70 in Peter
 >Brookesmith's 'UFO The Complete Sightings'.*

 >Finally, I have to say that if such a bright object was below
 >the clouds in the skies over southern Alberta, one would expect
 >many people to have noticed it and a few to have even reported
 >the unusual sight of a second Sun. Unfortuately, I was unable to
 >find any such reports (although, interestingly, there is a file
 >stamped SECRET of a similar Canadian fighter jet also flying in
 >formation which mysteriously vanished just days before this UFO
 >incident). If such a bright object was actually close to or
 >within the clouds themselves, why are not the parts of the
 >clouds around this luminous UFO brighter like the parts of the
 >clouds facing the Sun which is to the left? To me this is
 >further evidence that this UFO could not possibly be a large
 >distant luminous object but rather a reflection from within the
 >aircraft itself.

 >Nick Balaskas

 >*This was the same and only UFO photo (a negative of a print) I
 >was able to find when I visited the Canadian Forces Photographic
 >Unit in Ottawa back in 1996 in my unsuccessful attempt to view
 >their large but still secret UFO photo collection.


Hi Nick,

Some years ago, actually many years ago, I had the good luck to
be able to sit in the seat of an F-86 Sabre [unfortunately not
while it was flying]. If you had the same opportunity I think
you would discover that to get the angles needed to have the
inside relection of the Sun then mistake it for a UFO would be
extremely unlikely and difficult. There's not much room in
there. Also it appears now that the photo was taken at
Childerhose's 11 o'clock which is where the setting sun would
be, with the Sun being low. That would negate an inside
reflection. The Sabre enjoyed a bit of a tumblehome
configuration meaning the canopy actually curved inward slightly
at the base before meeting the fuselage. It permitted improved
downward visibility.

For what it's worth.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:34:34 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:00:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:02:05 -0700
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

This post from Nathan Daniel was so rife with false claims and
distortions as to make Korff proud. Here was one of them:

 >Did you hear that Meier claimed that he was Jesus' savior? ...

Totally false.

 >(Meier claimed that one of his pals socked Jesus in the face
 >and Billy put an end to it.)

Meier claimed no such thing. The man with Meier at the time did
NOT sock "Jesus" in the face and was no "pal" of Meier. The
episode as it was actually reported is contained within Meier's
Contact Notes, though in a section that Stevens deemed either
too sensitive or too lengthy to reproduce in his Vols. 1-4 of
_Message from the Pleiades_.

Finally, do you realize that I've asked twice what it was you
supplied Korff with, which he calls in his book (p. 83) "the
most significant analysis of the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' of this
writing"? And which he summarized by saying that UV "even
discovered evidence proving that the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' does
not contain Aramaic!"? So far you've failed to respond. Does
that mean you now understand that a translation of an Aramaic
document into German contains words written in German, not
Aramaic?

Jim Deardorff
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:17:24 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:02:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 13:42:58 -0700

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:17:41 -0700
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>It definitely seems to be the Oz effect. Meier mentions, when
 >>showing the film to those who were video-taping it, that there
 >>were no sounds, along with no breeze, during this period of
 >>time. Others who later mentioned the Oz effect also noticed no
 >>sound, which includes no sound of the wind or breeze in the
 >>trees.

 >Models don't give off the 'Oz' effect...

 >>When the craft reappears, only the twig suffered a tiny
 >>discontinuity in movement, not the camera frame.

 >Wrong. The branches stop moving _completely_  because Meier
 >shuts his camera off to remove his model and then replace the
 >model and there is a time lapse between...

Royce, ebk is going to have to cut this off, because you're just
repeating yourself, and are continually needing the reminder
that your "because" clause is just a conglomerate of
assumptions.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:21:59 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:13:45 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:55:15 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Deschamps

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Previously, I wrote:

 >>I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >>opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >>being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >>opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >>convinced that they're fake.

 >>Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

Michel M. Deschamps writes:


 >Personally, I think you're _way_off_!

 >Another futile attempt at dismissing a classic UFO case.

 >What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
 >four years later?

 >Another mirror?

 >Think again.

I will, if you will.

As I recall, you once wrote:

 >I also don't "believe" that
 >Ed Walters faked those [Gulf Breeze] photos. I
 >think these guys who like to re-hash good cases, trying to find
 >ridiculous explanations for them, are chicken.

Also, you offered:

 >I am 200% sure that the AA film is real.

And finally, you opined:

 >The time is long overdue for earthlings to know the truth about
 >flying saucers, UFOs, whatever you want to call them.

Michel, truth is a very relative term.

I am not a debunker nor am I chicken. I am well aware of the 14+
sightings that you have experienced. Oh, how I wish I had also
experienced them. To this date, I have not a one to my name.
None the less, I am a believer in ET's and UFOs and the like. I
do not need the likes of Ed Walters, or the Trents or Meier to
prop up my beliefs. I stand firm, without a SHRED of proof, that
we are being visited by ET life.

In my opinion it takes a lot of courage to take a stand without
proof. On the other hand, belief shouldn't be defined as
accepting fraud as a convenient replacement for research and
introspection.

While we're on the subject of research, what research have you
done to make you believe that the Trent photos are real?

Best,

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:13:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:05:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Defense Satellite UFO Photo? - Deardorff


 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 23:36:55 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Defense Satellite UFO Photo?
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Over 20 years ago a Defense Meteorological Satellite Program
 >satellite recorded a very strange image while not far from the
 >FSU  (Former Soviet Union).

 >Starting in 1985 this was publicized as a photo of an object at
 >45,000 ft traveling at 4000-5000 mph and leaving several
 >contrails. Ok, it looks like a "sport model" without wheels.
 >But who needs wheels at 45,000 ft. altitude, anyway?

 >Could that have been true? Is this a rare satellite photo of a
 >True UFO (TRUFO)?

 >What do you think?

Hi Bruce,

I could comment on the "contrail" swath, which as you noted
isn't consistent with being any contrail. You noted that this
swath just might be clouds, and so devoted your attention to the
cold "chassis" instead.

A swath of naturally formed high cloud that is curved in the
horizontal plane, with both edges congruent, and showing
indications of consisting of several similarly curved and
congruent narrower swaths compacted together, is unheard of in
all my sky-gazing days. So it just doesn't look like any cloud
form. The factors that give high clouds their overall general
shape and orientation are primarily wind shear and wave motion.
One sees from the neighboring high clouds that wind shear
stretched them out into their upper-left to lower-right
orientation, with wavy distortions superimposed due to internal
gravity waves. These influences are missing for the curved
swath, which would indicate, if they're formed of cloud
material, that these influences hadn't yet had nearly enough
time to act on the swath. So the swath looks like an anomaly for
this reason.

The coincidence of the "leading" edge of the swath with the rear
of the "chassis," which you noted, then greatly enhances the
odds that the swath is an unidentified anomaly associated with
the anomalous "chassis."

There is some suggestion, I think that pieces of the higher
clouds lay above the swath, as opposed to the alternative that
the swath was above but was discontinuous in those places.
However this seems quite uncertain.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 08:17:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:08:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Rimmer


 >From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:48:05 -0400

 >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:30:10 +0100
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Kaeser

 >>>From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
 >>>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 12:14:19 -0400
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 ><snip>

 >>I did say 'serious'! Mack is pretty fringey when it comes to UFO
 >>research. The fact is that, even so, in the end he kept his job
 >>and, as I recall, got a fair amount of support on an 'academic
 >>freedom' line, despite many of his ideas being well outside the
 >>scientific consensus.

 >>There are many scientists who move into contentious areas. The
 >>whole history of psychic research is full of established
 >>scientists who have gone out on a limb to exlore ESP,
 >>clairvoyance, survival, autokinesis, etc., and have done so
 >>without sacrificing their careers. Possibly some colleagues may
 >>think them a little 'flakey' but scientists allegedly being
 >>denied funding because of their interest in psi just does not
 >>seem to be an issue.

 >>Why should it be any different in ufology?

 >I think (and this is only an opinion) that ufology probably
 >triggers a greater reaction than ESP, Telekinesis, etc.,
 >although all of these contain a certain amount of hoaxing and
 >fraud (which is probably a major part of the problem). But there
 >is also an economic factor in the distribution of limited
 >funding, and I'm not sure that any project along these lines
 >would garner a great deal of support. IMO, becoming associated
 >with any "fringe" area of study would put severe limits on one's
 >ability to market one's skills.

 >Steve

Now this does surprise me, as I'd have thought that the types of
phenomena studied by psychical researchers involved a far
greater challenge (and rejection of) contemporary scientific
views that UFOs do. The ETH may be far from proven but it does
not stand our entire knowledge of the universe on its head as
would, for example, psychokinesis or precognition.

Can anybody really be surprised that establishment scientists
are reluctant to get involved in ufology when they see that
discussion in the subject, as evidenced by lists like UpDates,
amongst others, seems to be dominated by anti-scientific
nonsense such as the Meier joke (I wouldn't even call it a hoax,
myself)

--
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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                     Did UFOs Land Near Woodbridge Base?

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 10:07:08 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:09:49 -0400
Subject: Did UFOs Land Near Woodbridge Base?


Did UFO's land near Woodbridge base?

By Richard Cornwell
 From the Evening Star
September 26, 2000

One of the most famous UFO sightings, alleged to have happened a
few miles from Woodbridge, will be analysed in a new book
published to mark its 20th anniversary. The author, Georgina
Bruni, attempts to prove that there were UFO landings on the
perimeter of the American air base at Woodbridge � and she
claims her investigations will answer the "critics, the cynics
and the silencers who did not want the real story to be told."

The book, entitled 'You Can�t Tell The People', arrives during a
flurry of interest about the UFO mystery which occurred during
Christmas week of 1980 in Rendlesham Forest close to the east
gate of the air base.

Members of the Ipswich theatre company Red Rose Chain recently
performed a play in the forest on the subject and they hope to
produce a film.

Earlier in the year UFO investigator Jenny Randles wrote a book
with David Clarke and Andy Roberts about sightings of mysterious
objects throughout the world.

When Ms Randles examined the Rendlesham Forest incident she
concluded that there were secret tests taking place on nearby
Orford Ness and that the sightings of strange lights near the
air base were used in a cover up of what actually occurred on
the isolated shingle spit.

Now Ms Bruni enters the long-running debate with her own
theories which have been drawn from extensive research.

The claim by American service personnel that they saw a small
triangular craft smashing its way through pine trees is
scrutinised in her book to be published on November 24.

The book, according to the publishers Sidgwick and Jackson,
brings together definitive accounts from the MoD, military and
police sources and first hand witness testimonies.

Fresh information is revealed about the incident "and the
possible alien encounter that ensued."

The book also explains why the key witnesses have been silent
for so long.

The author, who spent 30 months on her research into the
Rendlesham Forest incident will be attending a book launch in
Woodbridge.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                   Re: A Little Boy Draws A Flying Saucer

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 04:17:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:11:51 -0400
Subject: Re: A Little Boy Draws A Flying Saucer


 >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 00:05:17 EDT
 >Subject: A little boy draws a flying saucer
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >A little boy draws a flying saucer.. at age three... in 1946

 >I promised the list in a post some months back, that I would
 >send along a copy of some drawings I made at a very early age.
 >There were quite a few drawings in the bank vault. I chose this
 >one for several reasons. First, it is dated by my mother. She
 >wrote my name ("Jamey") and the year, "1946" on the sheet of
 >paper.

<snip>

 >  ------------------------------------------------------------
 >                                     Name: UFO I drew at two or three.jpg
 >   UFO I drew at two or three.jpg    Type: JPEG Image (image/jpeg)
 >                                 Encoding: base64

 >  ------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jim!

Hey, could you scan that picture you drew again, but this time
in lower resolution?

I.e. fewer dots per inch when you scan it??

It came in so big I cannot visualize it.

I have to scroll way back and forth to see the
different parts, and cannot see the whole.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                        Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Fernandes

From: Joaquim Fernandes <jfernan@esoterica.pt>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:08:29 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:17:03 -0400
Subject: Re: 'Angel Hair'? - Fernandes


List members,

Its amazing that a large amount of Angel Hair reports had been
localised between September and October... Is the spider web
hypothese a good explanation?

Anyway, we also know of important reports wthin the religious
background of the Portuguese Fatima apparitions, since 1917,
where several falls of this substance were reported.

In 1957, October (!) 17, at Fatima a well registered fall of
"fibralvina" was photographed and published in two Lisbon
newspapers.

"Fibralvina" is a more scientific name to this material, coined
by Portuguese researcher Raul Berenguel in his 1978 book, 'OVNI,
Portas para o Ano Zero' ('UFO, Doors to Year Zero') where he
studied a long report of the 1959 web-like fall in Evora, in the
south of Portugal, whose towncentre was covered by these
web-like hairs.

We expect that the two labs can shed new light on this new US
web-like fall.

Joaquim Fernandes
University Fernando Pessoa
Porto
Portugal







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Sparks

From: Brad Sparks  <RB47Expert@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:00:22 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:03:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Sparks


Roger Evans' post:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m26-004.shtml

See Bruce Maccabee's response:

http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/sep/m26-040.shtml

See Bruce's scientific research papers on the Trent/McMinnville case:

http://brumac.8k.com/trent1.html
http://brumac.8k.com/trent1b.html
http://brumac.8k.com/trent2.html
http://www.mcmenamins.com/McHO/trent/

Joel Carpenter has done a fine job of putting together his web
page on the Trent/McMinnville case. But that doesn't mean he is
necessarily correct -- he is not.

Joel's excellent computer 3-D model proves that Hartmann's
markers for the approximate location of Paul Trent when he took
the pictures are in fact incorrect. He has the front yard
telephone pole on the wrong (left) side of the Trent's driveway
because that is the only way to make the pole visible in Trent's
Photo 1. But the pole is actually on the right side and in good
blowups of the Trent Photo 1 it is very obviously on the right.
 From Joel's reconstruction of Hartmann's Condon Committee site
photo of June 6, 1967, the telephone pole wouldn't even be
visible from the marker for Trent in Photo 1 but would be behind
the house.

Since Hartmann's positions are provably wrong then we're back to
using Bruce Maccabee's data for triangulating the location of
Trent in each photo, which is what should have been done anyway.

The old car mirrors are a cute suggestion for a hoax model, but there are
four main problems with it:

1. If it is allegedly a mass manufactured object then it must be
possible to find the _exact_ model -- not just an 'Approximate'
likeness. 'Close' and 'similar' just don't cut it. Scientific
testability is a two-way street. Skeptical hypotheses must be
testable.

2. The 'pole' in the Trent photos is obviously _off_center_. Yet
not a single one of the car/truck mirrors had an off-center
mount.

3. A heavy car or truck mirror suspended from the telephone wire
above would cause the 30-40-foot wire to _sag_ and/or have a
point defect at the spot where the alleged fishing line was
attached -- no such sagging or defect occurs.

4. Hoaxes must obey the laws of physics. The dynamics of a hoax
model -- whether a suspended car mirror or pie pan or a tossed
model -- do not match the object in the Trent photos. This has
been the subject of many years of my research and is not ready
for publication yet (no funding available to work on it
full-time as it requires).

But one example I can cite of the inconsistent physics is the
fact that the sighting lines from each photo do not and cannot
possibly cross underneath the telephone wires. Contrary to
Joel's website comments, the sighting lines cannot be forced to
cross below the wires by the expedient of juggling around the
locations or by insinuating error here and error there and then
trying to make the errors cancel out. As I have posted on
various lists for more than a year now, the location of the
wires with respect to a hoax model's sighting line crossing
point can be _directly_measured_ by triangulation.

The wires can be triangulated by using the identifiable kinks
and they are about 15.7 degrees shifted in direction. The object
can be triangulated by using the sighting lines which are about
17.2 degrees shifted. If the object was beneath the wires these
numbers would be the same -- but they are not. The difference of
about 1.5 degrees is glaringly obvious by simply overlaying
transparencies of the two photos -- it is an absolute physical
fact and it is _directly_measured_ (i.e., it is _not_ simply a
subtraction of 17.2 - 15.7, which can be done but is not as
accurate as direct measurement). The result is that the wires
and the hoax model's sighting lines are about 2 feet apart.

Lastly, I have to say that unlike Joel as shown in his photo
trying to demonstrate camera poses, Paul Trent certainly did not
have to hold a yardstick while holding his camera! There is no
information indicating that Paul Trent was as tall as Joel.
Crouching to take the photos (as I was the first to discover by
being the first to triangulate the low 36-40-inch heights of the
camera) is _not_ 'awkward' but is in fact the most stable
position from which to take a photo, almost like using a tripod.

In addition, the triangulations of camera height are
_not_above_ground level but with reference to the bottoms of the
garage and house, which are merely assumed for convenience to be
at ground level. In actual fact, just a glance at Hartmann's
site photo will show that the ground in the Trents' backyard was
very uneven. Thus, Trent could have been holding his camera
several inches higher or lower than 36-40 inches above the
ground at the actual spots and the 4-inch difference is no doubt
due to this unevenness of the ground.

Lastly, I want to address this issue of Trent taking the photos
so far back into his backyard and I hope this can be disposed of
once and for all. This issue goes all the way back to Phil Klass
in 1969 and it is just plain dead wrong, due to a total failure
to grasp or to bother understanding the sighting circumstances.
Rather than make this a tedious discussion of technical detail
let me make the point much more clearly.

The reason is very simple: When Mrs. Trent spotted the UFO she
was _far_back_into_the_backyard_ near the rabbit pens at the far
southeast end of the garage. Mr. Trent was inside the house at
the back door. He did _not_ see the UFO or know anything at all
about it at that point. This is where the erroneous skeptic
scenarios begin, because they implicitly assume Paul Trent knows
all about the sighting from the very start and therefore it was
very stupid or very suspicious of him to run away from the
direction of the UFO to the north out in front of his front
yard. _He_didn't_know_that_!

Let me say it again because this point for some reason just
never gets through and I'm going to repeat it over and over
again until it does because frankly, after arguing about this
damn point for 27 years (I have letters to Phil Klass disputing
his scenario back to 1973) I am really sick and tired of this
and fed up with it:

Mr. Trent at this point does not know there is a UFO in the sky
to the north out his front yard.

Mrs. Trent did _not_ yell to her husband "Paul grab the camera
because there is a UFO coming towards us at 1.7 miles to the
North-North-East at azimuth 020 degrees!" Can you even imagine
that? A simple farm woman on a remote farm in rural Oregon in
1950? (These are not the exact figures but are for
illustration.) Instead she yelled something to the effect of
"Paul grab the camera!" and probably something about something
up in the sky and then something about who should look where for
the camera. Then she went into the garage to look for the camera
in the car.

Again: Mr. Trent at this point does not know there is a UFO in
the sky out his front yard.

Mr. Trent only knows that his wife had been yelling from far out
in the backyard to the south talking about something in the sky
somewhere.

Mr. Trent found the camera in the house. Mr. Trent naturally
heads out his back door to find out what it was his wife had
been yelling to him about.

Again: Mr. Trent at this point does not know there is a UFO in
the sky out his front yard.

Then Mr. Trent quite logically and appropriately _went_far_out
_into_the_backyard_towards_where_Mrs._Trent_had_been_yelling_to_
_him_from_. She was in the garage looking for the camera so she
wasn't immediately on hand to explain further. Is this so
difficult to understand? Mr. Trent spotted the object in the
sky that his wife had been yelling about and took the photos
from where he stood. He moved 5 feet to his right to take the
second photo because the object was moving to the left. (Why on
earth would he have to change position if it was a nearby hoax
model he had hung up himself?) The rest is history.

Mr. Trent's actions were logical, sensible, rational and
consistent with his and his wife's testimony about sighting and
photographing an extraordinary flying object on May 11, 1950.

Brad Sparks








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:25:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:06:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Before I'd take this site's conclusion as the final word, I'd
 >want to know more about the immediate conditions (i.e.
 >psychological: how hurried was Trent? Would his haste in getting
 >2 good shots make him more or less likely to adopt the posture
 >suggested in the article? etc) under which the photos were
 >allegedly taken.

When a photographer is concerned about blurring a photograph due
to slow shutter speed, he might sit on the ground and brace his
arms on his knees to keep the camera steady. Also, if you want
to get more of the background in the frame for an aerial shot,
you might want to get the camera closer to the ground.

Just observations... not saying either is what happened.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:53:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:08:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak


 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:41:54 -0400
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!

 >I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >convinced that they're fake.

 >Take a look for yourselves:

 >http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >other photos. (most important!)


 >PS: The guy doing the research is named Joel Carpenter. He's
 >pretty sharp and in no way related to John Carpenter. Let's try
 >and keep the two unconfused in future posts on this subject.

First of all I'd like to say I know Joel Carpenter from e-mail
correspondence with him. He is an intelligent and serious
researcher with no axe to grind as far as I know. He has put a
lot of hard work into analyzing this. In short, he is no
debunker.

There has been an exchange of information on the Trent case the
last 2 years between myself, Carpenter, Bruce Maccabee, and Brad
Sparks.  E.g., the photo of Trent holding his camera on
Carpenter's web page is a photo I found in one of the Portland
newspapers. Carpenter used it to track down the identity of
Trent's camera. I don't think anybody has put more work into
analyzing the characteristics of this particular camera.

Having said all this, Carpenter's case is hardly of the open and
shut variety that the less objective Roger Evans thinks it is. I
would like to point out several errors of logic in some of
Carpenter's arguments.

One point Carpenter makes is that the camera in the two shots
was at a low level, a little more than 3 feet high. Carpenter
then points out that Trent's camera had two viewfinders. If the
camera was only 3+ feet up, the direct viewfinder would have
forced Trent to be kneeling when he took the photos. If Trent
was in a hurry, then it seems less likely that he would kneel
down to take the photos, though it is certainly possible.

The second viewfinder was an overhead one. Trent could have held
the camera waste-high and looked down into the viewfinder from
above. In this case Trent wouldn't have to take the time to
stoop down. Thus he could be standing there looking down through
the viewfinder, snapped photo 1, then stepped to his right and
snapped photo 2.

Carpenter doesn't think this likely, however, because the
overhead viewfinder produced a very minified image of the scene
and also reversed it. The "saucer" would have appeared as a very
tiny dot in the viewfinder. Carpenter thus believes it would
have been very difficult for Trent to have quickly framed the
pictures with this viewfinder. If Trent didn't do it this way,
then this suggests he was kneeling. That does not sound like a
man in a big hurry to take the photos.

However, I disagree with this assessment for the following
reason. All Trent needed to do was look up and see that the
"saucer" was between the garage on the left and the house on the
right. These are large objects and would be easy to see through
the viewfinder, even if the images were very minified.  The
reversal of direction also isn't important in this situation.
Reversed or not, all Trent had to know was to frame the picture
with two large buildings on the right and left knowing that the
object he was trying to film was somewhere in between.

Next point: Carpenter suggests that maybe Trent used an old
side-view car mirror as his saucer model, and then goes on do
suggest that the mirror might explain why the bottom of the
object was much brighter than would be expected from a nearby
model.

Carpenter posed this hypothetically to me in e-mail some months
back and asked me if I thought it possible that a mirror like
this might be reflecting the sky from in back towards the
camera.

I told him no, this didn't seem possible. Mirrors reflect
specularly, not diffusely. In plainer English, that means that
if you draw a line from the camera to the plain of a "model"
mirror hanging above the camera 15 to 20 feet away, the light
bouncing towards the camera had to have come from a direction at
exactly the same angle on the other side of the mirror

In the case of the first Trent photo showing the "saucer"
bottom, any model would have had its bottom surface nearly
parallel to the ground. So the light source on the other side of
the mirror would have been at an angle towards the ground. In
fact, the light source _would have been the ground_, not the
sky. The bottom of the "saucer" would have appeared much darker
than it does. (A mirror would have been reflecting the dark,
lush green grass that would have been growing at that time of
year.)

The mirror shows nothing but the reflected image of the light
source. If the light source is bright, then the mirror appears
bright. If the light source is dark, the mirror appears dark.
If you reflect the night sky off a mirror, the mirror looks
black. It doesn't matter that a mirror has high reflectivity.
High reflectivity does not mean it appears bright.

I don't think Carpenter understood my argument. A car mirror
would have been reflecting an image of the ground towards the
camera and would have appeared dark.

The same is true even if Trent used an aluminum foil pie pan,
his second suggested model object. This still does not explain
the bright underside of the object seen in the photos.

In short, Carpenter's argument that Trent would have most likely
have taken the photos from a kneeling position I find very
unconvincing. It would not have been difficult for Trent to
frame the pictures and take the photos standing up with the
overhead viewfinder. The second point about a mirror explaining
the light bottom is simply scientifically false.

Also finding objects that resemble the photographed object does
not mean one has found what was photographed. All sorts of
things have been definitively suggested as Trent's model in the
past, from aluminum pie pans, to paper plates, to lamp shades,
and even Carpenter's car mirror. Of course it would not be
difficult to build a model looking exactly like the one in the
pictures, just like one can build a model airplane. That does
not mean that photos of 747s in flight are all hoaxed by models
suspended by threads.

We cannot definitively prove whether photos are genuine, but we
can prove whether they are hoaxed or likely to be hoaxed. For
example, a suspension thread would be a dead giveaway. So far,
not one shred of evidence has turned up to indicate that these
photos were faked. These pictures have been examined to death
and have survived all challenges. In fact, a number of details
in the photos all point to genuineness, such as the very light
bottom in photo 1, readily explained by an object in the
distance, but not a model up close. The challenges by debunker
Robert Sheaffer about shadows and lighting have all proven
wrong. In fact, I have picked up on yet another detail in the
photos that refutes one of Sheaffer's shadow arguments based on
my last on-site visit. But that will have to wait for some other
time.

The devil is indeed in the details.

Here are some other confirmatory photo details not addressed on
Joel Carpenter's Web site:

1. The sighting lines to the object from the two photo points do
_not_ meet under the only likely suspension point -- the
electrical wires between the garage and the house.

2. The relative size difference between the object in the two
photos does _not_ match what would be expected from the two
photo positions to the electrical wires.

3. The size distance, however, does match what one would expect
for a distant object in level flight with the elevation angles
found in the photos.

4. The size difference, elevation angles, and azimuth angles are
consistent with a distant object flying due west, a very
unlikely event to happen by accident in any plausible hoax
scenario.

If Joel Carpenter reads this, I hope he isn't offended by my
criticisms. This is just my peer review of his arguments.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:57 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:10:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Apparently some 'nasty slashes' occurred to the
 >negatives between 1950 and 1967. The right edge of th first
 >photo and the left edge of the second photo were cut by someone
 >years and years ago. (no, the cut edges do not fit together) and
 >only the newspaper reproductions provide the complete photos.

Bruce, Roger, Mac, All:

Is it possible, therefore, that there are missing frames from
the Trent film roll, frames that never appeared in print? Are
there any frame numbers on the negatives?

Hartmann did measure the density of a portion of the unexposed
edge of the film negative, this is listed in one of his tables
in Condon.

 >5) Joel is the first to suggest a truck mirror (other
 >suggestions have been garbage can lid light shade, pie tin,
 >paper model, etc.). None of the truck mirrors he suggests has
 >exactly the same aspect ratio (length to width) or the same
 >off-center "pole" (attachment post on the back of th mirror).

There must have been many manufacturers and models of vehicle
mirrors in the, say, years from 1930-1950.

 >Also, a mirror hanging downward and photograped from below to
 >give a (nearly, but not exactly!!!) elliptical bottom image as
 >in photo 1, would provide a mirror reflection of the ground.

Evidently, it does. Hartmann's Table B (Scientific Study of
Unidentified Flying Objects, Bantam Edition, 1969, p 403) gives
densitometry results for different parts of the two negatives.
The results are normalized at 1.00 for the sky near the distant
horizon at 1.00.  Listed here are a few results:

Sky at distant horizon -            1.00
Shaded bottom of the UFO         .675
Foreground underbrush              .417
Hill 1                                        .63
Hill 2                                        .71
Garage roof                               .489
Illuminated metallic tank             .86
Shaded bottom of tank               .48

These measurements seem to corroborate your hypothesis
that a suspended mirror would reflect the distant terrain.

<snip>

 >6) There is much more to this case than just the photo analysis.
 >I have long pointed out that it would be possible to fake the
 >photos. My own "preference" would be for a paper model. This
 >would require the desire, the time, and the cleverness needed to
 >make up a photo and a story to go along with it.

But a common truck mirror would be a lot simpler an explanation,
and would not require such cleverness.

 >Anyway, we have the Trents' whole life story to look at now,
 >since they died several years ago. Anyone wishing to express an
 >informed opinion of the case should read what I have written and
 >also get a copy of the only video interview of the Trents, made
 >in 1995 (2 years before Evelyn died). Contact Terry Halstead at
 >halstead@pobox.com. Considering that this is the only video
 >interview of two of the most famous people in UFO history (I bet
 >that the trent photos have been published more than any others)
 >-- whether you think them nasty hoaxers or down-to-earth honest
 >people - this is a UFO collector's item. At the very least the
 >skeptics will want this video so that they can refute Mrs.
 >Trent's statements, one by one, and demonstrate how she managed
 >to bamboozle literally dozens of investigators, interviewers and
 >just plain interested people for nearly 50 years!

And even you?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:14:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:13:45 -0400

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Personally, I think you're _way_off_!

 >Another futile attempt at dismissing a classic UFO case.

Michel, Roger, All:

Any particular reasons, other than just your opinion?
Perhaps a fact or two that you disagree with?

 >What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
 >four years later?

Has the identity of the photographer and the circumstances of
this picture ever been established?

 >Another mirror?

Why not? There are clever people in France, too.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:16:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
 >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Hello, one and all...

 >>I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in
 >>my opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn
 >>from being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my
 >>past opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am
 >>now convinced that they're fake.

 >>Take a look for yourselves:

 >>http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

<snip>

 >While the author if this page does a good job of illustrating
 >that Trent's camera angle was not what one would expect, one
 >must keep in mind that he didn't exactly "expect" to be
 >photographing a UFO.

Mac, Roger:

This would be true _if_ Trent did not hoax the pixs. On the
other hand, _if_ he was taking a carefully staged pix, it may
represent a good explanation for the angles.

The really important thing about Joel Carpenter's hypothesis is
the possible identity of the object, itself: a truck mirror.
This would explain the brightness of the underside (mirror
reflecting the sky or distant terrain), and the brightness of
the (chromed) upper part. This brightness is what Condon Study
investigator William Hartmann thought _could_ indicate that the
object was at a distance.

Look at the image of the truck mirror, and then at the Trent's
pix. Unbelievable!

Joel Carpenter's eagle eye may have put this one to bed,
finally. A lot of folks have wasted a lot of time on this
over the years.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:19:42 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:19:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee


 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:14:46 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo

 >>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:28:12 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>My analysis of the photo taken by Canadian Air Force pilot RJ
 >>Childerhose in 1955 is now available at
 >>brumac.8k.com/rjc/rjc.html.

 >>This was, and I think still is, the only photo endorsed by none
 >>other than Philip J. Klass as a real unknown "UFO"...

<snip>

 >Bruce, I read your careful analysis of this photo and I think
 >the assumptions you made and incorporated in your calculations
 >are reasonable ones. That said, in light of the conflicting and
 >contradictory testimonies by the pilot who took the photo which
 >you included in your paper and the newspaper article about UFOs
t>he pilot wrote which was published in the Toronto Telegram
 >where the pilot promoted his beliefs that UFOs were real and
 >extraterrestrial, maybe we should seriously consider other
 >possible explanations for the UFO in the photo.>

 >I still cannot dismiss the hunch I had when I first saw your
 >photo which suggested to me that the luminous UFO was simply a
 >reflection of the Sun inside the aircraft's canopy window. Of
 >course the UFO would not be as bright as the Sun (a smooth
 >transparent surface would reflect up to about 5% the sunlight
 >falling on it depending on the viewing angle off the surface)
 >and would also appear elliptical in shape because of the
 >curvature o the canopy window. This is what I observed in your
 >UFO photo. If this UFO is indeed a reflection of the Sun off a
 >window, we would also then expect to see a second reflection
 >from the outside or second surface of the canopy window too. I
 >propose that the lower rim observed on the UFO is just that. As
 >proof of this, I suggest one look at another almost identical
 >photo of a luminous daylight UFO found on page 70 in Peter
 >Brookesmith's 'UFO The Complete Sightings'.*

Thanks for your comments on this photo. The suggestion of a
reflection from the canopy has, of course, been studied. (If I
recall correctly it was Dr. Robert Nathan, photoanalyst formerly
at JPL,, proposed this explanation years ago. Then rejected it.
Nathan also proposed that the sun reflected off some bright
object in the cockpit and that this reflection was, in turn,
reflected by the cockpit window. This explanation, too, was
rejected.)


First of all, he was flying toward the sun, in which case there
would be no reflecting surface properly aligned.

But in any case, to assume that he would have seen a reflection
of the sun and not realized it was merely a reflection in the
canopy is difficult to imagine. He said he rolled his aircraft
to take the picture. This surely would have changed any
reflection, if he hadn't already realized he was looking at a
reflection by moving his head. To advance the reflection
hypothesis for the photo is therefore tantamount to saying that
either the pilot was intent on creating a hoax when he took the
picture or else he took the photo and realized later it was a
reflection but continued to say it was a real object "out there"
even though he knew it was a reflection

Furthermore, the rest of his story about the object and photo
would have to be a hoax.

He said he flew past the object... as you would ride past a
telephone pole or some object at the side of a highway....
continuous motion toward the rear as you travel along.
Reflections, on the other hand, change radically with small
changes in angle or direction of travel.

The bottom line is, unless you assume the pilot created this
sighting as a hoax, for whatever reason, you can't expect the
reflection hypothesis to be accepted as a valid explanation. (If
he were going to create a hoax he could have created an image
that really matched his verbal description.)

(Your mention of his later claim that he "believes in UFOs"
suggests that you would accept the hoax explanation. That is
your decision. I reject the hoax explanation. He was completely
coperative in providing all the information he could including
the original slide - which had been lost in James MacDonald's
files for many years before I contacted Childerhose. If he had
known it was a reflection it seems to me that he would have been
worried that my investigation of the original slide would
discover his hoax)

 >Finally, I have to say that if such a bright object was below
 >the clouds in the skies over southern Alberta, one would expect
 >many people to have noticed it and a few to have even reported
 >the unusual sight of a second Sun. Unfortuately, I was unable to
 >find any such reports (although, interestingly, there is a file
 >stamped SECRET of a similar Canadian fighter jet also flying in
 >formation which mysteriously vanished just days before this UFO
i>ncident). If such a bright object was actually close to or
 >within the clouds themselves, why are not the parts of the
 >clouds around this luminous UFO brighter like the parts of the
 >clouds facing the Sun which is to the left? To me this is
 >further evidence that this UFO could not possibly be a large
 >distant luminous object but rather a reflection from within the
 >aircraft itself.

The lack of other witnesses is not necessarily a good argument
against the reality of the bright "thing" as an "object out
there" in the sky.

We don't know what the cloud cover underneath the bright object
was. Perhaps there was a dense layer at 5000 ft or so, This was,
after all, a huge tunderstorm with associated clouds.
Furthermore, it occurred over an area of low population,. We
don't know how long this bright object was in the sky, maybe for
only a few minutes. Had someone seen it he/she might have
assoiated it with lightning phenomena related to the storm. And,
lastly, even if someone had seen it and said "Aha, a UFO," said
person would have a relatively high probability of not reporting
it.

So, for these reasons I accept the reality of an object..."out
there."








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Eros' Square Craters - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:21:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:21:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Eros' Square Craters - Young


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:09:38 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Eros' Square Craters
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >For Richard Hoagland

 > (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

  .....

 >From: NASA Science News
 >Subject: Square Craters

 >NASA Science News for September 26, 2000

 >NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft has spotted square-shaped
 >craters on asteroid Eros, a telltale sign of mysterious
 >goings-on in the asteroid belt long ago.

 >Full story at:

 >http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast26sep_1.htm?list

Ron, All:

There are also many six-sided large craters on the Moon, such as
Sinus Iridium (the Bay of Rainbows). This is due, apparently, to
the structure of the upper crust of the Moon.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:57:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:27:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Clark


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:12:03 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs [was: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims]
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:07:36 -0500

Dennis,

 >Kinda makes you wonder, in the wake of the Mack affair, how UFOs
 >and Abductions: Challenging the Borders of Knowledge (University
 >Press of Kansas, David Jacobs editor) ever got published,
 >doesn't it?

No, I don't wonder, since I know how it came about. Which makes
me no less grateful, and maybe even hopeful that a precedent has
been set. Still, the sad fact remains, it's the only essentially
pro-UFO book published by an academic press since Indiana
University Press issued David M. Jacobs's UFO Controversy in
America in 1975.

 >But just as we should (and can) accuse science of not doing
 >enough ufology and abductionology, so, too, can we accuse
 >ufologists and abductionologists of not doing enough good
 >science. Re the latter I refer specifically to Hufford's
 >criticisms/recommendations as published in the MIT Proceedings,
 >Alien Discussions. Where, among other things, are complete
 >transcripts of abductee interviews, retrieved consciously or
 >with the use of hypnosis?

I agree that ufology and abductionology would do well to do
better science. If we can't influence what others do, we can at
least do the best we can for ourselves.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:45:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:36:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >convinced that they're fake.

 >Take a look for yourselves:

 >http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >other photos. (most important!)

 >PS: The guy doing the research is named Joel Carpenter. He's
 >pretty sharp and in no way related to John Carpenter. Let's try
 >and keep the two unconfused in future posts on this subject.

<snip>

Hello Roger, List,

"Verrry interesting but grrotesque" (Who said that?) ;)

First thing I did when I saw the research was to take a good
look at my 5 foot piano (I don't play), bend down a bit (I'm
5'9") and notice that:

1. To get a slight perceptual slope between the closest and
farthest parts of the top of my piano, I had to bend just 1 inch
below the horizon of the piano.

2. When I kneel down, the perceptual slope is nowhere close to
the slope that can be observed on the tank on the Trent photos:
it is a lot steeper.

Maybe this could be settled with some kind of computer model
simulation, at least, as far as the "point of view" of the
camera is concerned.

I flinched when I saw the computer model simulation: one of the
most important features of the scene - the fuel tank on the side
of the shed - is all wrong: it is much smaller and much lower
than it is in the actual pictures.

How can this be?

A computer simulation will allow you to view a scene from _any_
point of view you wish. Yet, Joel does not use this basic
feature of all 3D modeling programs to prove his point.

Strange...

I am always suspicious of geek talk thrown in a conversation
just to impress the gallery.

Is it possible to get _all_ the data and measurements used in
the simulation?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                       Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:04:59 -0700
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:42:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Daniel

 >From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:17:40 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >The problem is that scientists are also people with what let's
 >call worldviews. These can be religious, philosophical or what
 >have you. Its very hard for anyone, scientists included, to
 >claim to be unbiased about something like Meier which can have
 >such a tremendous impact on one's worldview. In fact, sometimes
 >the rhetoric on this list looks suspiciously like thinly
 >disguised worldview (belief system) defense. A jaundiced view of
 >literally every tidbit of evidence, and a repetitive tendancy to
 >shoot at the messenger are often good clues.

 >Well, once you start playing with something as fundamental as
 >someone's worldview, in most cases I suspect it becomes nearly
 >impossible to proceed in a neutral, openminded way.

So, it seems that there is no measurement to determine a hoax?
That's why pathological liars and con-artists get a thrill to
enter this field that has no standards. Con-men can make big
bucks spinning tales for dummy consumption.

 >Sometimes worldviews and rational inquiry just don't mix. And
 >with Meier, you're dealing with a major worldview issue.

Are you saying there can be no reasonable and balanced
worldview?-- Should there be irrational inquiry by someone
without a history? Who's that?

Do you see that anyone who calls the case a hoax is defending
his worldview? So what, is that wrong? Depends on the worldview
I guess, huh? My worldview is if someone is going to deceive the
public by creating a hoax, that person has to be accountable for
it. We have laws that are supposed to protect the public from
criminals and racketeers. I'm told that the Meier case
constitutes mail order fraud; a violation of the Ricco Statue,
etc, and whatever.

Does your worldview entitle charlatans to benefit from raping a
gullible public of their money? Does your worldview have any
laws that protect the public from criminals and swindlers? I'm
sure it does. And if you think about it, most worldviews are
filled with religious and moral laws. Most of them teach that
stealing and lying is not acceptable and punishable by
imprisonment. In the Islamic world, a thief gets his hand cut
off. Maybe that's how Meier lost his arm.

 >Your panel won't work. Its an attempt to rationally examine an
 >issue that pummels too many people's belief systems. The
 >panellists probably won't be able to examine it rationally, and
 >whatever conclusion they reach won't settle a thing. (Did Condon
 >settle anything?)

This doesn't have anything to do with belief systems if you are
referring to religion. It has to do with real vs. fraud. How do
you know panelists would not be able to examine it rationally?
First of all, the Meier case is irrational to common knowledge
of our world. How would you define the words, Fact, Conjecture,
Fraud?

I believe and have witnessed supernatural events, miracle
healings, and stuff that can't be proved by most scientific
standards, but were are not dealing with the intangible here,
were dealing with a conartist who hides the cards whenever you
want to get a closer look at his claims. It's the same smoke and
mirrors Magicians thrive off of-- illusion--they show you
something from a controlled perspective. If you stand near a
magician's shoulder, the illusion usually disappears. Slight of
hand, trick cards, mirrors and smoke-- ever hear of those
things? Magicians are famous for showing you something that
isn't really what you think it is.

Don't get me wrong. I have a deep belief in supernatural events
only because I witnessed them. And I believe that some UFOs
could be ET crafts. But it seems like a heck of a lot of cases
that have been around for decades have been debunked-- Adamski /
The Trent pixs / and more... So what is real in this field? I
believed Meier until we examined his case.

James Deardorff spins tale after tale in defense of the case
with lunatic analyses, then tries to bait fellow researchers
into a logical debate based on twisted logic. He will defend
Meier's case to the death it appears, because he's embraced the
case as his religion. He knows the biggest selling book in the
world is the Bible, and his mission is to rewrite it. Deardorff
already has done that with the Talmud Jmmanuel. Wonder how his
bank roll is building?

Another thing regarding Pleaidian technology: Many cars now have
antennas built into the windows. Let's see the Pleaidians are
thousands of years more advanced than us puny humans...do the
superior Pleaidians use antennas on their spacecrafts? Yes. Just
like the toy models, cartoons, and sci-fi comic books of the
1940's and 50's. Seems like advanced Pleaidians use old world
technology from the 20th century. But wait, James Deardorff and
Billy Meier can explain it--the Pleaidians don't want to
overload our brains with the sight of technology that is too
advanced because we may model it and turn it into a weapon of
destruction. Also because when we look at the archaic antenna it
gives us dumb humans a feeling of nostalgia and remembrances of
our first Sony portable radio. ---

The antenna also makes a good device to hang the beamship from
when Billy takes his phony pictures.


Cheers,

  N. Daniel
Official member of the vast right-left wing conspiracy to debunk
hoaxer Billy Meier and the Pleaidians (soon to be a rock band.)

Underground Video
Visit our site of weird stuff not necessarily true:
www.ufocoverup.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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:25:05 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:45:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >>opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >>being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >>opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >>convinced that they're fake..

 >>Take a look for yourselves:

 >>http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >>Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >>other photos. (most important!)



Bruce writes:

 >However, it is much more complex than just noting Joel's
 >suggestion that Trent photographed a truck mirror hanging from
 >the overhead wires.

And it could very well be just that simple.

 >My research initially concentrated on analyzing the photos to
 >determine (a) whether or not there was direct evidence of a hoax
 >(e.g., an image of a string from from the overhead wire to the
 >top of the UFO), and (b) whether or not William Hartmann
 >(astronomer) of Condon Report fame was blowing smoke when he
 >claimed that his brightness analysis of the bottom of the UO
 >(unidentified object) in the first photo indicate that the UO
 >was a distant object and hence large.

 >The result of my investigation was (a) no clear photo evidence
 >of hoax and (b) yes, after corrections were taken into acount
 >(veiling glare and the ratio of brightness of a vertical white
 >surface as compared to a horizontal white bottom surface....
 >read the paper to find out what this means) Hartmann was correct
 >in his distance calculations. However, as I pointed out, it
 >PROBABLY would be possible to construct a model,probably from
 >paper, that could be consistent with the brightness calculation.


As I have pointed out before, density readings of a photographed
object don't really amount to much unless you know the original
reflective properties of the object as a baseline for
comparison.  Most importantly, simply knowing the reflective
properties of the object are not enough. If the same conditions,
lighting, film, processing, paper, etc are not present, then the
_exact_ same object will give different readings in a second set
of photos. If the object were a mirror, then that would change
things tremendously, as unknown factors come into play regarding
what is reflected, whether the mirror's surface was dirty and
diffused, etc. Density readings allow for an educated guess; but
a guess, none the less.


Continuing, Bruce wrote:

 >1) the first photo of Paul Trent DOES show the left (southwest)
 >corner of the house at the right hand side,

<snip>

 >This has an impact on Joel's computer model (scroll down on his
 >page) where he shows the field of view of the first photo (white
 >rectangle) superimposed on Hartmann's 1967 photo of the scene.
 >Note that Joel's field of view rectangle on the SECOND photo
 >does show the corner of the house.

A distinction without a difference, really. The point is whether
or not Trent was in his back yard and if your info impacts the
ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from a piece of
sewing thread.

It doesn't.

 >2) I don't think the camera was as low as Joel assumes based on
 >my estimate of where, on the photo, was the horizon.

Again, another distinction without a difference. The point is
whether or not Trent was in his back yard and if your info
impacts the ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from a
piece of sewing thread.

It doesn't.

 >Unfortunately we don't know how Trent
 >typically held the camera to take pictures and hence we don't
 >know how he would be most likely to be holding the camera if
 >taking a picture of a slowly moving object at some distance
 >under these circumstances.

All very true. But the point is still whether or not Trent was
in his back yard and if your info impacts the ability of Trent
to shoot a mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread.

It doesn't.

 >I would place the altitude of the camera 6" to 1
 >foot higher than Joel.

Okay. But the point is still whether or not Trent was in his
back yard and if your info impacts the ability of Trent to shoot
a mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread.

It doesn't.

 >it is true that
 >Trent walked southward into the back yard quite a distance.

Okay, so Trent _was_ in his backyard for some reason. Does this
info impact the ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from
a piece of sewing thread?

It doesn't.

Bruce writes:

 >it could be because he came on the run and, not knowing
 >exactly where to look, he ran toward where his wife had been
 >standing, or near there (She had been coming from behind, i.e.,
 >south of, the garage and was walking toward the back door of the
 >house.). Perhaps the momentum of his rapid motion out the back
 >door carried him farther south than needed.

Maybe. On the other hand, maybe he just wanted a convenient way
to shoot a mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread.

Bruce also writes:

 >None of the truck mirrors [Joel] suggests has
 >exactly the same aspect ratio (length to width) or the same
 >off-center "pole" (attachment post on the back of th mirror).

In my opinion, not true. The mirror attached to the truck on the right
hand side of the web page is a ringer. In fact, it looks more like the
UFO than the second photo of the UFO does!

 >Also, a mirror hanging downward and photograped from below to
 >give a (nearly, but not exactly!!!) elliptical bottom image as
 >in photo 1, would provide a mirror reflection of the ground. The
 >image of the bottom of the UFO is large enough so that a mirror
 >reflection of the ground should have been apparent.

This is a _real_ stretch, Bruce. The Trent photos are not clear
enough to see detail in the UFO itself, much less reflections of
the ground. In fact, the bare ground isn't even that sharp.

Continuing, Bruce writes:

 >There is much more to this case than just the photo analysis.
 >I have long pointed out that it would be possible to fake the
 >photos. My own "preference" would be for a paper model. This
 >wuld require the desire, the time, and the cleverness needed to
 >make up a photo and a story to go along with it. the skeptics
 >have pointed out "inconsistencies" in the Trents' stories as
 >reported in the early newspaper accounts. These inconsistencies,
 >they say, indicate a hoax in which the ostensible witnesses
 >didn't get their stories straight. ON the other hand, if each
 >interview had produced exactly the same information from both
 >witnesses (although interviewed separately) the skeptics would
 >have cried "HOAX!" because no one could remember things that
 >perfectly and different people recall different aspects of the
 >same event.

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah.

But what impact does this have on Trent's ability to shoot a
mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread?

Again, it doesn't!

There is nothing in Bruce's analysis to preclude the mirror from
being the most likely "truth" of all that have been discussed to
date.

In fact, here's what we don't know:

1) We don't know how far away the object is.

2) We don't know the reflective properties of the object.

3) We don't know why Trent would be in his back yard to shoot a
    real UFO.

4) We don't know how Trent held his camera.

5) We don't know how tall Trent is.

6) We don't know what color his socks were.

However, we do know this:

The pictures sure look like a truck mirror hanging from a piece of
sewing thread!

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:04:27 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:47:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy


 >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:28:11 -0500

 >David Jacobs, who argues that abductions are real events, has
 >also suffered in his academic career and been just as bitterly
 >attacked as Mack has, and his view of the phenomenon is
 >decidedly _not_ a New Age one.

 >I hope this clarifies things a little.

 >Jerry Clark


Jerry, List

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if Michael Swords, Bruce
Maccabee, Richard Haines, Tom Deuley, John Schuessler, Ron
Westrum and Peter Sturrock paid any career penalties for their
public involvement with the UFO subject?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                 Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Mortellaro

From: Jim Mortellaro  <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:59:21 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:16:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Mortellaro


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:04:27 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs

 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:28:11 -0500

 >>David Jacobs, who argues that abductions are real events, has
 >>also suffered in his academic career and been just as bitterly
 >>attacked as Mack has, and his view of the phenomenon is
 >>decidedly _not_ a New Age one.

 >>I hope this clarifies things a little.


 >Jerry, List

 >Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if Michael Swords, Bruce
 >Maccabee, Richard Haines, Tom Deuley, John Schuessler, Ron
 >Westrum and Peter Sturrock paid any career penalties for their
 >public involvement with the UFO subject?

 >Dennis Stacy

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if Dennis Stacey paid
any career penalties for his involvement with the UFO subject?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:14:20 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:19:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:25:05 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

<snip>

 >>>Take a look for yourselves:

 >>>http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >>>Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >>>other photos. (most important!)

 >Bruce writes:

 >>However, it is much more complex than just noting Joel's
 >>suggestion that Trent photographed a truck mirror hanging from
 >>the overhead wires.

 >And it could very well be just that simple.

<snip>

 >However, we do know this:

 >The pictures sure look like a truck mirror hanging from a piece
of
 >sewing thread!

Hello Roger, Bruce, List,

Correct me if I am wrong, Roger, as I like to have my bearings
set OK:

You started this thread by pointing at a "research" of Joel
Carpenter who "says" that the Trent photos are a hoax _because_
he has "proven" that the pictures were taken from a camera
positioned 3 feet above the ground, which is inconsistent with
Trent's story.

Right?

Right.

If one proves that Joel Carpenter is in error and that the
pictures where taken rather at a height consistent with Trent's
testimony, then:

1. The mirror theory isn't good anymore?

2. And the Trent photos are guenuine?

I'd like you to answer this one, 'cause I'd like to know if
you're professing an opinion or expressing a conclusion.

If you are professing an opinion, we'll never get anywhere.

If you are expressing a conclusion, that will be great.

I understand that, through your eyes, the Trent pictures look
like a truck mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread, but,
you know, the Moon really looks like a piece of cheese.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:11:09 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:17:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:53:25 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:41:54 -0400
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!

<snip>

 >The mirror shows nothing but the reflected image of the light
 >source. If the light source is bright, then the mirror appears
 >bright. If the light source is dark, the mirror appears dark.
 >If you reflect the night sky off a mirror, the mirror looks
 >black. It doesn't matter that a mirror has high reflectivity.
 >High reflectivity does not mean it appears bright.

 >I don't think Carpenter understood my argument. A car mirror
 >would have been reflecting an image of the ground towards the
 >camera and would have appeared dark.

Hi, Dave, Roger, List:

Please see my post today in resonse to Bruce Maccabbee.
Hartmann's densitometry measurements published in Condon are
consistent with distant terrain being reflected in the mirror on
the bottom of the UFO.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 27

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Thompson

From: Paul Thompson <MrApol@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:20:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:40:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Thompson


 >From: Brad Sparks  <RB47Expert@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:00:22 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >The old car mirrors are a cute suggestion for a hoax model, but there are
 >four main problems with it:

 >1. If it is allegedly a mass manufactured object then it must be
 >possible to find the _exact_ model -- not just an 'Approximate'
 >likeness. 'Close' and 'similar' just don't cut it. Scientific
 >testability is a two-way street. Skeptical hypotheses must be
 >testable.

So we'll keep looking. Anyone want to check the DMV and find out
what kind of vehicles the Trents owned?

 >2. The 'pole' in the Trent photos is obviously _off_center_. Yet
 >not a single one of the car/truck mirrors had an off-center
 >mount.

A non-issue. Part of the asymmetry  is due to the angle of shot,
and part is due to the fact that the center post is on a
ball-and-socket mount. (I used to have mirrors like this on my
motorcycle). In fact, let's turn this question around: if the
object is not a vehicle mirror, why is the center post tilted
the way it is?

 >3. A heavy car or truck mirror suspended from the telephone
 >wire above would cause the 30-40-foot wire to _sag_ and/or
 >have a point defect at the spot where the alleged fishing
 >line was attached -- no such sagging or defect occurs.

Do you know how much they weigh? The chrome steel mirrors off my
Yamaha 650 weigh six ounces. A truck mirror probably weighs
more, but I would estimate it at well under a pound. I don't
think the wires (if they were even used) would sag under a small
burden like that.

Paul Thompson









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:17:21 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:12:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:14:20 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:19:07 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:25:05 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >>>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

Actually, I am going to make things easy on Errol and address
this post to Serge, Bruce, Brad, and any other proponents of the
Trent photos. I feel the points I am bringing up will answer
most of your individual questions.

Previously, I wrote:

 >>The pictures sure look like a truck mirror hanging from a piece
 >>of sewing thread!

Serge replied:

 >Correct me if I am wrong, Roger, as I like to have my bearings
 >set OK:

 >You started this thread by pointing at a "research" of Joel
 >Carpenter who "says" that the Trent photos are a hoax _because_
 >he has "proven" that the pictures were taken from a camera
 >positioned 3 feet above the ground, which is inconsistent with
 >Trent's story.

 >Right?

Hi, Serge.

No. Not at all. What I said is that I already had my own
opinions as to why the Trent photos could be fake. A casual
glance at the archives will bear this out. After looking at
Joel's site, I felt sure that the photos are fake. Joel makes no
claims of "proving anything". He is pretty level headed and Bob
Young and I really had to twist his arm to allow the list access
to his site. He presents his work and let's other people make up
their own minds. I made up mine after looking at his work.

Moving on, you wrote:

 >If one proves that Joel Carpenter is in error and that the
 >pictures where taken rather at a height consistent with Trent's
 >testimony, then:

 >1. The mirror theory isn't good anymore?

 >2. And the Trent photos are guenuine?

 >I'd like you to answer this one, 'cause I'd like to know if
 >you're professing an opinion or expressing a conclusion.

 >If you are professing an opinion, we'll never get anywhere.

 >If you are expressing a conclusion, that will be great.

 >I understand that, through your eyes, the Trent pictures look
 >like a truck mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread, but,
 >you know, the Moon really looks like a piece of cheese.


My position is simple:

Most things look like what they are; the moon not
withstanding.;)

Therefore, if you look at the mirror attached to the truck on
the right hand side of Joel's web page and compare it to the
UFO, it is a ringer. It even has the offset "stem".

So the questions become easy:

1) Is it reasonable that Trent had easy access to such a mirror?

Yes. Very reasonable. As Joel's research shows, these mirrors
were very common.

2) Is it complicated to photograph the mirror suspended in the
air?

No. Very simple. Plain white sewing thread would do just fine.

3) Would such a technique defy detection using modern photo
analyzing methods.

Yes. Programs designed to "detect" the vertical thread can't do
it if the image is obscured due to contrast, overexposure or
"overbleed" from the surrounding sky. (I've used white sewing
thread many times and it has never let me down.)

4) Would it have to hang from the power or telephone lines?

No. Only proponents of the Trent photos have maintained that
position. The mirror is very small and would be easy to hang
fairly close to the camera by a variety of methods; some as
silly as a fishing pole.

5) Would Trent's camera height make a difference in achievablity
of the shot?

None at all. In fact, Joel may or may not be right about the
camera height. It simply doesn't matter.

6) Would the type of camera make a difference?

None at all.

7) Would Trent get more believable results in his yard or
further out front?

Better results from the yard for 2 reasons. One, it is more
convenient for suspension. Two, the buildings provides a better
frame of reference than blank sky.

8) Would Trent have to be smart to do these things?

No. Nothing could be simpler than hanging an old truck mirror
from a piece of thread and snapping a shot.

9) How would Trent know this would work?

He wouldn't know until he got the pictures back. So what? And
let's not forget that there are frames missing from the
negatives. Perhaps some did NOT turn out!

10) Why would he do it?

A waste of time trying to answer that one. No one knows
another's motives.

So there it is. To make a case against the probability of the
mirror being the object takes a lot more "guesswork" than simply
looking at the practicality of it all.

In short, the damn thing looks like a mirror; Trent had access
and means. To make it more complicated than that is silly.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Rimmer

From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:31:09 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:19:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Rimmer


 >From: Jim Mortellaro  <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:59:21 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Stacy
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:04:27 -0500
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs

 >>Jerry, List

 >>Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if Michael Swords, Bruce
 >>Maccabee, Richard Haines, Tom Deuley, John Schuessler, Ron
 >>Westrum and Peter Sturrock paid any career penalties for their
 >>public involvement with the UFO subject?

 >>Dennis Stacy

 >Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if Dennis Stacey paid
 >any career penalties for his involvement with the UFO subject?

Well he got eased out of editing MUFON Journal for not toeing
the party line, didn't he, and allowing the occasional glimmer
of scientific scepticism through.


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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                     Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson

From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 17:21:29 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:16:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Cuthbertson


 >From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:04:59 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Your panel won't work. Its an attempt to rationally examine an
 >>issue that pummels too many people's belief systems. The
 >>panellists probably won't be able to examine it rationally, and
 >>whatever conclusion they reach won't settle a thing. (Did Condon
 >>settle anything?)

 >This doesn't have anything to do with belief systems if you are
 >referring to religion. It has to do with real vs. fraud. How do
 >you know panelists would not be able to examine it rationally?
 >First of all, the Meier case is irrational to common knowledge
 >of our world. How would you define the words, Fact, Conjecture,
 >Fraud?

Interesting wording: "the Meier case is irrational to common
knowledge of our world". Now, you say just below that you've
witnessed supernatural events. Would you term such events
"irrational to common knowledge of our world"? I sure would!

And yet you say they happened. Meier says his events happened.
At least Meier offers a few photos to back up his story. What do
you offer to back up yours? Why should I believe either one of
you? Maybe you're both charlatans. See?

When it comes to events "irrational to the common knowledge of
our world", whether you're Meier or Nathan Danial, there will be
a tremendous tendency for folks to refuse to believe any of it
because they weren't there themselves and it thoroughly
antagonizes their worldview. Get it yet?

 >I believe and have witnessed supernatural events, miracle
 >healings, and stuff that can't be proved by most scientific
 >standards, but were are not dealing with the intangible here,

That's not as clear to me as it appears to be to you ...

 >were dealing with a conartist who hides the cards whenever you
 >want to get a closer look at his claims. It's the same smoke and
 >mirrors Magicians thrive off of-- illusion--they show you
 >something from a controlled perspective. If you stand near a
 >magician's shoulder, the illusion usually disappears. Slight of
 >hand, trick cards, mirrors and smoke-- ever hear of those
 >things? Magicians are famous for showing you something that
 >isn't really what you think it is.

 >Don't get me wrong. I have a deep belief in supernatural events
 >only because I witnessed them. And I believe that some UFOs
 >could be ET crafts. But it seems like a heck of a lot of cases
 >that have been around for decades have been debunked-- Adamski/
 >The Trent pixs/and more... So what is real in this field? I
 >believed Meier until we examined his case.


The Trent pixs haven't been proven debunked - not yet to me,
anyway. But it is interesting that supernatural events are "OK"
because you were actually there and saw the evidence. Meier
however is a fraud and the Trent photos are bunkum. Of course,
you weren't personally either place at the time ...

Yeah, I understand real well. It looks like the same thing I see
over and over again in the list: reports of events so odd that
only the folks who see them firsthand can accept them. Most
everyone else suspects misperception, delusion, or fraud for
profit. Same song, 3000th verse.

Ya just had to be there, ya know?

 >James Deardorff spins tale after tale in defense of the case
 >with lunatic analyses, then tries to bait fellow researchers
 >into a logical debate based on twisted logic. He will defend
 >Meier's case to the death it appears, because he's embraced the
 >case as his religion. He knows the biggest selling book in the
 >world is the Bible, and his mission is to rewrite it. Deardorff
 >already has done that with the Talmud Jmmanuel. Wonder how his
 >bank roll is building?

Your opinion. I've looked at Deardorff's material. He sounds
like an honest investigator to me. This isn't to say I agree or
disagree with him; I'm just not into formal religion enough to
want to spend time delving into obscure religious detail.

But that last "bank roll" crack speaks more to me about you than
him. If you have facts, spit 'em out. Character deprecation by
indirect accusation is one of those red flags that lights up my
screen big time. I've seen it in threads before; it was ugly
then and its ugly now.


 >Another thing regarding Pleaidian technology: Many cars now have
 >antennas built into the windows. Let's see the Pleaidians are
 >thousands of years more advanced than us puny humans...do the
 >superior Pleaidians use antennas on their spacecrafts? Yes. Just
 >like the toy models, cartoons, and sci-fi comic books of the
 >1940's and 50's. Seems like advanced Pleaidians use old world
 >technology from the 20th century. But wait, James Deardorff and
 >Billy Meier can explain it--the Pleaidians don't want to
 >overload our brains with the sight of technology that is too
 >advanced because we may model it and turn it into a weapon of
 >destruction. Also because when we look at the archaic antenna it
 >gives us dumb humans a feeling of nostalgia and remembrances of
 >our first Sony portable radio. ---

 >The antenna also makes a good device to hang the beamship from
 >when Billy takes his phony pictures.

I'd bet you can still find plenty of antennae on commercial and
military vehicles, aircraft, and spacecraft. Cars aren't
aircraft or spacecraft. If you can prove me wrong though,
feel free. Otherwise, take a breather.

 >Cheers,

 >N. Daniel
 >Official member of the vast right-left wing conspiracy to debunk
 >hoaxer Billy Meier and the Pleaidians (soon to be a rock band.)


I will say one thing for you, Nathan: You sure know how to talk
a thread to death. And the sarcasm is so thick it cloggs your
points the way chlesterol clogs arteries. Your argument flow
would be much better off without it, or at least a bit shorter.

My 2 cents,

-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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:49:39 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:22:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:57 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>Apparently some 'nasty slashes' occurred to the
 >>negatives between 1950 and 1967. The right edge of th first
 >>photo and the left edge of the second photo were cut by someone
 >>years and years ago. (no, the cut edges do not fit together) and
 >>only the newspaper reproductions provide the complete photos.

 >Bruce, Roger, Mac, All:

 >Is it possible, therefore, that there are missing frames from
 >the Trent film roll, frames that never appeared in print? Are
 >there any frame numbers on the negatives?

Physically possible since the negatives aren't numbered and
we can't hold up for examination all the negatives from the
roll the photos were in. (I tried to get Mrs. Trent to find other
pictures during the "heat " of my investigation 25 years ago...
but she never did provide anything else.)

 >Hartmann did measure the density of a portion of the unexposed
 >edge of the film negative, this is listed in one of his tables
 >in Condon.

And so did I.

 >>5) Joel is the first to suggest a truck mirror (other
 >>suggestions have been garbage can lid light shade, pie tin,
 >>paper model, etc.). None of the truck mirrors he suggests has
 >>exactly the same aspect ratio (length to width) or the same
 >off-center "pole" (attachment post on the back of th mirror).

 >There must have been many manufacturers and models of vehicle
 >mirrors in the, say, years from 1930-1950.

Yeah, so what? I never said it would be impossible to fake the
photos. The fact that no one has come up with a commercially
available item that matches in aspect ratio, (width to
thickness), off center pole, etc. doesn't mean much, Can't prove
a negative.... that there is NO device out there that looks like
what they photoed and is also small and light weight enough to
hang. I do know the pie pans won't work (did that investigation
years ago).

Incidently, any object perfectly round won't work either,. The
UO had short straigh segments for edges at the left side of the
image... oddly enough remeniscent of Arnold's Air Force sketches
of the rear ends of the objects he saw!!!

 >>Also, a mirror hanging downward and photograped from below to
 >>give a (nearly, but not exactly!!!) elliptical bottom image as
 >>in photo 1, would provide a mirror reflection of the ground.

 >Evidently, it does. Hartmann's Table B (Scientific Study of
 >Unidentified Flying Objects, Bantam Edition, 1969, p 403) gives
 >densitometry results for different parts of the two negatives.
 >The results are normalized at 1.00 for the sky near the distant
 >horizon at 1.00. Listed here are a few results:

 >Sky at distant horizon -  1.00
 >Shaded bottom of the UFO  .675
 >Foreground underbrush  .417
 >Hill 1     .63
 >Hill 2     .71
 >Garage roof    .489
 >Illuminated metallic tank  .86
 >Shaded bottom of tank  .48>

 >These measurements seem to corroborate your hypothesis
 >that a suspended mirror would reflect the distant terrain.

Would be "violating physics" if the mirror reflection showed
anything but the ground, considering tha the tilt of a
hypithetical nearby object would be small... that is the bottom
surface was nearly horizontal/. Try holding a mirror horizontal
and above your head... look up at it and. what do you see... sky
or ground.

<snip>

 >>6) There is much more to this case than just the photo analysis.
 >>I have long pointed out that it would be possible to fake the
 >>photos. My own "preference" would be for a paper model. This
 >>would require the desire, the time, and the cleverness needed to
 >>make up a photo and a story to go along with it.

 >But a common truck mirror would be a lot simpler an explanation,
 >and would not require such cleverness.

There are lots of things that would be a "simpler explanation"
but not fit the shape of the image.

 >>Anyway, we have the Trents' whole life story to look at now,
 >>since they died several years ago. Anyone wishing to express an
 >>informed opinion of the case should read what I have written and
 >>also get a copy of the only video interview of the Trents, made
 >>in 1995 (2 years before Evelyn died). Contact Terry Halstead at
 >>halstead@pobox.com. Considering that this is the only video
 >>interview of two of the most famous people in UFO history (I bet
 >>that the trent photos have been published more than any others)
 >>-- whether you think them nasty hoaxers or down-to-earth honest
 >>people - this is a UFO collector's item. At the very least the
 >>skeptics will want this video so that they can refute Mrs.
 >>Trent's statements, one by one, and demonstrate how she managed
 >>to bamboozle literally dozens of investigators, interviewers and
 >>just plain interested people for nearly 50 years!

 >And even you?

Yup,. me, Hartmann, Philip Bladine (newspaper editor), Frank
Wormann (banker who probably "owned" the Trents), Bill Powell
(photo editor of the newspaper, did the first investigation of
the photos), etc... see the third paper entry at the web site
for a list of people who were bamboozled.

Of course, you weren't.

 >Clear skies,

Would be nice!








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:56:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:26:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
 >>From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>Hello, one and all...

<snip>

 >>While the author if this page does a good job of illustrating
 >>that Trent's camera angle was not what one would expect, one
 >>must keep in mind that he didn't exactly "expect" to be
 >>photographing a UFO.

 >Mac, Roger:

 >This would be true _if_ Trent did not hoax the pixs. On the
 >other hand, _if_ he was taking a carefully staged pix, it may
 >represent a good explanation for the angles.

 >The really important thing about Joel Carpenter's hypothesis is
 >the possible identity of the object, itself: a truck mirror.
 >This would explain the brightness of the underside (mirror
 >reflecting the sky or distant terrain), and the brightness of
 >the (chromed) upper part. This brightness is what Condon Study
 >investigator William Hartmann thought _could_ indicate that the
 >object was at a distance.

The underside of the mirror "points" downward. It is tilted by a
small angle _toward_ the camera. Hence if it were reflective it
would reflect the _ground_, not the sky. If it reflected the sky
the bottom of the UO would be as bright as the sky (mirror,
remember? Good reflection?)

It is true that the _relative_brightness_ of the bottom of the
UO caught Hartmann's attention (admirable observation
considering that the bottom of the UO appears dark against the
sky background.) What Hartmann noticed was that the bottom of
the UO was darker than the sky but brighter than the nearby
shadows , in particular the shadows under the tank. He noted
that if the UO were a model nearby the bottom would be shaded
from the sky and sun and hence ought to be at least as dark as
the shadows near the bottom of the tank. It was from that
observation that his whole analysis was to spring forth...and
then get criticized by Sheaffer... and then "rectified" by me.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:12:29 -0700
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:40:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:39:46 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:49:23 -0700
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:02:35 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Deardorff

 >Previously, Jim wrote:

 >>In my previous response to you on this list, you'll find the
 >>focal length as obtained by Stevens and listed in his 1982 book
 >>on p. 400. I had written:

 >>"The same limb's left-to-right width, subtended along the
 >>horizontal, is less, about 16 inches. This subtended width
 >>occupies 13% of the 35mm film's width (or length in the film's
 >>along-the-roll direction). Then knowing the camera's focal
 >>length of 42 mm, one finds this blurry limb's distance from the
 >>camera as having been 16 feet. This uses the "camera" equation:

 >>Width of object on 35mm film   Actual width of object
 >>---------------------------- = ----------------------
 >>  focal length in mm           Actual distance from camera

 >>End of quote. I.e., 42 mm focal length.

 >Yes, having gone back over the previous posts, I see that you
 >did mention the focal length as being 42mm. I wish I had seen
 >that earlier as this conversation could have been a lot shorter.
 >...

<snip>

Roger,

Now that you know the focal length, you may go back to the photo
itself and, checking out lengths of the out-of-focus tree
branches on the lower right of photo #57, using dimensions of
spruce/pine/fir/ tree needles/branches, form your own estimate
of how far away this tree branch was. Then let's see how this
fits in with your manual's statements of depth of focus, and
then estimate what the aperture setting may have been.

Jim

http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:58:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:42:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:53 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:13:45 -0400

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Personally, I think you're _way_off_!

 >>What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
 >>four years later?

 >Has the identity of the photographer and the circumstances of
 >this picture ever been established?

Bob,

You ought to read the ending of thr third Trent paper at my web
site... to see the only info we have on the Rouen photo.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas

From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 20:05:12 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:45:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Balaskas


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:19:42 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >Thanks for your comments on this photo. The suggestion of a
 >reflection from the canopy has, of course, been studied. (If I
 >recall correctly it was Dr. Robert Nathan, photoanalyst formerly
 >at JPL,, proposed this explanation years ago. Then rejected it.
 >Nathan also proposed that the sun reflected off some bright
 >object in the cockpit and that this reflection was, in turn,
 >reflected by the cockpit window. This explanation, too, was
 >rejected.)

Hi Bruce.

Did Dr. Robert Nathan publish his reasons for rejecting the
possibility that the UFO in the photo was a reflection of the
Sun, including a multiple reflection of the Sun off other
instruments within the cockpit? If so, I would be interested to
read on how he came to this conclusion. I think you will agree
that one should never rule out any possibility simply on the
opinion of a single person, even if he is a photoanalyst (or
just me).

 >(Your mention of his later claim that he "believes in UFOs"
 >suggests that you would accept the hoax explanation. That is
 >your decision. I reject the hoax explanation. He was completely
 >coperative in providing all the information he could including
 >the original slide - which had been lost in James MacDonald's
 >files for many years before I contacted Childerhose. If he had
 >known it was a reflection it seems to me that he would have been
 >worried that my investigation of the original slide would
 >discover his hoax)

What criteria do you use to reject the possibility of a hoax?
Can it ever be ruled out in single witness testimonies? I agree
that my comments allow for the possibility that the pilot could
have been involved in an intentional hoax but my thoughts at the
time I wrote them was that the pilot's testimony could have been
simply an honest interpretation of what he believed to be a UFO
in one of the several photos he took after he got his pictures.

One colleague who saw both of the photos in your paper made some
interesting comments which I think should be considered. First,
he said that if he was the pilot and had such an close encounter
with a large luminous UFO, he would have done more than just
roll his aircraft to take a single photo which may not have
turned out good. Second, he made a comment on how unexpected
dark the CF-86 jets looked in the other photo considering they
were flying above the clouds and are highly reflective aircraft.
He went on to propose that if one of these other aircraft were
at the right location and orientation relative to the Sun and
the pilot who took the photo, this aircraft would seem to
momentarily brighten to an intensity comparible to the Sun (much
like an Iridium satellite flash that others have may have
identified as a UFO). On film the aircraft would appear as a
featureless blob of light but it would retain the width and
height ratio of the CF-86, which the UFO in the photo seems to
do.

 >The lack of other witnesses is not necessarily a good argument
 >against the reality of the bright "thing" as an "object out
 >there" in the sky.

It would help though, especially since this UFO was not your
typicial inconspicuous daylight disk but a large luminous object
comparible to the brightness of the Sun. Just remember that even
a small mirror will attract the attention of the few people in a
large (say 100 square miles) area of wilderness by person who is
lost.*

 >We don't know what the cloud cover underneath the bright object
 >was. Perhaps there was a dense layer at 5000 ft or so, This was,
 >after all, a huge tunderstorm with associated clouds.
 >Furthermore, it occurred over an area of low population,. We
 >don't know how long this bright object was in the sky, maybe for
 >only a few minutes. Had someone seen it he/she might have
 >assoiated it with lightning phenomena related to the storm. And,
 >lastly, even if someone had seen it and said "Aha, a UFO," said
 >person would have a relatively high probability of not reporting
 >it.

 >So, for these reasons I accept the reality of an object..."out
 >there."

Considering all these things you mention above which we do not
know, I would say these are just additional reasons to doubt the
reality that a true UFO was out there.

Since the luminous UFO in the photo the CF-86 pilot took seems
to be surrounded by clouds in shadow, how would you account that
they could remain so dark if there was a very bright UFO in
their vicinity? Wouldn't these clouds facing the UFO be bright
much like the clouds facing the Sun are as I mentioned in my
original reply? I still think the reflection of sunlight off the
aircraft canopy makes more sense. A large bright UFO near or
within the clouds is not supported by what is observed in the
photo.

Nick Balaskas

*Sometime in the early 1980's during a flight from Toronto to
Los Angeles I saw a very bright spot on the ground from my
airplane window. I could not figure out at the time why it
remained so bright for so long - impossible for a stationary
mirror. I noted its location and sometime after I returned home
I discovered that there was a large multiple mirror solar energy
collection structure located there. When one mirror or set of
mirrors were no longer at the correct angle to reflect light
from the Sun towards my airplane as it moved across the sky,
then another mirror or set of mirrors would be. I really wanted
it this to be a luminous UFO which had landed in the western
U.S. desert below but it turned out to be something much less
exciting.

P.S. There is an excellent review article in the August 15 issue
of EOS, the newspaper of the American Geophysical Union, about
Blue Jets, Red Sprites (with tendrils), Elves (expanding disks
up to 100 km or more in size), Upward Superbolts (not yet
confirmed by science) and many other transient luminous
atmospheric events that are now accepted as real by scientists
in only the past decade or so. Maybe the photo of the luminous
UFO taken by the Canadian CF-86 pilot could have been a yet
unknown atmospheric phenomena, possibly not unlike the bright
lights seen by several commercial pilots over the night skies
near Toronto a while back which one Russian scientist seemed to
think could be evidence for his "geophysical meteors".








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:02:54 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:50:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>I "happened" upon a site regarding the Trent photos that, in my
 >>opinion, pretty much drives the nail in a coffin well worn from
 >>being opened and closed too many times. Readers know my past
 >>opinions on the photos. After looking at this site, I am now
 >>convinced that they're fake..

 >>Take a look for yourselves:

 >>http://www.ufx.org/mcminn/photo.htm

 >>Make sure that you also go all the way to the end for links to
 >>other photos. (most important!)



<snip>

 >As I have pointed out before, density readings of a photographed
 >object don't really amount to much unless you know the original
 >reflective properties of the object as a baseline for
 >comparison.

The shadowed bottom of the object is much too light to be explained as a
nearby object no matter what you assume about its reflectively. That's all
you really need to know. It would have to be "whiter than white", i.e. have
a reflectively greater than 100% if illuminated by ambient lighting.

The only way out of this that I can see would be to supply an
artificial light source, such as a spotlight on the ground
underneath the object to supply the extra needed light.

But that's not your argument, is it, so why should I argue this
for you?

 >Most importantly, simply knowing the reflective
 >properties of the object are not enough. If the same conditions,
 >lighting, film, processing, paper, etc are not present, then the
 >_exact_ same object will give different readings in a second set
 >of photos. If the object were a mirror, then that would change
 >things tremendously, as unknown factors come into play regarding
 >what is reflected, whether the mirror's surface was dirty and
 >diffused, etc. Density readings allow for an educated guess; but
 >a guess, none the less.

A mirror facing the ground and only about 7 feet off the ground
would reflect darkened ground whether the mirror was dirty and
diffused or whether it was clean and specular. Or are we
supposed to suspend laws of physics here to satisfy your
religious beliefs?

 >Continuing, Bruce wrote:

 >>1) the first photo of Paul Trent DOES show the left (southwest)
 >>corner of the house at the right hand side,

<snip>

 >>This has an impact on Joel's computer model (scroll down on his
 >>page) where he shows the field of view of the first photo (white
 >>rectangle) superimposed on Hartmann's 1967 photo of the scene.
 >>Note that Joel's field of view rectangle on the SECOND photo
 >>does show the corner of the house.

 >A distinction without a difference, really. The point is whether
 >or not Trent was in his back yard and if your info impacts the
 >ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from a piece of
 >sewing thread.

 >It doesn't.

 >>2) I don't think the camera was as low as Joel assumes based on
 >>my estimate of where, on the photo, was the horizon.

 >Again, another distinction without a difference. The point is
 >whether or not Trent was in his back yard

No, the point is not whether Trent was or was not in his back
yard. Talk about a pointless point.

 >and if your info
 >impacts the ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from a
 >piece of sewing thread.

Does any of your info impact the ability of Trent to shoot a
distant object from his backyard?

 >It doesn't.

It doesn't.

 >Unfortunately we don't know how Trent
 >typically held the camera to take pictures and hence we don't
 >know how he would be most likely to be holding the camera if
 >taking a picture of a slowly moving object at some distance
 >under these circumstances.

 >ll very true. But the point is still whether or not Trent was
 >in his back yard and if your info impacts the ability of Trent
 >to shoot a mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread.

 >It doesn't.

More inanity. Earth to Roger. The point is not whether Trent was
in his backyard. Trent was in his backyard. He could film either
a model close up or an object in the distance from his backyard.
Am I going to fast for you here?

Here's the _real_ point. If this was a car mirror suspended form
a thread, then there should be clear signatures in the photos
themselves that this was a mirror suspended from a thread.

First of all, where's the thread? Trent was only about 16-18
feet from the overhead power lines (the logical suspension
point) if this was a model. If he used typical sewing thread,
then it would be detectable on the negatives assuming it had
some contrast against the background. But there is no evidence
of thread, none at all. This either means there was no thread,
or Trent cleverly chose a thread of about the same lightness as
the background, meaning that there is insufficient contrast to
find it on the negatives.

So when you keep saying it was a "mirror hanging from a piece of
sewing thread", you are merely stating one of your usual
unsupported opinions. It is not a statement of fact, even if you
repeat yourself 100 times. It _might_ be true, but it currently
isn't supported by any evidence.

Next, where's the evidence of sag in the overhead power lines
from the weight of a car mirror? You are now talking about
something relatively heavy compared to a paper plate or aluminum
tart pan, which would cause no sag of any significance. The
power lines the Trents ran to the garage were not heavy duty.
They were used to light a single light bulb in the garage and
light in front of the garage. The answer is there is no
noticeable sag in the power lines, a point Brad Sparks made.

That's strikes two against a "mirror hanging from a piece of
sewing thread."

Strike three is the fact that "a mirror hanging from a piece of
sewing thread" about 7-8 feet feet off the ground and thus
showing a cross section of the bottom of the mirror to a camera
3 to 4 feet off the ground and about 16-18 feet away will
definitely be reflecting light coming from the nearby ground
(not distant sky or ground cover). Assuming that the object was
circular (like one of those alleged old "car mirrors"), simple
trig indicates that the camera was at an angle of about 22
degrees relative to the bottom of the mirror. In about the
best-case dubunking scenario with the camera only 3 feet from
the ground (or 5 feet beneath the "mirror" if it was at 8 feet
above the ground) and 16 feet away, only about 18 deg. of this
22 deg. can be accounted for by a mirror parallel to the ground
and being viewed from underneath.

How do you get those extra 4 degrees of tilt needed to reproduce
the image? Well the mirror could be tilted 4 degrees more
_toward_ the camera, meaning by laws of simple reflection (you
aren't going to suspend physical laws again on us, are you
Roger), that the light would be coming from ground very close in
front of the mirror. In fact, with a little more simple trig, or
just drawing yourself a simple picture on a piece of graph
paper, the light would be coming from a plot of ground only
about 16 feet in front of the suspension point.

I've been to the Trent place twice Roger, once in April and once
in June. It nothing but lush, dark green grass growing there.
This is western Oregon. It rains a _lot_ there. And in 1950,
according to newspaper stories from local newspapers I checked,
this had been one of the rainiest years on record.

Well that's three strikes and you're out of there Roger!

Roger, over and out, Roger.

 >>I would place the altitude of the camera 6" to 1
 >>foot higher than Joel.

 >Okay. But the point is still whether or not Trent was in his
 >back yard and if your info impacts the ability of Trent to shoot
 >a mirror hanging from a piece of sewing thread.

 >It doesn't.

One gets the feeling sometimes that you're one of those people
who buys self-improvement tapes and then repeats motivational
phrases to yourself hundreds of times while standing in front of
a mirror (suspended by a sewing thread perhaps?).

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat yourself if you have
nothing to back up your arguments. You never have, and probably
never will.

 >>it is true that
 >>Trent walked southward into the back yard quite a distance.

 >Okay, so Trent _was_ in his backyard for some reason. Does this
 >info impact the ability of Trent to shoot a mirror hanging from
 >a piece of sewing thread?

It doesn't.

Etc., etc., yawn, Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.


 >>Also, a mirror hanging downward and photograped from below to
 >>give a (nearly, but not exactly!!!) elliptical bottom image as
 >>in photo 1, would provide a mirror reflection of the ground. The
 >>image of the bottom of the UFO is large enough so that a mirror
 >>reflection of the ground should have been apparent.

 >This is a _real_ stretch, Bruce. The Trent photos are not clear
 >enough to see detail in the UFO itself,

Now let's see if I've got this straight. "The Trent photos are
not clear enough to see detail in the UFO." But at the same time
they show a nearby "mirror suspended by a sewing thread." If
they were nearby and a car mirror on a ball pivot joint, they
should be showing all sorts of detail proving exactly that,
including a clear image of the ball joint itself and the frame
around the mirror on the bottom.

But they don't. This can't be merely explained away by being out
of focus because the camera was focused at infinity. If the
mirror was only 16 feet away, it would be only slightly out of
focus. (By comparison, the rear of the oil tank against the
garage in photo 2 is only about 25 feet away, and the details
are very clear.) The surrounding frame of the "mirror" holding
the mirror in place would still be easily discernible, e.g.,
even with a slightly defocused image. But the bottom of the
object is absolutely even in lightness. There is no indication,
not even the slightest, of the surrounding frame that would have
to be there to hold the mirror in place.

And that brings us to the next point:

 >much less reflections of
 >the ground. In fact, the bare ground isn't even that sharp.

Well lets do a little more math. Assume in the best case
scenario the mirror is suspended only 16 feet away and 4 feet
above the camera (to optimize bottom showing to the camera).
Then the spot of ground reflecting towards the camera is 16 feet
in front of that (from law of specular reflection). The total
distance along the hypoteneuses is about 33 feet. For a camera
focused at infinity (to produce maximum blur to your car
mirror), 33 feet is going to be sharply in focus (remember the
garage and oil tank at similar distances with sharp details?).

Grass is not absolutely even in texture. The mirror is going to
being reflecting an image of the grass and we should be seeing
significant variations in the lightness on the bottom of the
object.

But we don't.

Roger's next weasel to try to avoid this physical fact would
probably be what he stated at the beginning of his post:

"If the object were a mirror, then that would change things
tremendously, as unknown factors come into play regarding what
is reflected, whether the mirror's surface was dirty and
diffused, etc. Density readings allow for an educated guess; but
a guess, none the less."

In other words, Roger would probably argue, "But we don't know
that the mirror was specular. It could have been dirty and
diffused, etc., etc., in which case the variation in lightness
across the bottom could have been even."

"Very true Roger," I respond. "But if it's not specular, then
why are you arguing it must be a mirror and not a paper plate
with a piece of paper glued across the bottom? That would form a
natural diffuse surface, whereas you would expect a specular one
from a 'car mirror.' Furthermore, a light paper plate would not
deflect the overhead wires like a heavy 'car mirror.' It would
be a hoax object that better fits that actual observed details
of the photos."

"And finally, Roger, whether a mirror or a paper plate, specular
or diffuse, a model with the observed bottom showing relative to
the camera is definitely reflecting light primarily from the
nearby dark ground and should be much darker than it is."

"Unless Roger, like a true pelicanist, you wish to suspend laws
of physics just to suit your religious beliefs."

<Internal dialog mode off>

<snip>

 >There is nothing in Bruce's analysis to preclude the mirror from
 >being the most likely "truth" of all that have been discussed to
 >date.

 >In fact, here's what we don't know:

 >1) We don't know how far away the object is.

To explain the light bottom and lack of details without jumping
through a million contortions of logic and suspending physical
low, the most economical explanation is a distant object with
contrast reduced, shadows lightened, and details reduced by
atmospheric haze.

But if you want to believe it _must_ be a side view car mirror,
which in Joel Carpenter's example was 4 to 5 inches across, then
the object would be roughly 15-20 feet away. But then what
happened to all the detail in the alleged car mirror and why is
the bottom so bright?

2) We don't know the reflective properties of the object.

You insist it was a car mirror, meaning ordinarily specular.
Whether specular or "dirty" and diffuse in its reflecting
properties, it would be picking up light from nearby dark grass
and appear much darker than what we see in the photos.

3) We don't know why Trent would be in his back yard to shoot a
real UFO.

Perhaps because he lived there and Mrs. Trent called him from
the back yard?

 >4) We don't know how Trent held his camera.

I presume he held it in his hands. He could have taken the
photos standing up looking down through an overhead view finder
or crouching looking through the direct viewfinder. He would get
the same pictures.

 >5) We don't know how tall Trent is.

It really doesn't make a helluva lot of difference.

 >6) We don't know what color his socks were.

We do know what color the grass was: dark green. That would be
the source of the light for "a truck mirror" and would make the
bottom of the "truck mirror" much darker than what is actually
seen in the photo.

 >However, we do know this:

 >The pictures sure look like a truck mirror hanging from a piece of
 >sewing thread!

And we do know this. After your endless boring mantra of "a
truck mirror hanging from a piece of thread.," you have provided
zero evidence to support either a thread or a "truck mirror."
The best evidence is from the pictures themselves, and they
simply do not support it.

So after all this, we are merely back to your expression of
personal religious belief.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Eros' Square Craters - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:38:46 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:52:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Eros' Square Craters - Gates


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:09:38 -0400
 >From: Ron Cecchini <Ron.Cecchini@GD-CS.COM>
 >Subject: Eros' Square Craters
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 > (Sorry.  I couldn't resist.)

 >.....

 >From: NASA Science News
 >Subject: Square Craters

 >NASA Science News for September 26, 2000

 >NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft has spotted square-shaped
 >craters on asteroid Eros, a telltale sign of mysterious
 >goings-on in the asteroid belt long ago.

Ah Ha, you have just uncovered proof of Hoagland's mars
conspiracy because just everybody knows that their is absolutly
nothing that is "square" or "round" found in nature, therefore
it is a giant pattern that illustates that those craters were
dug by alien caterpiller diggers many eons ago, when they used
such simple technology as we use now......   :)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                        Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:42:51 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:55:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims - Gates


 >Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:34:34 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Nathan G. Daniel <7starspublishing@onemain.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 12:02:05 -0700
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >This post from Nathan Daniel was so rife with false claims and
 >distortions as to make Korff proud. Here was one of them:

 >>Did you hear that Meier claimed that he was Jesus' savior? ...

 >Totally false.

 >>(Meier claimed that one of his pals socked Jesus in the face
 >>and Billy put an end to it.)

 >Meier claimed no such thing. The man with Meier at the time did
 >NOT sock "Jesus" in the face and was no "pal" of Meier. The
 >episode as it was actually reported is contained within Meier's
 >Contact Notes, though in a section that Stevens deemed either
 >too sensitive or too lengthy to reproduce in his Vols. 1-4 of
 >_Message from the Pleiades_.

 >Finally, do you realize that I've asked twice what it was you
 >supplied Korff with, which he calls in his book (p. 83) "the
 >most significant analysis of the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' of this
 >writing"? And which he summarized by saying that UV "even
 >discovered evidence proving that the 'Talmud of Jmmanuel' does
 >not contain Aramaic!"? So far you've failed to respond. Does
 >that mean you now understand that a translation of an Aramaic
 >document into German contains words written in German, not
 >Aramaic?

 >Jim Deardorff
 >http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj

I think you guys are just Korff baiting with this thread if you
ask 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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                Politics of UFOs/Disclosure Town Hall Meeting

From: Steven G. Bassett <ExPPAC@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 03:56:56 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:04:22 -0400
Subject: Politics of UFOs/Disclosure Town Hall Meeting


Politics of UFOs/Disclosure Town Hall Meeting in Santa Clara

X-PPAC
Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political Action Committee
_______________

Press Release  September 27, 2000

Washington, DC - As announced Tuesday evening on Coast to Coast
AM with Mike Siegel, The Extraterrestrial Phenomena Political
Action Committee (X-PPAC), with the support of numerous
co-sponsors, will hold a town hall meeting confronting the
politics of UFOs/disclosure at the Santa Clara Convention Center
at Great America on October 13, 2000. Additional sub-themes such
as secrecy reform and intelligence agencies abuse, will also be
addressed.

This will be the first town hall meeting of its kind ever held
during a presidential campaign, or perhaps at any time, in the
United States. Between 600 and 1200 citizens will be able to
address unscripted questions to a broad panel of experienced
members of the UFO/ET research/activist movement, political
professionals, and campaign 2000 presidential/senate candidates
(should they agree to appear).

The Politics of UFOs/Disclosure Town Hall Meeting at Santa Clara
will have some similarities to the many town hall meetings
conducted by ABC Nightline on a range of issues over the past
two decades. Additional information is available at the Town
Hall Webpage [www.x-ppac.org/TownHall.html].

Formal invitations to appear were sent to seven presidential and
three California Senate campaigns on September 13. Seven
possible dates were provided for consideration, and negotiations
were begun immediately. As of this press release, three
presidential campaigns (Democrat, Republican and Constitution)
and two California Senate campaigns (Republican and Green) have
declined the invitation. Negotiation with five other campaigns
continues.

In addition to candidates there will other presenters and
surprise guests. These include: Frances Barwood (via videotape),
Stephen Bassett, Barry Bitzer, Elaine Douglas, Peter Gersten,
Heather Harder, Richard Hoagland, Daniel Sheehan (via
videotape), Ron Regehr, and Alfred Webre. Others are expected
and will be announced at a later time.

The role of X-PPAC is to assist in driving political action,
educate the political leadership, raise public awareness, and
create a partnership between the American people and their
government as regards the most important event in human history.

Contact: Stephen Bassett - 301-564-1820
_______________________________________________

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








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Felder

From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 08:46:38 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:09:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Felder


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:49:39 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >Incidently, any object perfectly round won't work either,. The
 >UO had short straigh segments for edges at the left side of the
 >image... oddly enough remeniscent of Arnold's Air Force sketches
 >of the rear ends of the objects he saw!


Well, there's the problem! It is pelicans!

Sorry....couldn't resist  :)

Bobbie

Bobbie "Jilain" Felder
   --->backwoods of Mississippi
   --->USA
   --->planet Earth
   --->somewhere in the cosmos

http://www.jilain.com
Horizons Radio
IRC Undernet #chariots
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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Kaeser

From: Steve W. Kaeser <Steve@konsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:51:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:30:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Kaeser


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:17:21 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca <mailto:updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >So there it is. To make a case against the probability of the
 >mirror being the object takes a lot more "guesswork" than simply
 >looking at the practicality of it all.

 >In short, the damn thing looks like a mirror; Trent had access
 >and means. To make it more complicated than that is silly.

 >Roger

I think that it has been accepted that it was possible to fake
the photos involved, but most of us would want to take it
further than simply a possibility (which you further speculate
is a probability).  Of course, this analysis only looks at the
images and ignores the witness statements and the statements of
investigators who have examined their involvement in this matter
for years.

Unfortunately, this genre requires the proverbial "smoking gun"
to resolve issues of dispute, and that simply isn't seen in the
information being provided. More information to review as the
case is re-examined, but nothing that would put this matter to
rest and allow us to close the book on this particular sighting.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:37:04 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:34:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:02:54 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:50:25 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak

Previously, I wrote:

 >>As I have pointed out before, density readings of a photographed
 >>object don't really amount to much unless you know the original
 >>reflective properties of the object as a baseline for
 >>comparison.


David replies:

 >The shadowed bottom of the object is much too light to be explained as a
 >nearby object no matter what you assume about its reflectively. That's all
 >you really need to know. It would have to be "whiter than white", i.e. have
 >a reflectively greater than 100% if illuminated by ambient lighting.

 >The only way out of this that I can see would be to supply an
 >artificial light source, such as a spotlight on the ground
 >underneath the object to supply the extra needed light.

 >But that's not your argument, is it, so why should I argue this
 >for you?

Agreed. You have no idea what was reflected in the bottom of the
mirror so why argue about something that you don't know and have
no baseline for comparison.


Continuing, David wrote:

 >A mirror facing the ground and only about 7 feet off the ground
 >would reflect darkened ground whether the mirror was dirty and
 >diffused or whether it was clean and specular. Or are we
 >supposed to suspend laws of physics here to satisfy your
 >religious beliefs?

Boy, is this boring. Again, you have no idea what was reflected
in the bottom of the mirror so why argue about something that
you don't know and have no baseline for comparison. There are no
laws of physics to apply here as you have no baseline for
comparison. Can't you understand this?


Continuing, David wrote:

 >Trent was in his backyard. He could film either
 >a model close up or an object in the distance from his backyard.

At least we agree on something!

Moving on, David declares:

 >Here's the _real_ point. If this was a car mirror suspended form
 >a thread, then there should be clear signatures in the photos
 >themselves that this was a mirror suspended from a thread.

 >First of all, where's the thread? Trent was only about 16-18
 >feet from the overhead power lines (the logical suspension
 >point) if this was a model. If he used typical sewing thread,
 >then it would be detectable on the negatives assuming it had
 >some contrast against the background. But there is no evidence
 >of thread, none at all. This either means there was no thread,
 >or Trent cleverly chose a thread of about the same lightness as
 >the background, meaning that there is insufficient contrast to
 >find it on the negatives.

Let me get ths straight, David: For you to believe that the
mirror was hung with thread, you'd have to see it in the
negatives. For that to happen, a black or dark thread would have
to be used against a white sky. Now, by your own admission, a
white thread ("cleverly chosen") that had no contrast against a
white sky would not show up, as evidensed by the lack of visible
support in the photos.

Let me ask you: How clever do you have to be to know NOT to use
black thread against a white sky? Granted, there is no guarantee
that using a white thread will work. However, YOU seem to think
that it would. Why wouldn't Trent? Oh, that's right. He's not as
"clever" as you. Only YOU would know not to use a black thread
against a white sky. Duh!

David rages on:

 >So when you keep saying it was a "mirror hanging from a piece of
 >sewing thread", you are merely stating one of your usual
 >unsupported opinions. It is not a statement of fact, even if you
 >repeat yourself 100 times. It _might_ be true, but it currently
 >isn't supported by any evidence.

Sure it is, David. You just gave it support in the above
paragraph when you suggested:

 >Trent cleverly chose a thread of about the same lightness as
 >the background, meaning that there is insufficient contrast to
 >find it on the negatives.

Therefore it IS possible to suspend the mirror without
detection. Now all we need is another mirror that looks like the
one in the Trent photos. Oh! That's right, we DO!

Painfully, David asks:

 >Next, where's the evidence of sag in the overhead power lines
 >from the weight of a car mirror? You are now talking about
 >something relatively heavy compared to a paper plate or aluminum
 >tart pan, which would cause no sag of any significance. The
 >power lines the Trents ran to the garage were not heavy duty.
 >They were used to light a single light bulb in the garage and
 >light in front of the garage. The answer is there is no
 >noticeable sag in the power lines, a point Brad Sparks made.

Frankly this is an often repeated dumb and desperate point.
There is NO reason that Trent would have to use the power lines
for suspension. Also, even if that were the case, a mirror
weighs virtually nothing. The power lines wouldn't even show an
effect of such negligable weight. And, by the way, this is a
fact, not my opinion.

David writes:

 >That's strikes two against a "mirror hanging from a piece of
 >sewing thread."

Wrong on both counts, David. All you've done so far is prove
that you guys are still desperately guessing and have now tried
to introduce unrelated information in an effort to confuse the
issue.

Regarding possible reflections, David offers:

 >I've been to the Trent place twice Roger, once in April and once
 >in June. It nothing but lush, dark green grass growing there.
 >This is western Oregon. It rains a _lot_ there. And in 1950,
 >according to newspaper stories from local newspapers I checked,
 >this had been one of the rainiest years on record.

Okay, so it rained alot. Okay, so you went there in April and
and June. Okay, so there's grass growing there now. What is
important is that you were NOT there when Trent took the
pictures and landscape changes a lot over time. I have pictures
of my parents house taken 40 years ago and there is nothing but
white dirt in the photos where now stands a perfect, green lawn.
Most importantly, working farms and rural homestead plots
usually had little grass due to animals, foot traffic, wagons,
general traffic, etc.

The bottom line is you are STILL operating on assumptions, so my
counter-assuptions about the ground are just as valid! Neither
of us was there when the photos were shot, so why argue about
it?

David writes:

 >Now let's see if I've got this straight. "The Trent photos are
 >not clear enough to see detail in the UFO." But at the same time
 >they show a nearby "mirror suspended by a sewing thread." If
 >they were nearby and a car mirror on a ball pivot joint, they
 >should be showing all sorts of detail proving exactly that,
 >including a clear image of the ball joint itself and the frame
 >around the mirror on the bottom.

 >But they don't. This can't be merely explained away by being out
 >of focus because the camera was focused at infinity.

Holy cow! Hold the presses! David must have, indeed, been there
when Trent shot the photos! He knows that the camera was focused
to infinity! Before we go any further, David, you MUST back up
that statement. How the HELL do you know that the camera was
focused to infinity? We'll discuss depth of field issues after
that...

For the record, I never said that the mirror was out of focus. I
simply stated what is true: The photos are not very good and
don't have much detail. If the mirror were moving slightly, then
detail would be obscured. After all, much has been made of the
limited 50th of second shutter speed fo the Roamer I camera.
Furthermore, if the camera were hand held, things in the
foreground would be more affected by hand movement than things
in the distance. In all, there are a variety reasons why the
photos are not very good. However, the main point remains:
They're good enough to tell that the thing hanging out there
looks like a truck mirror!

Finally, David attempts to put words in my mouth by writing:

 >In other words, Roger would probably argue, "But we don't know
 >that the mirror was specular. It could have been dirty and
 >diffused, etc., etc., in which case the variation in lightness
 >across the bottom could have been even."

In all, not a bad way of putting, actually!

David then replies to himself:

 >"Very true Roger," I respond. "But if it's not specular, then
 >why are you arguing it must be a mirror and not a paper plate
 >with a piece of paper glued across the bottom?

Uh... because it looks exactly like the photo of the truck
mirror? Sheesh...

Continuing, David writes:

 >Furthermore, a light paper plate would not
 >deflect the overhead wires like a heavy 'car mirror.' It would
 >be a hoax object that better fits that actual observed details
 >of the photos."

You guys and the damn power lines. Get real. The power lines
don't have to be involved and wouldn't be affected, even if they
were. This is nothing but a diversion from the real issue at
hand: The thing in the Trent photos looks like the truck mirror
and would produce the same results if suspended from a white
piece of sewing thread; a technique that you admit would work
(and apparently has!).

Finally, David writes:

 >"Unless Roger, like a true pelicanist, you wish to suspend laws
 >of physics just to suit your religious beliefs."

 >And we do know this. After your endless boring mantra of "a
 >truck mirror hanging from a piece of thread.," you have provided
 >zero evidence to support either a thread or a "truck mirror."
 >The best evidence is from the pictures themselves, and they
 >simply do not support it.

 >So after all this, we are merely back to your expression of
 >personal religious belief.


Uh, what's with the "pelicanist" and "religious beliefs"
nonsense?

Am I the one ignoring obvious photographic evidence of the truck
mirror?

No.

Am I the one reduced to making assumptions about imcomplete date
because I have no baseline for comparison?

No.

Am I the one trying to smokescreen the facts by focusing on
information such as the powelines that has NOTHING to do with
the discussion?

No.

Am I the one that hangs on to a belief despite obvious visual
evidence to the contrary?

No.

In all, David, name calling is the last refuge for the
defenseless. Have you reached that point so quickly?

Insults not withstanding, I will play your game:

On the one hand, you seem to feel that the data from the photos
regarding reflections and density readings is conclusive,
despite the obvious fact that there is NO baseline for
comparison; only assumtions. Yet more obvious data (such as the
fact that the object looks EXACTLY like a truck mirror) is
ignored, even though there IS a basis for comparison!

Certainly, you have better reasoning powers than that! After
all, you are clever enough to know that white sewing thread
would be perfect to hang the truck mirror from.

Gee. I wonder if Mrs. Trent could have possible had any white
cotton sewing thread...

Nah! That's crazy talk!

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                          Another UFO Fighter Plane

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:48:02 -0500
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:35:18 -0400
Subject: Another UFO Fighter Plane


List,

All you fans of military UFOs should check out the following:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2000/news_release_000927n.htm

Click on the picture at top to enlarge. You can also download a
short video of the thing in flight.

Also a picture of Boeing's UCAV pilotless plane in today's NY
Times.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:47:29 -0400
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:45:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:02:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:51:28 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

 >>>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

I agree with David Rudiak's calculations presented in his most
recent post:.

Lets go Full Monte Hoax Trent Photos Blowout and assume a 4" (or
5") diameter mirror hanging from ANY suspension (you pick it) at
a particular distance such that the round (Perfectly Round)
mirror makes an image 2.92 mm wide (see Figure 6 of the third
Trent paper at brumac.8k.com/papers). Now, what might that
distance be, hmmm? Not the distances that have been discussed
before. The focal length of the camera we now know (Thanks to
Carpenter and others... see near the end of the third Trent
paper) was about 101 mm. Hence to get a 2.92 mm wide image from
a round mirror, viewed obliquely so that the mirror looks like a
PERFECT ellipse (but the UO image is not a perfect
ellipse....see Figure 6... oh, well, let's do it anyway)

4" x 101mm/2.92mm = 138" = 11.5 ft
(If a 5" diameter mirror the distance was =14.4 ft) This is the
radial distance from the camera lens to the UO hanging from a
"skyhook" ( a real flying saucer came along and dropped down a
suspension to hang the model from. HAHAHAHAHA.... uh oh, here
they come to take me away.... again.....)

Assume also that the mirror was 8 ft above the ground and the
camera was at low waist height of 3 ft (remember, full monte
hoax blowout hypothesis; my own belief is that the camera was 40
or more inches above ground)

Now we have a triangle with the line of sight from the camea to
the UO forming a hypotenuse of 11.5 ft (or 14.4 ft) and a
vertical rise underneath the UO of 8 - 3 = 5 ft. The angle
(ooops, trigonometry here, sorry folks) would be arcsin(5/11.5)
= 25.8. This is the angle between the line of sight and any
HORIZONTAL surface, such as the bottom surface of the
hypothetical mirror, IF it were parallel to the ground (most
likely if suspended by a thread attached to a "pole" at the
center of the back od the mirror frame).

Hmmm, amusing.

IF this were a round mirror, the ratio of the minor axis to the
major axis of the (nearly!!) elliptical image of the UO bottom
would correspond to a tilt of the flat mirror surface with
respect to the LINE OF SIGHT from the camera to the center of
the UO image of (more trigonometry) arcsin(.35) = 21 degrees
(about) where .35 is the ratio of the minor axis (vertical width
of the ellipse) to the major axis (length).

That means that if the mirror surface were horizontal the angle
from the camera to the center of the mirror (or vice versa)
would be 21 degrees, not 25.8.

But we just calculated 25.8 degrees as the angle between the
line of sight and the surface of a HORIZONTAL mirror (mirror
surface parallel with the ground). That means the assumption
about the height of the mirror above the camera must be wrong.
The angle calculated from height and distance can be LESS than
21, but not more,.

What about the 5" mirror assumption at 14.4 ft?

Now the angle of elevation of the mirror above the camera would
be arcsin(5'/14.4') = 20.3. This is close.

Make it 5.15 ft and get 20.95 which is close enough to 21..
Alternatively we could "save" the 4" mirror hyopthesis by
reducing the altitude difference from 5 ft to, say, 4.1 ft (UO 7
ft above ground, camera 3 ft above ground) arcsin (4.1'/11.5') =
20.9 degrees . Close enough

(Note to Rudiak and Sparks: previously we have "mixed
hypotheses" ... which, like mixed metaphors, is a dangerous
thing. Previously we used distances like 16 ft from the camera
to the UO suspension point if a model because that was what came
out from our calculations. This resulted in the angle from the
camera to the bottom of a model UO being smaller than 21 degrees
(e.g., 5 ft rise but 16 ft horizontal distance corresponds to 17
degrees). We made up the difference between 21 and the elevation
of the sighting line by assuming the UO was tilted toward the
camera by a small amount. (e.g. 21 - 17 = 4 degree tilt of
bottom of UO). Naturally I was surprised to find that the "full
monte truck mirror blowout hypothesis" resulted in a distance
short enough that there is no tilt of the UO required.!! Not
that it matters. HAHAHA)

SO: we could have a 4" mirror 4.1' up and 11.5' radially away
which is 11.5cos(20.3) = 10.8 ft horizontal measure

or we could have a 5" mirror, 5.15' up and 14.4' radially away
from the camera which is 14.4 cos(20.3) = 13.5' horizontal
measure

There is a "small" thing about a mirror: a light ray incident at
some angle, say A, on the surface (angle measured between the
ray and the surface) will bounce off at the SAME angle (angle of
reflection =angle of incidence.... a fact that some skeptics
seem to have ignored or not understood).

Thus, with a horizontal mirror, a light ray FROM the camera to
the mirror making an angle of 21 degrees with the mirror surface
would bounce off making another ang;le of 21 degrees. Since the
initially the ray is going upward from the camera to the surface
the reflection will go downward. But downward is toward the
ground.

Those of you who understand what is going on here will realize
immediately from the symmetry of the situation that the light
ray would pass through a point at the same distance as the
camera is from the mirror and at the same altitude as the camera
is below the mirror. I hope the little sketch below comes out
(try variable or fixed font to make it work)

Thus the ray will pass through a point 3' up from the ground
and 21.6' from the camera (if the 4" mirror is used as below)
and continue down another 3 ft and picking up another
3ft/tan(21) = 7.8 ft of horizontal distance before it hits the
ground at 10.8+7.8 = 18.6 ft from below the mirror or
10.8 + 18.6 = 29.4 ft from the camera.



                                        4" mirror
                     _ _ _ _ _ _  _____    _  _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _
               21 deg angle     *           21 degree angle
                               *                          *
                    *                                              *
  __     []*  - - - - - 10.8'- - - -|--- - -  -10.8'- - - - *
   |        |
|         *
  3'       |
|                 *
  |________________________________|___________*__
           |- - - - -10.8' - - - - - -| - - - - - - - - -18.6' - - - - - - -
- - - - -|
           | - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - -   29.4 - -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- - --- -|


Then the ray will continue down until it hits the
ground , umm, but not at the distant horizon. (Sorry!)

If the mirror were 5" in diameter the numbers would be as
follows: 13.5 ft horizontal measure from lens to underneath the
mirror. Since the angle is still 21 degrees the added distance
of the ray in traveling from 3 ft to the ground (right side of
diagram) is still 7.8 ft = 3/tan(21). Hence the light ray would
hit the ground 13.5 + 13.5 + 7.8 = 34.8 ft from the camera.

OK, so now reverse the picture. INstead of light going from the
camera to the ground, the light actually comes from the ground.
It follows the same path upward toward the mirror and then
downward toward the camera lens. This, then is the source of
light IF THE UO WAS A MIRROR hanging by some means.

Roger pointed out that the relative brightness of the bottom of
the UO in Hartmann's measurements was comparable to that of the
distant horizon. He used this as support for the suggestion by
Joel that the UO could have been a truck mirror hanging from a
suspension. What Roger, and Joel earlier, apparently didn't
(could not? ) understand was that this coincidence in brightness
is irrelevant IF THE UO was a mirror.... because the mirror
would not be reflecting light from distant ground or the
horizon!!!!

The mirror would be reflecting light from the nearby grass or
perhaps the driveway surface (bare dirt). Perhaps the ground
could be as bright as the distant horizon, but I doubt it.

A dirty mirror surface would reflect less light than a clean
surface but it would still be light from the ground.

The bottom line is that the mirror hypothesis is certainly not
supported by the relative brightness of the bottom of the UO.
Whether or not it is contradicted by the relative brightness as
a point that may not be resolvable since we have no photography
of the ground that would allow an estimate of the relative
brightness of the ground (grass, dirt) itself under the same
lighting conditions.

On the other hand, the distance measured along the light path
would not be great (about 30 ft) and so the mage of the ground
as reflected in the mirror bottom of the UO should be resolved.
One can see small variations in the wall of the garage at a
comparable distance, so one would expect to see variations in
the reflected image of the ground., the "structure" of the
reflected portion of the ground. There is no such structure in
the image.

...........

Then there is the matter of non-roundness. The UO image is NOT a
perfect ellipse. The left edge has two, perhaps three straight
sections. Have to look at this carefully to see one of the
"points" made by the intersection of straight segments. From the
exact left end of the blowup (see brumac.8kcom/trent1.html;
scroll down) draw a straight line segment upward and to the
right at about 50 degrees compared to horizontal on the picture.
Make the line segment about 0.7 inch long. Now draw a straight
line from that point with a slope of about 15 degrees for a
distance of about 1.1 inches.

_________________________________

If Roger want's to "believe" (there's that word again) that the
Trent's hoaxed their pictures using a truck mirror... then
that's his prerogative.

There isn't any proof that they did so and some evidence rejects
the hypothesis. (Note: the non-roundness of the bottom of the UO
image rejects any hypothesis that makes use of a perfectly round
model)

This is no better or worse than my claim.... made for the last
25 years.... that, frpm the point of view of photo analysis
there was no proof of a hoax, nor was there proof against a hoax
(Brad might argue with this). I, myself proposed a hoax
hypothesis that would satisfy ALL the characteristics of the UO
image (including non-roundness as a probable accident in
building a paper model... couldn't cut a perfect circle).

The photo acts as an aide to the witness' memory ... that's all.
The evidence against a hoax must come from the circumstances
surrounding the photo. I found nothing in the circumstances that
would indicate the Trents did or would even think of creaing any
hoax, practical joke, whatever. They were too busy surviving.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:50:40 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:46:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:56:31 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:54 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >It is true that the _relative_brightness_ of the bottom of the
 >UO caught Hartmann's attention (admirable observation
 >considering that the bottom of the UO appears dark against the
 >sky background.) What Hartmann noticed was that the bottom of
 >the UO was darker than the sky but brighter than the nearby
 >shadows , in particular the shadows under the tank. He noted
 >that if the UO were a model nearby the bottom would be shaded
 >from the sky and sun and hence ought to be at least as dark as
 >the shadows near the bottom of the tank. It was from that
 >observation that his whole analysis was to spring forth...and
 >then get criticized by Sheaffer... and then "rectified" by me.

Bruce, et al.:

Yes, as I noted in my previous post, Hartmann's densitometry
measurements are consistent with a hypothetical mirror
reflecting distant terrain:

 >Table B (Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects,
 >Bantam Edition, 1969, p 403) gives densitometry results
 >for different parts of the two negatives. The results are
 >normalized at 1.00 for the sky near the distant horizon
 >at 1.00. Listed here are a few results:

 >Sky at distant horizon -  1.00
 >Shaded bottom of the UFO  .675
 >Foreground underbrush  .417
 >Hill 1     .63
 >Hill 2     .71

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                                Simone Mendez

From: Karl Pflock <Ktperehwon@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:26:25 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:49:29 -0400
Subject: Simone Mendez


TO ALL AND SUNDRY -- Today is Simone Mendez' 41st birthday and
she's been MIA for more than a year.

A few days ago, Jim Moseley had a call from one of her brothers,
asking if he or I knew of her whereabouts. Simone has been out
of touch with her family for even longer than she's been out of
touch with Jim and me, and they are quite worried about her.
Simone has been estranged from them for decades, but
nonetheless, they do remain concerned about her welfare.

Does anyone out there have any idea where Simone might be? If
so, I'd appreciate knowing or having a message conveyed to her
to get in touch with Jim or me. Please tell her that we will
respect any confidentiality requirements she may have--including
not passing anything along to her family unless she explicitly
authorizes it.

Thx. -- Cheers, KARL








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                     Re: Eros' Square Craters - Tonnies

From: Mac Tonnies <macbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:52:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Eros' Square Craters - Tonnies


 >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 23:38:46 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Eros' Square Craters
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft has spotted square-shaped
 >craters on asteroid Eros, a telltale sign of mysterious
 >goings-on in the asteroid belt long ago.

 >Ah Ha, you have just uncovered proof of Hoagland's mars
 >conspiracy because just everybody knows that their >is
 >absolutly nothing that is "square" or "round" found in nature,
 >therefore it is a giant pattern that illustates that those
 >craters were dug by alien caterpiller diggers many eons ago,
when they used such simple technology as we use now.....:)

While I don't think the square craters on Eros are likely
artificial, the notion of keeping on eye on asteroids for signs
of intelligent activity isn't a bad idea. If we've been visited
(or have been visited) by an extrasolar civilization, the
Asteroid Belt would provide a wealth of raw materials for
construction, life-support, etc. Gregory Benford and Gerard K.
O'Neill have made similar comments.

O'Neill, specifically, noted that the low gravity on asteroids
would make them especially attractive celestial real-estate for
shipping/launching purposes.



=====
Mac Tonnies (macbot@yahoo.com)
MTVI: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/mtvi.html
Cydonian Imperative: http://www.geocities.com/macbot/cydonia.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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:49:11 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:54:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:58:36 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:53 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Michel M. Deschamps <ufoman@ican.net>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >>>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:13:45 -0400

 >>>What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
 >>>four years later?

 >>Has the identity of the photographer and the circumstances of
 >>this picture ever been established?

 >Bob,

 >You ought to read the ending of thr third Trent paper at my web
 >site... to see the only info we have on the Rouen photo.

 >brumac.8k.com

Bruce,

Thanks for reminding me where I had seen this. For the benefit
of others, I am taking the liberty of quoting from your report:

"THE ROUEN PHOTO

In 1957 two magazines, the Flying Saucer Review and the Royal
Air Force Flying Review both published a photograph that was
said to have been taken by a French military pilot. These
publications are illustrated in the files labelled
TrntRouenFSR.jpg and TrntRouenRAFFR.gif. The text of neither
publication discussed the photo and the only information is
contained within the photo caption. At my request Claude Poher,
formerly of the French National Space Agency (CNES), tried to
locate the presumably French military source for the photo. At
the same time I contacted the publishers of both the magazines.
This was done in the 1976-1977 time frame, 20 years after the
photo was published. In both cases the search ended in failure
to locate the original source.

About all that can be said about the image in the photo is that
it is clearly the same sort of object as appears in the Trent
photo #2 but it is not simply a "rephotograph" of the Trent
photo because the orientation in 3-D space is different, i.e.,
the object in the Rouen photo is rotated somewhat from the
orientation in Trent #2. If the story behind the photo is
correct, that it was taken by a French miliary pilot, then if
provides strong corroboration for the Trent photos.
Unfortunately we will probably never know whether or not the
Rouen photo is actually what it purports to be."

A really ugly thought just popped up. What if the Rouen photo
_is_ part of the missing piece of Trent film? Does anybody happen
to know which magazine, FSR or the Royal Air Force journal,
published the pix first?

Hey, just trying to keep the pot stirred.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:00:26 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:56:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:02:54 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 11:40:13 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >The shadowed bottom of the object is much too light to be
 >explained as a nearby object no matter what you assume about
 >its reflectively. That's all you really need to know. It would
 >have to be "whiter than white", i.e. have

No, if the object were a mirror, the image of distant terrain
would be similar to the actual image of the same terrain.
Hartmann's densitometry, published in Condon, is consistent with
this.

<snip>

Or a light colored nylon fishing line.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:04:53 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:58:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 08:46:38 -0500
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: Bobbie Felder <jilain@digidezign.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:49:39 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

<snip>

 >>Incidently, any object perfectly round won't work either,. The
 >>UO had short straigh segments for edges at the left side of the
 >>image... oddly enough remeniscent of Arnold's Air Force sketches
 >>of the rear ends of the objects he saw!

 >Well, there's the problem! It is pelicans!

Hi, Bobby, Bruce, the list:

I doubt that, but maybe just an old, dented edged mirror Trent
had laying around in his garage.

Someone is probably going to get me in a discussion about how I
have not proven that the thing was originally in his garage.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young

From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:05:18 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:59:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:49:39 -0400
 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:57 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>>Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:38:16 -0400
 >>>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>Anyway, we have the Trents' whole life story to look at now,
 >>>since they died several years ago. Anyone wishing to express an
 >>>informed opinion of the case should read what I have written and
 >>>also get a copy of the only video interview of the Trents, made
 >>>in 1995 (2 years before Evelyn died). Contact Terry Halstead at
 >>>halstead@pobox.com. Considering that this is the only video
 >>>interview of two of the most famous people in UFO history (I bet
 >>>that the trent photos have been published more than any others)
 >>>-- whether you think them nasty hoaxers or down-to-earth honest
 >>>people - this is a UFO collector's item. At the very least the
 >>>skeptics will want this video so that they can refute Mrs.
 >>>Trent's statements, one by one, and demonstrate how she managed
 >>>to bamboozle literally dozens of investigators, interviewers and
 >>>just plain interested people for nearly 50 years!

 >>And even you?

 >Yup,. me, Hartmann, Philip Bladine (newspaper editor), Frank
 >Wormann (banker who probably "owned" the Trents), Bill Powell
 >(photo editor of the newspaper, did the first investigation of
 >the photos), etc... see the third paper entry at the web site
 >for a list of people who were bamboozled.

 > Of course, you weren't.

Bruce,

Well, actually, when I first read Condon 31 years ago, I
remember being disappointed that it didn't offer more support
for my wish that there really were ET spaceships zipping around.
My belief, then, went something like this, "There's probably
something to it because there are so many reports." Well, I was
young and hopeful, then, I guess.

After about 10 years taking UFO reports (my phone number was
listed as an alternate number for a public observatory until my
wife rebelled - "No more 2 AM UFO calls" - I'm sure others on
this list know the problem well) I concluded that there probably
wasn't anything there. (note the deliberate use of the word
"probably"). Now, after 20 more years with the observatory and a
public planetarium, I have to say that I haven't run into
anything to change that (still tentative) conclusion.

As to the Trent pixs, I had read about them, but never really
looked closely into them, myself, until they came up earlier
this year on this list. I'm glad that your stuff, Joel
Carpenter's and others are available on the Net so that this can
be done. But, the error bars seem pretty big, here, and there
are questions even about the time of day, cloud cover, etc. And
mirrors get dented when they are dropped on knocked off. Maybe
that's why it was laying around to be used.

I'm not convinced that there is any evidence of an extraordinary
object here.

 >>Clear skies,

 >Would be nice!

Yes it would, then we would know whether that 1950 Sun was
peeking through the clouds, around an itty bitty one, or just
coming up. Well, I'm leaving tomorrow for a week of hiking in
Utah and will be mostly off-line. Maybe one of the many bright
folks who read this list but haven't put in their nickel, yet,
can offer an insight or two.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 28

                       UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 39

From: John Hayes <webmaster@ufoinfo.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:51:04 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:28:09 -0400
Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 5 Number 39


Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor.

<Masinaigan@aol.com>
==========================

       UFO ROUNDUP
Volume 5, Number 39
September 28, 2000
Editor: Joseph Trainor

http://ufoinfo.com/roundup/

PHILIPPINES RELEASES
SECRET UFO FILES

       "Now it can be told."
       "A team from the Philippines Atmospheric,
Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration
(PAGASA) has admitted actively participating in the
investigation of what is known as Close Encounters of
the Third Kind."
       "UFOs or unidentified flying objects, in particular,
Elmer Escosia, team leader, team leader, said they opined
files to reveal what they discovered so far instead of keeping
the information to themselves."
       "'Our files and records are open to the public and
anyone can read or research,' Escosia told the Manila Times.
       "The team, he said, is composed of eight members under
PAGASA's Astronomy Division, which was assigned to
investigate UFO sightings in the country," i.e. the
Philippine Islands.
       "According to Escosia, they were able to explain most
of the UFO sightings from all over the country, which were
reported to PAGASA."
       "But, he admitted, they were stumped and found
no logical explanation for three such sightings."
       "The first was in 1984, or 16 years ago, when
children reported that they saw 'bulbous-non-human
beings' alight from a large, disk-shaped 'spacecraft'
which landed in Ormoc City in western Leyte."
(Editor's Note: Ormoc is a port city on the west coast
of Leyte Island, located about 640 kilometers or 400
miles southeast of Manila, the national capital.  Ormoc
was the site of a ferocious battle between the Imperial
Japanese Army and the U.S. Army's 77th Division in
September 1944 during World War II.)
       'It was impossible not to believe the children's
testimonies since they gave the same descriptions,'
Escosia said."
       "He added they sent the description of the 'aliens'
to other investigators in the USA who appeared to be
similarly stumped."
       "The two other unexplainable sightings were in
Las Pitas and Muntiniupa City in 1997 and on May 10 of this
year (2000)."
       "In 1997, Escosia reported, at least 400 people reported
that they saw 13 odd-shaped flying objects that were clearly
visible in the following subdivisions: Uranium Street, Pilar
village, Las Pitas" (and) "Dona Josefa, also in Las Pitas,
and Heroes Hill in Muntiniupa."
       "The eyewitnesses described the UFOs as
transparent and hollow at the middle, closely resembling a
school of jellyfish minus the tentacles."  (See the Manila
Times for September 14, 2000, "Three sightings of UFOs
aliens stump PAGASA astronomical experts," by
Jeannette Andrade. Many thanks to Rev. Billy Dee
for forwarding the newspaper article.)

"ANGEL HAIR" FALLS NEAR
ROMNEY, WEST VIRGINIA

       A housewife in rural Hampshire County, near
Romney, West Virginia (population 2,000) reported
that the mysterious gossamer substance known as
"angel's hair" fell in profusion on her family farm
during the evening of Tuesday, September 19, 2000.
       "Last night (Tuesday, September 19, 2000), at
about 7 p.m., I heard a loud 'droning' sound, like a
large airplane.  I went out to look to see if I could
see it, but I could not see it," the witness, Rusty,
reported.  "The droning lasted about an hour."
       "This morning (Wednesday, September 20, 2000),
when I got up, my yard was full of this 'spider web stuff.'
Don't know exactly how to describe this other than
they looked like spider webs but at the same time they
were not your usual 'circular' webs."
       "I immediately got the camera out and took a dozen
photos.  I had my husband go to town to buy some
rubber gloves so we could get some samples.  On
His way in (to Romney--J.T.) there were a few spots
he could see on the way to town, which was seven miles
(11 kilometers away) but nothing as heavy as was in
my yard."
       "The first sample he tried to get with the gloves
soon turned into a goo-like substance as soon as he
touched it.  He put the samples on a piece of paper
towel and put the gloves in with it in a plastic bag."
       "I went to town to the One-Hour Photo place  and
got the photos developed."
       "I have lived here in Romney, W.V. for six years
and I have never seen anything like this."
       Rusty has posted the "angel hair" photos on her
website.  UFO Roundup readers can reach the website
by setting their browsers for this URL:
http:www.homestead.com/rustys_retreat/spiderstuff.html
       Romney, W.V. is on Highway 50 in the northeastern
corner of West Virginia, approximately 27 miles
(43 kilometers) south of Cumberland, Maryland.
(Many thanks to Louise A. Lowry for forwarding the
   report.)

CHUPACABRA BLAMED FOR
FIFTY DEAD SHEEP IN CHILE

       "The new-mythical 'Chupacabra' and starving pumas
(also known as cougars or mountain lions--J.T.) are now
disputing authorship over the deaths of fifty sheep  in the
section of Carahue commune in (Chile's)
Ninth Region."
       "The event mobilized the Carabineros (Chile's
national police--J.T.), health services personnel and
veterinarians aimed at determining the cause of the
strange event."
       "According to eyewitness testimony, the deceased
animals presented wounds in the jugular veins through
which blood was apparently extracted."
       "The find sent shivers through all the people living in
the field owned by Aliro Pedreros Jaque.  They stated that
regardless what is to blame for the slayings--either the
Chupacabra or pumas enraged by the lack of sustenance
(due to a hard winter--S.C.) it nonetheless constitutes a
hazard."
       "Losses due to sheep deaths are nearing the one
million (Chilean) peso mar.  This is the motive
behind the intensification of efforts to determine exactly
what happened in order to prevent another animal
attack."
       "The animal deaths took place at La Gloria farm,
some 14 kilometers (8 miles) to the west of Carahue.
It was the workers themselves who made the discovery
while performing forestry work.  Almost speechless, the
farmhands ran to the overseer to notify him of the event.
Angrily the man returned to the place in question, where
he was able to verify that his farmhands weren't
delusional and that the deaths of the sheep had been
caused by a very strange animal."
       "Investigators are clearly mystified by the fact that the
victims were enclosed in a pen--much the same as 15
other animals who died under similar circumstances
three days ago (Wednesday, September 13, 2000),
displaying wounds in the neck and literally bloodless."
       "Residents stated that their first guess was that the
pumas were responsible.  When starved, these animals
descend from the mountains (the Andes--J.T.) and make
free with any animal that gets in their way.  It was later,
after having observed the (dead) animals that the peculiar
stories of the despised Chupacabra began to emerge."
       "According to the accounts of several section residents,
this true terror of the animal world had already made his
presence felt in Angel, where it destroyed dozens of fowl."
       "Juan Carlos Sanhueza, one of the workers in
the pasture, stated his disbelief (in the Chupacabra)
and opined that 'the one responsible for the animal
deaths is likely a puma or a lion.  And that's that!'"
(See the Chilean newspaper La Cuarta for September 17,
2000.  Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales,
autor de los libros, Chupacabras and Other
Mysteries y Forbidden Mexico para eso articulo
de diario.)

THREE UFOs SIGHTED OVER
SAN FRANCISCO

       On Sunday, September 17, 2000, "just after
6 p.m., I spotted a UFO, just like the white ones
San Jose," witness James W. reported.
       "A couple of minutes later, another UFO came
next to the first one.  I saw two of them floating there.
I was sitting down and watched them hover from about
a 900-foot elevation.  The UFOs were very high.  The
UFOs were just a little southeast of the Mount
Sutro tower and Twin Peaks, well over the air traffic--
I'm guessing 8,000 feet (2,400 meters) or more."
       "I decided to run home to get my binoculars.
I looked up some more to try to find them again.
This time there were three in a row, just like in San
Jose.  When I got home about five minutes later,
about 6:25 p.m., I couldn't find them again.  I
looked hard for another ten minutes, scanning the sky,
but I couldn't find them.  I did see a big (Boeing) 747
coming in from the north, heading for" San Francisco
International Airport.  "Those UFOs had to be at least
as twice as high" as the big jetliner.  (Email Form
Report)

HIGH-FLYING UFOs SEEN
SOUTH OF KANSAS CITY

       On Monday, September 18, 2000, at 6:20 a.m.,
D.A. opened the front door of his home in Prairie
Village, Kansas (population 25,000), a suburb
about 20 miles (32 kilometers) south of Kansas City,
and stepped onto his front walk.  "I was outside to get the
morning paper and noticed how bright and clear the sky was,"
he reported, "The moon was bright.  You could see Orion's
three stars clearly."
       "As I perused the sky, I could see two bright white
objects moving from the southwest.  One, followed by
another.  They were really high up, shaped like a triangle.
Seemed to be moving rather fast. no sound, no vapor
trail, going to the northeast.  I watched for about a minute
and a half.  There were no other airplanes in the sky,
only stars."
       "The two objects seemed to be white in color and
triangle in shape.   They were both moving very fast."
       D.A. added that he contacted a TV station in Kansas
City, but the receptionist wasn't interested.  (Email Form
Report)

ATLANTIS WRAPS UP 12-DAY
SPACE STATION MISSION

       The space shuttle Atlantis touched down safely
on Wednesday morning, September 20, 2000
following a successful 12-day mission to the International
Space Station.
       "'We had a great time,' Commander Terrence Wilcutt
said, 'We're all glad to be back.'"
       "'We've had a really great flight,' (NASA) flight director
Wayne Hale said."
       "During their five days inside the space station,
Atlantis' crew hauled in three tons of equipment.  Another
crew is scheduled to depart for the space station October 5
aboard (the shuttle) Discovery."
       On Tuesday, September 12, "shuttle pilot Scott Altman
showed off the (newly-installed) bathroom inside Zvezda
(one of the station's Russian modules--J.T.)  and one of the
two sleeping compartments."
       "'Each cabin comes with its own window,' he pointed
out."
       "At 6-foot-4, 230 pounds, Altman barely fit inside the
sleeping compartment.  He is ineligible for a stint aboard
the space station because he's too big for the Russian
escape capsule."  (See USA Today for September 13,
2000, "Astronauts furnish the space station,"
September 20, 2000, "Space shuttle planning
touchdown today" and September 21, 2000, "
"Atlantis returns; Discovery preps for liftoff.")
(Editor's Comment:  Don't let it bother you, Scott.
As the skipper of Altman's Ark, you hold the record
for ferrying the largest number of Earth life-forms
into space.  That record may stand for decades."

OUT-OF-PLACE ALLIGATOR
SNAPS AT A MAN IN
KENNEBUNKPORT, MAINE

       One of the weirdest Fortean phenomena is
the "Crazy Croc syndrome," the sudden and
unexplained appearance of alligators in places
far from their natural habitat.
       Just such an incident occurred last week in
Kennebunkport, Maine (population 1,200), a
seaside resort town on Route 9 located about 26 miles
(40 kilometers) south of Portland.
(Editor's Note: The Bush family mansion, summer home
of former President George Herbert Walker Bush, and
his son, Gov. George W. Bush, the current Republican
Party candidate for USA president, is located on
Walker's Point in Kennebunkport.)
(Editor's Comment: Cue spooky organ music...)
       "An alligator that nipped at a man's trousers was likely
someone's pet that was set free, police said."
       "William Sartry shot the 31-inch-reptile dead.  He said
the alligator approached him while he was walking around
a pond in his back yard."
       "'You're going to think I'm nuts,' Sarty told a police
dispatcher when he reported the incident."  (See
USA Today for September 20, 2000, "Maine,"
page 6A.)
(Editor's Comment:  Can I possibly top this?  You betcha!
If you want to see a hilarious picture of Dubya, check out
the October 3, 2000 issue of the tabloid newspaper Globe,
page 9.  Globe is on sale in USA supermarkets everywhere
this week.  Question: if Dubya is a self-professed born-
again Christian, then why is he making the Sign of the
Goat, aka the Sign of the Horned God, aka the Sign of
Lucifer, in that photo?)

EX-ARMY OFFICERS CRITICIZE
BLACK HELICOPTER PROGRAM

       Recently-retired U.S. Army officers, one of them
formerly assigned to the 160th Aviation Regiment, also
known as "the Night Stalkers" disputed the USA Defense
Department's claim that recent helicopter exercises
are designed to train U.S. troops for deployment overseas.
       The disclosures were made to WorldNet Daily "by
former Night Stalker Captain Jeff Norgrove."
       "'These aren't really military exercises,' Norgrove
said.  'They are SWAT training.  The Army will never
admit that to you, but that's what it is.'"
       In March 1999, "Delta Force and the Night Stalkers
were involved in a controversial exercise in Kingsville,
Texas, where the SWAT (Special Weapons and
Tactics) used live ammunition and explosives to
conduct their training."
       "Special Operations Command officials at Fort Bragg,
North Carolina  insist that only 'training ammunition' was
used during the exercise in Kingsville and other
American communities."
       "A number of retired military officers have come
forward to insist that Army claims of the use of only
training ammunition are untrue."
       "'They really think that we're so stupid that we can't
figure this out,' Norgrove said."
       "Most of the Night Stalkers and the Delta Force
troops, according to Norgrove...are young and not fully
aware of what is going on."
       "'They just do what they are told,' Norgrove explained.
'It's exciting and the pay is very good.'"
       In addition, "a high-ranking retired Special Operations
Command officer" told the Washington, D.C. weekly
newspaper The Spotlight that "elite military units have
been undertaking urban warfare training" across the USA
"in preparation for assuming the duties of U.S. law enforcement."
       "The retired colonel confirmed for the first time that that
the mysterious training engaged in by U.S. Army Special
Forces and Delta Force, Navy SEALs, Marines Force
Recon and U.S. Air Force Air Commandos is intended
for domestic operations."
       "The Delta Force and Night Stalkers do not even wear
standard military uniforms.  Instead, just like any SWAT team,
they are garbed in black uniforms, complete with black
helmets and face shields.  They also wear bulletproof
body armor and are discharged from the Night Stalkers'
helicopters wielding German-made Hechler and Koch
9mm submachine guns."
       "The maneuvers are always conducted at night.  The
helicopters are painted dark with a special paint that has a
sandpaper texture, appears black and enables the
aircraft to avoid radar.  They are flown without lights by
Night Stalker pilots utilizing night vision goggles.  The
helicopters bear no markings and can be seen in the darkness."
(See The Spotlight for September 25, 2000, "Military trained
for police ops," page 6.)

FREAK SNOWSTORM
CLOBBERS WYOMING

       The USA's western state of Wyoming was hit by an
unusually heavy snowstorm last weekend.
       ""From Friday (September 22) through midmorning
Sunday (September 24, 2000), the (state) capital,"
Cheyenne, "had recorded 10.5 inches of snow, though
the number was fleeting.  By noon, clumps of snow were
falling from sun-warmed trees and roofs."
       "The last comparable September snowfalls for
Cheyenne were on Sept. 28, 1985 when a storm had left
4.9 inches, and on Se[t. 18, 1942, when 4 inches fell,
according to the National Weather Service."
       "About 1,200 travelers were "stranded in Rawlins and
Rock Springs...A few of them began moving on as
Interstate (Highway) 80, which had been closed Saturday,
reopened a section at a time."
       "'We had 15 miles in Rawlins that is nothing but a
parking lot for trucks,' said Don Brinkman, chairman of
the Red Cross branch in Carbon County."
       "About 550 travelers had spent the night at the
Rawlins Family Recreation Center, 350 to 400 more
were at the Wyoming National Guard armory in town."
       "On Friday and Saturday, the storm struck central
and south-central Wyoming.  It deposited 12 to 15
inches in Casper; 19 in Rock Springs; six in Lander;
six to eight in Kemmerer; three in Riverton; 3.5 in
Buffalo; four north of Cody; four north of Greybull; and
one to two inches in Jackson. "
       "Pine Bluffs received the most serious (snowfall)
toward the end of the storm, about 12 inches."  (See
USA Today for September 25, 2000, "Snowstorm buries
Wyoming's record," page 4A.)
(Editor's Comment:  Wyoming wasn't the only place hit
Fortean weather last weekend.  Check out the following
story.)

SOUTHERN ASIA INUNDATED
BY MONSOON FLOODS

       "Millions of residents of India and Bangladesh tried
to find refuge Monday," September 25, 2000, "from
torrential rains and floods that have killed more than
700 people and left millions more homeless in the last
week."
       ""Late monsoon rains sent water rushing over
riverbanks and dams, submerging villages, and the homes
of more than 10 million people in eastern India and 200,000
in Bangladesh."
       "In India's West Bengal region, the worst-hit area,
652 people were feared dead, according to Deputy Chief
Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharjee.  He said 415 bodies
had been recovered, and another 217 people had been
washed away by strong currents."
       "In neighboring Bangladesh, at least 15 people have
died in the country's northwestern districts."
       "Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina ordered the army
and paramilitary troops to join relief work after
floodwaters damaged or washed away about
40,000 mud-and-straw huts, leaving at least 200,000
people homeless."
       Floodwaters raged elsewhere in Asia, as well.
       "In Vietnam, floodwaters claimed the lives of more
than 120 people, of which nearly 100 were children, in
the past several weeks.  Officials say the floods have
been the worst to hit the Mekong Delta area in decades."
       "In Thailand, at least 47 people have been killed by
rising floodwaters, which have hit 43 of the country's
76 provinces."
       "In Cambodia, at least 173 people have died in
flooding that began in August.  More than 715,000
acres of rice crops have been destroyed by the floods."
(See USA Today for September 26, 2000, "'Gigantic'
task waits in floodwaters' wake," page 16A.  Many thanks to
Binh and Trinh for the news tip.)

from the UFO Files...

1954: ALIENS LAND IN
            EASTERN PORTUGAL

       On September 24, 1964, Cesar Cardoso was
driving on a two-lane road near Almaseda, a
village about 216 kilometers (135 miles) northeast
of Lisboa (Lisbon), the capital of Portugal.
       While driving in this hilly rural area not far from the
border with Spain, Cardoso heard a strange humming noise.
All at once, his car engine began to sputter and cough.
He pulled over to the side of the road beside a low
green hill.
       Frowning, Cardoso turned the ignition key and tried
to restart the car.  The engine made a noise like nails
rattling in an empty coffee can.  As he stepped out of
the car, he saw two other cars pulling over.  The
humming sound grew louder.  Then a circular shadow
passed over his car.
       Looking up, Cardoso let out a yell of excitement.
Floating downward toward the nearby hilltop was a
flattened silver disc about 13 meters (40 feet) in
diameter.
       Afterward, Cardoso reported, "I was near the
village of Almaseda when I saw a flying saucer, out of
which stepped three beings in suits of shining aluminum.
They were two meters (6 feet, 7 inches--J.T.) tall."
       The aliens moved around the hilltop, taking samples
of the local vegetation.  Cardoso reported, "They picked
and cut flowers, snipped off twigs from bushes and put
them in a shining box."
       Then the aliens noticed Cardoso and the other three
humans on the roadside.  Without speaking, they made
gestures of invitation, pointing to the saucer's open hatch.
       "I and three companions were invited to enter the saucer.
But when we refused, the beings did not insist.  They climbed
back into their saucer and ascended vertically at an immense
speed, emitting a shower of sparks."  (See the book Flying
Saucers Uncensored by Harold T. Wilkins, The Citadel Press,
New Jersey, 1955, page 55.  See also the Portuguese
newspaper Diario de Lisboa for September 28, 1954.)

       That'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."
Assuming those idiots don't destroy Jerusalem, we'll see
you them.

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.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

              '2001 Mars Odyssey' For NASA's Next Trip To Mars

From: NASA News <NASANews@hq.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 03:46:26 -0400
Subject: '2001 Mars Odyssey' For NASA's Next Trip To Mars


Donald Savage
Headquarters, Washington, DC                 September 28, 2000
(Phone:  202/358-1727)

Mary Hardin
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
(Phone:  818/354-0344)

RELEASE:  00-155

IT'S "2001 MARS ODYSSEY" FOR NASA'S NEXT TRIP TO THE RED PLANET

As NASA's next spacecraft to the red planet begins a crucial
round of testing in preparations for launch next year, the
mission has been given a new name: 2001 Mars Odyssey.

"The year 2001 has a special significance to many of us who
recall the thrill of reading the book and watching the movie
'2001: A Space Odyssey.' We looked forward to the exciting
future of space exploration that the year 2001 promised," said
Scott Hubbard, Mars Program Director at NASA Headquarters,
Washington, DC.

"NASA's next mission to Mars, launching in the year 2001,
represents the start of a new wave of exploration at the red
planet," said Hubbard. "It seemed fitting to name the mission
2001 Mars Odyssey not only in honor of the story and the movie,
but also to herald the start of our new long-term journey to
explore Mars."

Hubbard added that Arthur C. Clarke, author of  "2001: A Space
Odyssey," enthusiastically endorsed the new mission name.

The orbiting spacecraft is designed to find out what Mars is
made of, detect water and shallow buried ice and study the
radiation environment. The spacecraft begins thermal vacuum
testing this week at Lockheed Martin Astronautics in Denver, CO,
where it was designed and built.

"It's exciting to have a new name for the mission, and going
into the thermal vacuum testing chamber is the next big step for
the spacecraft," said George Pace, project manager for 2001 Mars
Odyssey at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. "We
will simulate the full range of temperatures that the spacecraft
will be subjected to during its entire mission, from the coldest
to the warmest."

"We have done several things in response to the NASA review
board recommendations to ensure mission success, like adding
additional staff and transitioning development personnel to
operations. I'm confident we have a solid mission," Pace added.

The orbiter will study the kinds of minerals on the surface and
measure the amount of hydrogen in the shallow subsurfaces of the
planet, which will give scientists clues about the presence of
water, either past or present. It will also provide information
on the structure of the Martian surface and on the geological
processes that may have caused it. Finally, the orbiter will
take all-important measurements of the planet's radiation
environment so potential health risks to future human explorers
can be evaluated. To do this, the spacecraft carries three
science instruments: The Thermal Emission Imaging System
(THEMIS), the Gamma Ray Spectrometer (GRS), and the Mars
Radiation Environment Experiment (MARIE).

2001 Mars Odyssey is scheduled for launch on April 7, 2001, on a
Delta II launch vehicle from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station,
FL. The space explorer is scheduled to arrive at Mars in October
2001.

In August, NASA announced plans to launch twin rovers which will
land on Mars in 2003, and later this fall, will announce details
of the multi-year Mars exploration program plan.

The mission is managed by JPL for NASA's Office of Space
Science. Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, CO, is JPL's
industrial partner. JPL is a division of the California
Institute of Technology.



                         - end -



                             * * *

NASA press releases and other information are available automatically
by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov.
In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type
the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes).  The system will
reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription.  A second
automatic message will include additional information on the service.
NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command
GO NASA.  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail
message to domo@hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only
"unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message.







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:41:26 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:35:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:47:29 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:45:04 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

Previously, Bruce wrote:


 >SO: we could have a 4" mirror 4.1' up and 11.5' radially away
 >which is 11.5cos(20.3) = 10.8 ft horizontal measure
 >
 >or we could have a 5" mirror, 5.15' up and 14.4' radially away
 >from the camera which is 14.4 cos(20.3) = 13.5' horizontal
 >measure

Ahhhhh. So it could be done!

But, Bruce warns:

 >There is a "small" thing about a mirror: a light ray incident at
 >some angle, say A, on the surface (angle measured between the
 >ray and the surface) will bounce off at the SAME angle (angle of
 >reflection =angle of incidence.... a fact that some skeptics
 >seem to have ignored or not understood).


On the contrary, Bruce. I understand that completely as do most
people. The simple fact is that you do _not_ know what the
mirror was reflecting and never will!


Bruce then writes:

 >Roger pointed out that the relative brightness of the bottom of
 >the UO in Hartmann's measurements was comparable to that of the
 >distant horizon.

Actually, that was another combatant - Bob Young (losing track
of your opponents, Bruce?;)

Actually, I have little faith in the desity readings. They mean
nothing to me as there is no baseline for comparison. An
interesting exercise; but pointless, really.

Continuing, Bruce wrote:

 >He used this as support for the suggestion by Joel that the UO
 >could have been a truck mirror hanging from a suspension. What
 >Roger [not me!], and Joel earlier, apparently didn't (could
 >not?) understand was that this coincidence in brightness is
 >irrelevant IF THE UO was a mirror.... because the mirror would
 >not be reflecting light from distant ground or the horizon!!!!

Never claimed it would. In fact, no knows what it was
reflecting.

However, I love this part where Bruce now writes:

 >The mirror would be reflecting light from the nearby grass or
 >perhaps the driveway surface (bare dirt). Perhaps the ground
 >could be as bright as the distant horizon, but I doubt it.

Why? Because it would support the mirror theory? This is
astounding to me considering the number of assumptions you _are_
willing to make just keep the UFO idea on lifesupport.

 >Then there is the matter of non-roundness. The UO image is NOT a
 >perfect ellipse. The left edge has two, perhaps three straight
 >sections. Have to look at this carefully to see one of the
 >"points" made by the intersection of straight segments. From the
 >exact left end of the blowup (see brumac.8kcom/trent1.html;
 >scroll down) draw a straight line segment upward and to the
 >right at about 50 degrees compared to horizontal on the picture.
 >Make the line segment about 0.7 inch long. Now draw a straight
 >line from that point with a slope of about 15 degrees for a
 >distance of about 1.1 inches.

Frankly, Bruce, I've looked at the images and just do not see
it. And before people accuse me of not "wanting" to see it,
guess again. The images just are not good enough to make that
kind of claim for certain. In fairness, I suppose the images
also are not good enough for me to claim that the mirror IS
round with certainty, either. I'll concede to a draw on this
point since the photos are inadequate.

However, it sure looks like the truck mirror to me!


Finally, Bruce writes:

 >This is no better or worse than my claim.... made for the last
 >25 years.... that, frpm the point of view of photo analysis
 >there was no proof of a hoax, nor was there proof against a hoax
 >(Brad might argue with this). I, myself proposed a hoax
 >hypothesis that would satisfy ALL the characteristics of the UO
 >image (including non-roundness as a probable accident in
 >building a paper model... couldn't cut a perfect circle).

How about a dented mirror. Why not? It would have been a cast
off item, anyway.

In closing, Bruce suggests:

 >The photo acts as an aide to the witness' memory ... that's all.
 >The evidence against a hoax must come from the circumstances
 >surrounding the photo. I found nothing in the circumstances that
 >would indicate the Trents did or would even think of creaing any
 >hoax, practical joke, whatever. They were too busy surviving.

That must be why he plunked down a small fortune for a Roamer
camera and a matching leather carrying case. Absolutely could
_not_ survive without it!

Please.

Poor people have fun, too, Bruce. And they might be clever
enough to hang a disgarded, dented truck mirror from a piece of
white sewing thread for a couple of fun pics, just to see what
it looked like. It would seem that you are more intent on
implying sinister motives than anyone. After all, you pointed
out long ago that the pictures were long forgotten about until
you started investigating them. In your opinion, it seems the
only reason for them to fake the photos is to commit fraud. What
about simple fun?

Roger





   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:41:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:44:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman


 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:53:25 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Carpenter posed this hypothetically to me in e-mail some months
 >back and asked me if I thought it possible that a mirror like
 >this might be reflecting the sky from in back towards the
 >camera.

 >I told him no, this didn't seem possible. Mirrors reflect
 >specularly, not diffusely. In plainer English, that means that
 >if you draw a line from the camera to the plain of a "model"
 >mirror hanging above the camera 15 to 20 feet away, the light
 >bouncing towards the camera had to have come from a direction at
 >exactly the same angle on the other side of the mirror

 >In the case of the first Trent photo showing the "saucer"
 >bottom, any model would have had its bottom surface nearly
 >parallel to the ground. So the light source on the other side of
 >the mirror would have been at an angle towards the ground. In
 >fact, the light source _would have been the ground_, not the
 >sky. The bottom of the "saucer" would have appeared much darker
 >than it does. (A mirror would have been reflecting the dark,
 >lush green grass that would have been growing at that time of
 >year.)

 >The mirror shows nothing but the reflected image of the light
 >source. If the light source is bright, then the mirror appears
 >bright. If the light source is dark, the mirror appears dark.
 >If you reflect the night sky off a mirror, the mirror looks
 >black. It doesn't matter that a mirror has high reflectivity.
 >High reflectivity does not mean it appears bright.

 >I don't think Carpenter understood my argument. A car mirror
 >would have been reflecting an image of the ground towards the
 >camera and would have appeared dark.

Hi, David!

Having caught the implication of this from something in one of
Bruce Maccabee's papers, I implemented a scaled 3D model in
Carrara, using a blue sky and a red and black checkered infinite
ground. The result was indeed exactly as you state - no part of
the sky was visible, only the checkerboard pattern.

The data was drawn from Bruce's estimates of 30m object size and
1.06km distance. However experimentation showed that to attain
an angular size similar to that in the main photo, a simulated
distance of 1.2km was needed for the 30m object. The altitude,
based on attempting to duplicate the framing of the photo using
a simulated 100mm lens, was 250m. The camera altitude was set at
3 feet, as estimated by Joel Carpenter. However, it was
interesting to find that the image framing is almost completely
insensitive to the camera height at the simulated distance - I
tested 3 and 6 foot high camera placements.

The object in this image is in a bank of about 20 degrees, and a
"nose" up of about 9 degrees.

The simulated images can be found at

http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/report/500511.htm

Interestingly, the original photo does not show notable
variations from one side of the disk to the other, suggesting
that the bottom of the disk is not mirror reflective.

An indirect comment on this can be found in the Hartmann
analysis (at the same URL)

"Thus the UFO in any interpretation is known to have a brighter
surface than the foreground tank. Thus, the photometry at once
confirms the witnesses' report that the UFO was shiny, like a
fresh, aluminum-painted surface, but not a specular surface."

In other words, while the object is reflective, it is not a
mirror or chrome finish. But it is bright...

Thus, a mirror such as the A 1911 Ford Model T mirror would not
be a candidate for the hoax object, since it is chrome plated on
the non-mirror side. Yet, the hoax mirror would have to have a
very bright, non-specular surface, for instance, white in color.

The analysis continues:

"Fig. 3 graphically illustrates the problem. For example, if the
object is a model suspended from the wire only a few meters
away, its surface is some 37% brighter than that of the tank,
and the shaded side is probably more than 40% brighter than the
shadow on the tank. But this is nearly impossible to maintain in
the face of the photometry. Although the distant house's surface
is roughly twice as bright as the tank's surface, its shadows
can be only a few percent brighter, intrinsically, than those on
the tank. This is basically the problem that was suggested by
initial inspection of the photos: the shadowed side of the UFO
appears to be so bright that it suggests significant scattering
between it and the observer.

"The upshot is that if the top and bottom surfaces of the UFO
are made out of essentially the same material, i.e. with the
same albedo, the photometry indicates that the UFO is distant,
at roughly r = 1.3 � 0.4 km (est. P. E.). The witnesses referred
to a slightly different hue of the bottom side of the UFO: they
said it was more bronze than the silvery top side. We have
assumed this change in tint had negligible effect on the
photometry, although the implication is that the bottom has
slightly lower albedo. If so the UFO would be still more
distant. "

I believe these are the essential points that must be addressed
by any critique of these photos.

Note that I am also sending a copy of this to Joel. He may not
be aware that his paper is under discussion - to the best of my
knowledge, he has not announced its availability, and it may
even be a work in progress.

------
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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:17:16 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:46:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Cashman


 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:37:04 -0500
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >Let me get ths straight, David: For you to believe that the
 >mirror was hung with thread, you'd have to see it in the
 >negatives. For that to happen, a black or dark thread would have
 >to be used against a white sky. Now, by your own admission, a
 >white thread ("cleverly chosen") that had no contrast against a
 >white sky would not show up, as evidensed by the lack of visible
 >support in the photos.

 >Let me ask you: How clever do you have to be to know NOT to use
 >black thread against a white sky? Granted, there is no guarantee
 >that using a white thread will work. However, YOU seem to think
 >that it would. Why wouldn't Trent? Oh, that's right. He's not as
 >"clever" as you. Only YOU would know not to use a black thread
 >against a white sky. Duh!

Reading the actual reports of those who have worked on the
photos is useful for resolving this part of the dispute...

http://www.brumac.8k.com/trent2.html

"The camera was evidently well focused, and perhaps a large f#
was used (like f#22), since distant telephone wires can easily
be seen in the photographs. The most distant wires were probably
over 60 m away. Using a wire diameter of about 0.6 cm (1/4"),
the angular width of the distant wires would have been about
0.0001 radians . Experiments with detection of small linear
structures (e.g., threads) by photographic means indicate that
if there is sufficient contrast between the structure and the
background a linear image structure much smaller than the grain
size of the film can be detected. Since the grain size of the
film used by the Trents was on the order of 5-10 microns, linear
structures with images as narrow as 1 micron might be
detectable, corresponding to angular sizes of about 0.001
mm/100mm = 0.00001 radians (where 1 micron = 0.001 mm). This
would correspond to a thickness of about 0 .05 mm at a distance
of 5 meters (about 16 ft) , which would have been the distance
to the object if it had been hanging under the overhead wires. A
typical thread is about 0.03-0.06 mm in diameter.

"Images comparable in size to the film grain are very "bumpy''
or rough. The film grain accounts for a portion of the blurring
of the edges of the images in the photographs. This blurring is
especially apparent in high -power blowups of images . Other
contributers to image blur are diffractive ("MTF") effects and
perhaps a slight amount of imperfect focus or motion blur.
Nevertheless, in spite of the slight blurring effects, it
appears that the photographs should have been able to detect a
linear structure as small as a thread under the illumination
conditions prevalent at the time if the thread had a high
contrast relative to the background sky, for example if it were
either black or white, but not if it had been color matched to
the sky. No such structure has been found in any analysis of the
photographs. "

------
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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Gates

From: Robert Gates <RGates8254@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:03:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:48:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Gates


 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:58:36 -0400
 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:53 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >Bruce,

 >Thanks for reminding me where I had seen this. For the benefit
 >of others, I am taking the liberty of quoting from your report:

 >"THE ROUEN PHOTO

 >In 1957 two magazines, the Flying Saucer Review and the Royal
 >Air Force Flying Review both published a photograph that was
 >said to have been taken by a French military pilot. These
 >publications are illustrated in the files labelled
 >TrntRouenFSR.jpg and TrntRouenRAFFR.gif. The text of neither
 >publication discussed the photo and the only information is
 >contained within the photo caption. At my request Claude Poher,
 >formerly of the French National Space Agency (CNES), tried to
 >locate the presumably French military source for the photo. At
 >the same time I contacted the publishers of both the magazines.
 >This was done in the 1976-1977 time frame, 20 years after the
 >photo was published. In both cases the search ended in failure
 >to locate the original source.

 >About all that can be said about the image in the photo is that
 >it is clearly the same sort of object as appears in the Trent
 >photo #2 but it is not simply a "rephotograph" of the Trent
 >photo because the orientation in 3-D space is different, i.e.,
 >the object in the Rouen photo is rotated somewhat from the
 >orientation in Trent #2. If the story behind the photo is
 >correct, that it was taken by a French miliary pilot, then if
 >provides strong corroboration for the Trent photos.
 >Unfortunately we will probably never know whether or not the
 >Rouen photo is actually what it purports to be."

If I may add a reflection or two..and see if anybody takes the
bait on my fishing line... pun intended...

Ah but we do know exactly what it is.  Multiple choice

1) A pie pan being suspended by fishing line

2) A mirror being suspended by thread

3) Its some kind of hoax, unfortunatly the evidence doesn't
    exist to prove it...

4) All or combination of the above...

:)

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:14:17 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:50:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:17:21 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:14:20 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:19:07 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

Hello Roger, List,

Not trying to be the wise guy here, but...

<snip>

 >No. Not at all. What I said is that I already had my own
 >opinions as to why the Trent photos could be fake.

<snip>

Then, referring to Joel's site:

 >I made up mine after looking at his work.

So, you already had an opinion but had not yet made up your mind
until you looked at Joel's site?

This point is important, as Joel's work is _the_ factor causing
you to make up your mind.

I am thus sorry that you didn't answer my previous post which
specifically addressed the pertinence of Joel's research.

Allow me to repeat:

"I flinched when I saw the computer model simulation: one of the
most important features of the scene - the fuel tank on the side
of the shed - is all wrong: it is much smaller and much lower
than it is in the actual pictures.

"How can this be?

"A computer simulation will allow you to view a scene from _any_
point of view you wish. Yet, Joel does not use this basic
feature of all 3D modeling programs to prove his point.

"Strange...

"I am always suspicious of geek talk thrown in a conversation
just to impress the gallery.

"Is it possible to get _all_ the data and measurements used in
the simulation?"

Some other observations:

Some of Joel Carpenter's lines on Hartman's photo are wrong.

His estimate of the position of the horizon is flawed.

Which makes me wonder:

<snip>

 >After looking at
 >Joel's site, I felt sure that the photos are fake. Joel makes no
 >claims of "proving anything". He is pretty level headed and Bob
 >Young and I really had to twist his arm to allow the list access
 >to his site. He presents his work and let's other people make up
 >their own minds.

<snip>

Did you check his work?

Ufology 101: trust no one - even PhDs :) Recent personal
experiences on the List have convinced me that you must do the
homework.

Please note that my critics of Joel's analysis and conclusions
are nothing personal. Joel can only be congratulated for putting
up the _data_. I'm not patronizing either. Hey, I may be full of
it myself as far as my analysis of the data is concerned (life
sucks).

It all bears down to _attitude_. Which brings me to a last
comment:

 >Actually, I am going to make things easy on Errol and address
 >this post to Serge, Bruce, Brad, and any other proponents of the
 >Trent photos.

I am not a proponent of the Trent photos.

I just happened to follow your link (that will teach you!) and
stumbled on a few discrepancies.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:59:12 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:53:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:49:11 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>>>What about the similar craft photographed near Rouen, France,
 >>>>four years later?

 >>>Has the identity of the photographer and the circumstances of
 >>>this picture ever been established?

 >>You ought to read the ending of thr third Trent paper at my web
 >>site... to see the only info we have on the Rouen photo.

 >>brumac.8k.com

 >Bruce,

 >Thanks for reminding me where I had seen this. For the benefit
 >of others, I am taking the liberty of quoting from your report:

 >"THE ROUEN PHOTO

 >In 1957 two magazines, the Flying Saucer Review and the Royal
 >Air Force Flying Review both published a photograph that was
 >said to have been taken by a French military pilot. These
 >publications are illustrated in the files labelled
 >TrntRouenFSR.jpg and TrntRouenRAFFR.gif. The text of neither
 >publication discussed the photo and the only information is
 >contained within the photo caption. At my request Claude Poher,
 >formerly of the French National Space Agency (CNES), tried to
 >ocate the presumably French military source for the photo. At
 >the same time I contacted the publishers of both the magazines.
 >This was done in the 1976-1977 time frame, 20 years after the
 >photo was published. In both cases the search ended in failure
 >to locate the original source. >

 >About all that can be said about the image in the photo is that
 >it is clearly the same sort of object as appears in the Trent
 >photo #2 but it is not simply a "rephotograph" of the Trent
 >photo because the orientation in 3-D space is different, i.e.,
 >the object in the Rouen photo is rotated somewhat from the
 >orientation in Trent #2. If the story behind the photo is
 >correct, that it was taken by a French miliary pilot, then if
 >provides strong corroboration for the Trent photos.
 >Unfortunately we will probably never know whether or not the
 >Rouen photo is actually what it purports to be.">

[Bob]
 >A really ugly thought just popped up. What if the Rouen photo
 >_is_ part of the missing piece of Trent film? Does anybody happen
 >to know which magazine, FSR or the Royal Air Force journal,
 >published the pix first?

 >Hey, just trying to keep the pot stirred.

They were published at the same time, i.e., in issues of the
two journals that appeared in the same month.






   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                 Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under

From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:54:09 +1000
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:59:01 -0400
Subject: Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under


Check the new 'Strange Nation' site, mainly devoted to the
paranormal and strange down under.

I've written a book review on Bruce Maccabee's FBI book for the
site and an account of my own University of New England
"daylight disk" sighting back in 1972.


Enjoy,

Bill Chalker

http://www.strangenation.com.au/bookshelf.htm
http://www.strangenation.com.au/sna_uni_ufo.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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 02:00:35 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 06:00:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Rudiak


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:00:26 EDT
 >Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:56:12 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Young


 >>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 22:02:54 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>The shadowed bottom of the object is much too light to be
 >>explained as a nearby object no matter what you assume about
 >>its reflectively. That's all you really need to know. It would
 >>have to be "whiter than white", i.e. have

 >No, if the object were a mirror, the image of distant terrain
 >would be similar to the actual image of the same terrain.
 >Hartmann's densitometry, published in Condon, is consistent with
 >this.

Even if the object were a mirror, it _cannot_ be reflecting an
image of distant terrain if it is tilted at the wrong angle,
unless you want to create your own physical law of specular
reflection.

If you hadn't clipped out critical sections of the _rest_ of my
post, I covered this. So did Bruce Maccabee today in much more
detail.

If you assume a circular object, then it is simple math to
calculate the tilt of the object w.r.t. to the camera based on
the length/width ratio of the observed bottom.

If Trent were photographing a nearby model from underneath, then
most and perhaps all of the tilt can be explained given certain
assumptions of the size and distance of the object and how far
beneath the object the camera was.

Joel Carpenter said the truck mirrors were 4-5 inches across.
Using these sizes and the actual angular size of the object in
the photos, one can calculate the distance a 4-5 inch object
would have to be to appear the size it does in the photos. Then
using the most generous figures possible for the vertical
distance between the camera and the object in order to give your
hypothesis the best chance possible of succeeding, at best, the
flat surface of the "mirror" would have been parallel to the
ground. This means the light bounching off the mirror and
reaching the camera could only have come from _nearby ground_,
most likely dark, lush green grass.

This is why your "distant terrain" hypophesis is untenable. It's
just basic math and the law of specular reflection at work.

Then there is the second problem of why we don't see any
uneveness in the lighting on the bottom of the object. If the
"mirror" image is nothing but ground on the other side (or even
distant terrain), one would expect some uneveness to the
lighting. But in reality it is very even on the object bottom.

Then there are other little details, like why can't we see the
frame around the mirror if this really is a nearby "truck
mirror". Instead, again, the bottom is very evenly lit with no
hint of a frame lip around it.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:02:32 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:53:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@sympatico.ca>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:14:17 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 05:50:31 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Salvaille

 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:17:21 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca


Previously, I had written:

 >>What I said is that I already had my own
 >>opinions as to why the Trent photos could be fake.
 >>I made up mine after looking at his work.


Serge reasonably asks:

 >So, you already had an opinion but had not yet made up your mind
 >until you looked at Joel's site?

Yes. In my previous disscussions with Bruce, part of his support
for the Trent photos was speculation about what kind of people
the Trents were. Granted, he had done density readings of the
negs, etc. However, as I have pointed out many times, I put no
faith in those readings as there is no baseline for comparison.
In short, regardless of whether the bottom of the object were
mirrored or not, there is no way of knowing what it was
reflecting or if the changes in density were caused by overbleed
from the surrounding sky, grazing due to minimal motion blur,
etc. I truly mean no disrespect to Bruce, but to fill in the
"holes" in his data with assumptions and then to also make
assumptions about the Trents to back up the data is too much of
a stretch for me. Simply too many assumptions. Therefore, in my
mind, the photos could be fake as there was no technical reason
precluding such fakery. Joel's work pointed me toward the truck
mirror and that was the missing element for me. After looking at
the mirror, the Trent photos and considering the number of
foreground miniature shots I've done for clients, I felt that
the Trent photos were fake.

Continuing, Bruce wrote:

 >"I flinched when I saw the computer model simulation: one of the
 >most important features of the scene - the fuel tank on the side
 >of the shed - is all wrong: it is much smaller and much lower
 >than it is in the actual pictures.

<snip>


 >Some of Joel Carpenter's lines on Hartman's photo are wrong.

 >His estimate of the position of the horizon is flawed.

 >Did you check his work?

 >I am not a proponent of the Trent photos.

 >I just happened to follow your link (that will teach you!) and
 >stumbled on a few discrepancies.

Sorry for the grouping. I was just trying to lighten the load on
Errol as this thread has generated a lot of posts and I didn't
want to repeat the same answers to the same questions in
multiple posts.

Perhaps I can best answer the question(s) this way.

Let's say that you own a store that is burglarized and there is
a security camera mounted on the wall in clear view of the
crime. Then, later, the suspect is identified by comparing the
photo of the crime with another photo from a mugshot at the
police station.

Now, in the course of the investigation, you are asked how high
the camera was mounted on the wall and you answer "7 feet" and
it turns out to really be 7.5 feet or even 8. Then Bruce, the
attorney representing the suspect, tries to make a case for the
suspect's innocence on the basis that the camera was not at the
height you said it was. I don't think you would accept that nor
would any other reasonable person.

And this is my point.

It doesn't matter if Bruce and Joel differ on their estimates on
the height of the camera; after all they're both estimates. In
either instance, the identity of the object isn't really
affected. It still looks like the truck mirror to me (and, by
the amount of email I've received, to most people it would
seem!)

Regarding the computer imagery, that was added well after I had
made up my mind and Joel clearly indicates it is a first pass.
So I suspect it would be followed up with updated data. However,
this still is a distinction without a difference. Even if the
perspectives are altered slightly, everyone agrees that Trent
was in his backyard taking pictures of the object in question.

And, as I understand it, this is what launched Joel on his
research.

Proponents of the Trent photos are forced to speculate about how
Trent would react in order to justify his position in the back
yard. Again, assumptions to support more assumptions.

On the other hand, regardless of whether you are in favor of
Bruce's data or Joel's regarding perspective and camera height,
it is a fact that being in the backyard would make fakery of the
photos much easier and, perhaps, even necessary. To be fair, it
would an assumption also, at this point, to say that the photos
are fake if there were no other data available.

But, of course, there is.

The mirror attached to the truck on Joel's web page is a good
match to the mystery object and would produce the same effect if
suspended by a light thread regardless of camera height or
position. The fact that Trent was in his back yard only
strengthens the theory of fakery for obvious reasons. Add to
this the fact that such a mirror was readily available and the
technique was not beyond Trent's ability, and you've got a
better case for fakery than for it being a real UFO.

Concrete? Maybe not, but proof beyond a reasonable doubt, to be
sure.

And, without beating up on Bruce too much, this is probably the
biggest rub for me regarding his research. In the Gulf Breeze
saga, Bruce puts much emphasis on whether or not Ed Walters was
smart enough to produce the photos in question since, in Bruce's
opinion, the photos would require more effort and skill than Ed
could muster. This same approach was evident in the Trent
investigation, as well, as Trent was described as being too
simple minded to produce the shot.

Yet, it is now clear that the shot would not be complicated to
produce and that the object required was readily available.
Still, Bruce favors a multitude of assumptions to fill out his
theory rather than face the simplist of truths: He was fooled by
a guy hanging a truck mirror from a piece of thread.

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

               Recent Action: Illinois, Wisconsin and Arizona

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 08:30:55 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:56:34 -0400
Subject: Recent Action: Illinois, Wisconsin and Arizona


The following report is courtesy of Mr. Charles Stuart, a
researcher from West Chester, Ohio.

-------

While listening to Chicago radio station WLS 890 AM last night
(Sept. 28, 2000), I heard a woman call in reporting what she
thought was an aircraft going down in flames and sparks. She
thought it was only a couple miles away. Soon thereafter, other
callers called in reporting similarly. Several callers stated
that within minutes of the event, the sky was full of planes and
helicopters with "searchlights". Two callers from outside the
area, (central Illinois and Wisconsin) also reported seeing an
orange fireball going down at a 30-40� angle. One caller said
the object came from the southwest.

Curiously enough, they called 4 police stations and none
admitted receiving any calls about the fireball or having any
knowledge of it. Anyway, the obvious possibility that this was
simply a large meteor ( although the first caller said that it
was moving too slowly for a meteor) or space junk must be
considered.

A similar event occurred just two days ago in the southwest
U.S.A. [article enclosed below] and was attributed to a large
meteor or bolide. Does anyone know if the Iridium satellites are
coming down at this time? I heard that they were to be crashing
soon.

PS: The time of the "event" was around ( 9:15 local time -
Central)

Filed,
Sept. 29, 2000
Charles Stuart
=====================

"Asteroid Chip May Have Caused Bright Flash in California Sky"
Wednesday, September 27, 2000
� Associated Press

LOS ANGELES --   A green and orange flash people saw streak from
the high desert to the Pacific Coast across the night sky was
most likely a meteor, according to an astronomer.

The flash was seen in the clear Southern California sky about 8
p.m. Tuesday. It was visible more than 100 miles away, as far
east as the Arizona line and as far south as the U.S.-Mexico
border.

"From the description I got, it sounds like a very bright meteor
or fireball as we call it," said Patrick So, an astronomer with
the Griffith Park Observatory in the hills just north of
downtown. He said it was mostly likely a fragment of an asteroid
that broke up long ago.

Such objects give off a green glow as they burn up in the
Earth's atmosphere, So said.

Trucker Tom Lawson was driving along Interstate 8 near Gila
Bend, Ariz., when he says he saw "a green light with kind of an
orange tail going from the southwest sky."

"It just kind of faded out as it got to the West Coast," he
said.

Others said they witnessed the flash from San Diego and from
Joshua Tree, in the Mojave Desert.

End or 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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                     Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton

From: Terry Blanton <commengr@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 08:58:36 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:57:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Blanton


 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:41:26 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >On the contrary, Bruce. I understand that completely as do most
 >people. The simple fact is that you do _not_ know what the
 >mirror was reflecting and never will!

Or the glass was broken if, indeed, it is a truck mirror.

Probably broken off by a close encounter with a tree or flying
saucer!

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    UFO Report: Girard, Ohio - 9/19/2000

From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:40:13 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 11:00:38 -0400
Subject: UFO Report: Girard, Ohio - 9/19/2000


For details and a map showing the areas of two recent UFO
sightings near Youngstown and Ravenna, Ohio, see:

http://home.fuse.net/ufo/9-19-00.html

Thanks for your attention,
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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:18:46 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:06:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:41:26 -0500
 >From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca


 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:47:29 -0400
 >>Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:45:04 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

 >Previously, Bruce wrote:

 >>SO: we could have a 4" mirror 4.1' up and 11.5' radially away
 >>which is 11.5cos(20.3) = 10.8 ft horizontal measure

 >>or we could have a 5" mirror, 5.15' up and 14.4' radially away
 >>from the camera which is 14.4 cos(20.3) = 13.5' horizontal
 >>measure

 >Ahhhhh. So it could be done!

Never said it couldn't be done! In fact, I showed how it culd be
done.

 >But, Bruce warns:

 >>There is a "small" thing about a mirror: a light ray incident at
 >>some angle, say A, on the surface (angle measured between the
 >>ray and the surface) will bounce off at the SAME angle (angle of
 >>reflection =angle of incidence.... a fact that some skeptics
 >>seem to have ignored or not understood).

 >On the contrary, Bruce. I understand that completely as do most
 >people. The simple fact is that you do _not_ know what the
 >mirror was reflecting and never will!

Glad you understand about reflection.
I know the mirror was reflecting the ground. Why don't you?

Oooopppsss Wait a minute. I suddenly get your point. (This is
your point, is it not?)... you think it was reflecting something
other than the ground. Where might that something have been?
Could it be that they put something down to cover the ground so
the ground itself could not be seen reflected in the mirror?

Gee, they should have put a small doll at that location. Then
the photo wuld have shown a small image of a "creature" and they
could have said an alien was waving to them.

HAHAHA.

But, aside from the doll, I suppose while milking that cows that
morning Paul Trent or his wife could have calculated where the
light hitting the mirror (and then entering the camera lens )
could have come from using the reflection law and trignometry or
simlar triangles and placed a white piece of paper there to make
it appear as if the bottom of the UO was bright, even though all
it was doing was reflecting white paper. Yeah, the Trent's might
have been clever enough to think of that... but I doubt it.

(In this case the white paper would have been lit by skylight
and would been a lot brighter than white paper on the bottom of
the UO..)

(My own solution, if I hadn't run through all the calculations
of brightness would have been to put white paper over the mirror
surface making a white paper bottom. This white paper wul be
diffusely reflecting light coming upward from the ground.

But the calculations based on relative brightness say the bottom
was brighter than white paper would have been under those
conditions. see below.

The reflection of white paper lying on the ground would be
brighter than the white paper pasted onto the bottom of the
mirror and therefore would make the object appear distant. Gee,
Roger. You're a genius!)

 >Bruce then writes:

 >>Roger pointed out that the relative brightness of the bottom of
 >>the UO in Hartmann's measurements was comparable to that of the
 >>distant horizon.

 >Actually, that was another combatant - Bob Young (losing track
 >of your opponents, Bruce?;)
Sorry. Didn't have time to track back through so many emails.

 >Actually, I have little faith in the desity readings. They mean
 >nothing to me as there is no baseline for comparison. An
 >interesting exercise; but pointless, really.

They mean nothing to you?

They represent hundreds of hours of work to me, time that was
necessary until I got it right, spread over several years..
Hartmann was impressed when I sent him an early version of my
paper that repeated his work with more accuracy.

  The density reading are, in fact, quite accurate, whether you
have "faith" in them or not. And, in fact, one aspect of the
cleverness of Hartmann's analysis was the realization by him
that he could use the distant white house brightness as a
"baseline for comparison." I then did better by using the tiny
image of a portion of the nearby Trent house, also white, as
another "baseline for comparison."

But you are correct in one sense.... the exercise was
"pointless" because it could not prove the object was distant.
What it did do, however, is "up the ante" in terms of what the
Trent's had to do if they had constructed a model. Their model
had to meet the brightness requirements that I determined from
the analysis of their negatives. Specifically, IF it were a
model a dozen or so feet away (truck mirror or whatever), then
having a pure white bottom was not enough... it had to be a
source of light. This is all discussed in my first paper on the
photos, wherein I point out that a translucent paper model might
work (light from the sky coming filtering through th top paper
and downwards through the bottom)

In the light of the previous truck mirror discussion it is
interesting to note that (a) the ground is not as bright as
white paper hence the reflection of the ground is not as bright
as white paper and (b) if they had put a white paper on the
bottom of the truck mirror model UO, then it wouldn't have been
bright enough still because sky light couldn't get through the
metal backing of the mirror (or the silver/aluminum metal
coating that formed the mirror) and therefore could not be
coming through the white paper bottom.

However, from the above discussion we now know for the first
time anywhere that if they had used a mirror from a truck or
whatever and the mirror surface was facing down and they placed
a white paper of some size at the "ground reflection point" that
the image of the bottom of the UO would be an image of that
white paper and would have been bright enough to appear distant.

 >>Continuing, Bruce wrote:

 >>>He used this as support for the suggestion by Joel that the UO
 >>>could have been a truck mirror hanging from a suspension. What
 >>>Roger [not me!], and Joel earlier, apparently didn't (could
 >>>not?) understand was that this coincidence in brightness is
 >>>irrelevant IF THE UO was a mirror.... because the mirror would
 >>>not be reflecting light from distant ground or the horizon!!!!>>>

 >>Never claimed it would. In fact, no knows what it was
 >>reflecting.

Yup I agree. If it wasn't reflecting the ground it was
reflecting something the Trents put on the ground.


 >>However, I love this part where Bruce now writes:

 >>>The mirror would be reflecting light from the nearby grass or
 >>>perhaps the driveway surface (bare dirt). Perhaps the ground
 >>could be as bright as the distant horizon, but I doubt it.

 >>Why? Because it would support the mirror theory? This is
 >>astounding to me considering the number of assumptions you _are_
 >>willing to make just keep the UFO idea on lifesupport.

Grass and dirt are not as reflective as white paper. And I
pointed out above that only the white paper on the ground would
have worked.

 >>Then there is the matter of non-roundness. The UO image is NOT
a >>perfect ellipse. The left edge has two, perhaps three
straight >>sections. Have to look at this carefully to see one
of the >>"points" made by the intersection of straight segments.
 From the >>exact left end of the blowup (see
brumac.8kcom/trent1.html; >>scroll down) draw a straight line
segment upward and to the >>right at about 50 degrees compared
to horizontal on the picture. >>Make the line segment about 0.7
inch long. Now draw a straight >>line from that point with a
slope of about 15 degrees for a >>distance of about 1.1 inches.

 >Frankly, Bruce, I've looked at the images and just do not see
 >it. And before people accuse me of not "wanting" to see it,
 >guess again. The images just are not good enough to make that
 >kind of claim for certain. In fairness, I suppose the images
 >also are not good enough for me to claim that the mirror IS
 >round with certainty, either. I'll concede to a draw on this
 >point since the photos are inadequate.>

 >However, it sure looks like the truck mirror to me!


 >Finally, Bruce writes:

 >>This is no better or worse than my claim.... made for the last
 >>25 years.... that, frpm the point of view of photo analysis
 >>there was no proof of a hoax, nor was there proof against a hoax
 >>(Brad might argue with this). I, myself proposed a hoax
 >>hypothesis that would satisfy ALL the characteristics of the UO
 >>image (including non-roundness as a probable accident in
 >>building a paper model... couldn't cut a perfect circle).

 >How about a dented mirror. Why not? It would have been a cast
 >off item, anyway.

 >In closing, Bruce suggests:

 >>The photo acts as an aide to the witness' memory ... that's all.
 >>The evidence against a hoax must come from the circumstances
 >>surrounding the photo. I found nothing in the circumstances that
 >>would indicate the Trents did or would even think of creaing any
 >>hoax, practical joke, whatever. They were too busy surviving.>

 >That must be why he plunked down a small fortune for a Roamer
 >camera and a matching leather carrying case. Absolutely could
 >_not_ survive without it!

 >Please.

Small fortune for the Roamer? I don't know what it cost. But
they certainly had if for a time before the event and a long
time afterward. There is no evidence that they bought the camera
simply to create a UFO hoax...... so the argument here that
they spent a "fortune" to buy te camera does not compare with my
claim that they were too busy to think of and carry out a hoax.

 >Poor people have fun, too, Bruce. And they might be clever
 >enough to hang a disgarded, dented truck mirror from a piece of
 >white sewing thread for a couple of fun pics, just to see what
i>t looked like. It would seem that you are more intent on
i>mplying sinister motives than anyone. After all, you pointed
 >out long ago that the pictures were long forgotten about until
 >you started investigating them. In your opinion, it seems the
 >only reason for them to fake the photos is to commit fraud. What
 >about simple fun?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It always boils down to the same argument:
they COULD have done it for whatever reason (fun, money, fame,
to prove Mrs Trent was not lying when she said she had seen
flaying sauxcers before... etc. Same old tired argument.

If they did it once and were amazingly successful (newspaper
story, free trip to NYC) why didn't they do it again? After all
they never got paid for the pictures so I should think that they
would have said... let's do another one and this time we won't
let the city slickers take it away from 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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                   French Book By Astronomer Pierre Gurin

From: Gildas Bourdais <GBourdais@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 13:46:48 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:10:00 -0400
Subject: French Book By Astronomer Pierre Gurin


Good evening

I have the pleasure to announce the publication in France of an
important book on UFOs, written by astrophysicist (retired)
Pierre Gurin, of the National Institute of Astrophysics, in
Paris.

I dare say it's an important, because it is a very articulate
approach, not only of the reality of ufos, but of the question
of secrecy and disinformation. Hence its provocative title :

"UFOs. The Mecanisms of Disinformation
(in French: OVNI. Les mcanismes d'une dsinformation).
(published by Albin Michel. ISBN 2-226-12022-X)

Pierre Gurin has been involved in ufos since the beginning of
the 50's when he was a young astronomer, and he had to do that
very discretly at the beginning.

He has been friend of Aim Michel, Jacques Valle and many
others, and has been all the way a very courageous defenfer of
ufos, in the face of continuouus skepticism and debunking. His
book gives a rather unique insider story of French ufology. His
global approach is close to the Cometa Report published last
year, notably in his views on the American policy o secrecy.

After so many years of predominant skepticism in France, with
the so called "sociopsociological" shool, or "new ufology", it
is good to see that not everybody fell into that deadly trap.
Gurin is a tough man and he hits hard and efficiently at the
skeptical arguments. Of course, some of his viewpoints are
debatable. He would certainly agree on that, but unfortunately
he very ill now, being stricken at the same time by cancer and
hepatitis C, so that his life is in danger, and he won't be able
to enter in such a debate now.  At least he had the time to
write his book.

Let's hope someone will want to translate it and publish it it
in English. It is well worth 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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                   Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson

From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 19:13:00 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:16:00 -0400
Subject: Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson


Dear UpDates Colleagues,

Can anyone tell me how and where I may contact Beth Collings and
Anna Jamerson, authors of the book 'Connections'?

Any information would be helpful.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

               Strange Lights Frighten Driver In Pennsylvania

From: Stan Gordon <paufo@westol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:05:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:18:56 -0400
Subject: Strange Lights Frighten Driver In Pennsylvania


Strange Lights Frighten Driver In Pennsylvania 09/19/00

PA UFO Hotline (24 hours) 724-838-7768
Stan Gordon's UFO Anomalies Zone: http://www.westol.com/~paufo

I recently interviewed a witness who reported a UFO sighting
which occurred on September 19, 2000, between 4:30 and 4:45 A.M.
in a rural area outside of Marysville, Pennsylvania. While I am
awaiting further details, what I have learned initially is that
the witness commonly travels through this area on the way to
work. The location of the sighting was described as a valley
with fields surrounded by mountains. From approximately a mile
away, the driver observed "what looked like stadium lights over
an open field." This observer knew that no such lights were
located in that area.

As the witness continued to watch, at one point the car window
was lowered, but no sound could be heard. What the observer
described seeing were two very large round lights. These lights
were white in color, non-blinking, and were very brilliant.
According to the witness, this luminous source was extremely
large and was estimated as being as long as a football field. At
first it seemed as though this was one object, but it became
apparent that there were two seperate lights positioned side by
side.

The lights were quite low in altitude, motionless over the
field, and according to the driver, the illumination from the
lights "lit up the whole sky." The witness proceeded down the
road for a distance, then returned several minutes later, but
the lights could no longer be seen. This observer indicated that
this was a very frightening experience. During the time of the
observation, another vehicle came up the road. The witness is
hopeful that driver of the other car will also report this
event.

There have been numerous UFO sightings reported during August
and September, 2000, from across Pennsylvania. Both the National
UFO Reporting Center, and myself have been receiving these
reports. Besides UFO encounters, other strange incidents have
also come to my attention from across the state. I will be
releasing further information as investigative reports become
available.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                           MUFON E-mail Directory

From: Bob Long <Alienchasr@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:00:47 EDT
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:27:07 -0400
Subject: MUFON E-mail Directory


Hello,

This is Bob Long, Assistant State Director of NY MUFON. I am in
charge of the MUFON e-mail directory. I am searching for members
whom have not gotten on the list yet.

This is only for the use of its members for ease of
communications and not a junk generator.

If you are a Mutual UFO Network member and wish to be on the
list of almost 400 members, please give me your state, title,
region, etc and any corrected e-mail addresses as well as
addresses of other members in your state.

If you are not a member or no longer a member, please disregard
this message.

Regards,

Bob Long
ASD NY MUFON
MUFON E-mail Directory Editor







   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

               Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:57:40 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 18:55:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo - Maccabee


 >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 20:05:12 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
 >From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@yorku.ca>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo


 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:19:42 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Canadian Air Force Pilot's Photo
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>Thanks for your comments on this photo. The suggestion of a
 >>reflection from the canopy has, of course, been studied. (If I
 >>recall correctly it was Dr. Robert Nathan, photoanalyst formerly
 >>at JPL,, proposed this explanation years ago. Then rejected it.
 >>Nathan also proposed that the sun reflected off some bright
 >>object in the cockpit and that this reflection was, in turn,
 >>reflected by the cockpit window. This explanation, too, was
 >>rejected.)

 >Hi Bruce.

 >Did Dr. Robert Nathan publish his reasons for rejecting the
 >possibility that the UFO in the photo was a reflection of the
 >Sun, including a multiple reflection of the Sun off other
 >instruments within the cockpit?

He did not publish his reasons for rejecting. This was basically
a private discussion between him and me.

Considering the shape of the canopy and the location and
mobility of the pilot's head in the canopy we concluded that
even if there were a reflection of sunlight (coming basically
from the front of the a/c) from a small bright object, (Nathan
suggested a button or pilot's ring) that (a) it is unlikely the
pilot would be confused and think the light was at a great
distance and (b) as soon as he rolled toward it to take the
picture the direction to any reflection would change greatly.
(The rate of change in direction of reflected light is twice as
fast as the rate of change of direction of the reflecting
surface.) In other words, after thinking about it for a while
Nathan could not imagine that the reflection would seem to the
pilot to be in exactly the same direction before the roll as
during the roll. Instead, once the roll began the reflection, if
it contnued to be visible to the pilot (not very likely) would
move with the airplane roll and the pilot would immediately
realize he was looking at a reflection and not a bright object
"out there."

 >If so, I would be interested to
 >read on how he came to this conclusion. I think you will agree
 >that one should never rule out any possibility simply on the
 >opinion of a single person, even if he is a photoanalyst (or
 >just me).

 >>(Your mention of his later claim that he "believes in UFOs"
 >>suggests that you would accept the hoax explanation. That is
 >>your decision. I reject the hoax explanation. He was completely
 >>coperative in providing all the information he could including
 >>the original slide - which had been lost in James MacDonald's
 >>files for many years before I contacted Childerhose. If he had
 >>known it was a reflection it seems to me that he would have been
 >>worried that my investigation of the original slide would
 >>discover his hoax)

 >What criteria do you use to reject the possibility of a hoax?
 >Can it ever be ruled out in single witness testimonies? I agree
 >that my comments allow for the possibility that the pilot could
 >have been involved in an intentional hoax but my thoughts at the
 >time I wrote them was that the pilot's testimony could have been
 >simply an honest interpretation of what he believed to be a UFO
 >in one of the several photos he took after he got his pictures.

I would assign a low probability to outright hoax. Could the
pilot have failed to identify some natural phenomenon that was
extremely unusual? Could he had thought, "Wow, that's amazing,.
Maybe it was a UFO."? Sure. The point of my paper is that the
source of the light has not been identified. It was rejected by
Applied Optics under the pretense that it culd be identified as
a) sundog (rejected) b) reflection from a lake (also rejected).
I raised the question of gigantic ball lightning. No one has
jumped on this case as evidence of gigantic ball lightning other
than PJK.

On the other hand the pilot _said_ the object looked like a coin
seen obliquely. His photo does not exactly support this, so for
him to say it is to go out on a limb with his "hoax".

Nevetherless, maybe he was hoaxing the "coin" claim. Maybe he
saw the bright object, photographed it and subseuqnetly said to
himself,. AHa. I can use this as proof of UFOs... I'll say the
object looked like a coin-shaped flying saucer.! Then I'll be
rich and famous... or have some fun pulling the legs of my other
flight buddies... or get an article published in a UFO
magazine,.

Yeah, he could have thought about one these things, but I doubt
it.

 >One colleague who saw both of the photos in your paper made some
 >interesting comments which I think should be considered. First,
 >he said that if he was the pilot and had such an close encounter
 >with a large luminous UFO, he would have done more than just
 >roll his aircraft to take a single photo which may not have
 >turned out good.

Perhaps... if he KNEW he was looking at a UFO. On the other
if he just thought that it was an interesting phenomenon, then
he might have figured it was worth photographing and that
was all.

He was at work at the time (preparing for a speed flight the
next day or so) and flying with a team. Rolling and a/c/ and
taking a picture would not put him behind his flight, but "going
after" a bright object would.

At any rate what he "would" or "Would not" have done is no more
than the personal opinion of someone who was not there at the
time and so couldn't know all the competing "forces" at work on
the pilot that made him decide to do what he did.

 >Second, he made a comment on how unexpected
 >dark the CF-86 jets looked in the other photo considering they
 >were flying above the clouds and are highly reflective aircraft.
 >He went on to propose that if one of these other aircraft were
 >at the right location and orientation relative to the Sun and
 >the pilot who took the photo, this aircraft would seem to
 >momentarily brighten to an intensity comparible to the Sun (much
 >like an Iridium satellite flash that others have may have
 >identified as a UFO). On film the aircraft would appear as a
 >featureless blob of light but it would retain the width and
 >height ratio of the CF-86, which the UFO in the photo seems to
 >do.

It is obvious from the second photo where the other planes were.
He claimed that the bright object was in the lee of the anvil of
a thunderstorm. None of the planes was near that thunderstorm.

If there were a glint from an aircraft it would not necessarily
have the width to height ratio of the airplane itself.

But in any case, if there was a glint from one of the other
aircraft he surely would have known about it... since he knew
where the other a/c were with respect to him... and therefore to
photograph the glint and claim it was a bright object under a
thunderstorm anvil would be tantamount to a hoax (certainly not
a misidentification).

 >>The lack of other witnesses is not necessarily a good argument
 >>against the reality of the bright "thing" as an "object out
 >>there" in the sky.

 >It would help though, especially since this UFO was not your
 >typicial inconspicuous daylight disk but a large luminous object
 >comparible to the brightness of the Sun. Just remember that even
 >a small mirror will attract the attention of the few people in a
 >large (say 100 square miles) area of wilderness by person who is
 >lost.*

Yeah, on a clear day!

 >>We don't know what the cloud cover underneath the bright object
 >>was. Perhaps there was a dense layer at 5000 ft or so, This was,
 >>after all, a huge tunderstorm with associated clouds.
 >>Furthermore, it occurred over an area of low population,. We
 >>don't know how long this bright object was in the sky, maybe for
 >>only a few minutes. Had someone seen it he/she might have
 >>assoiated it with lightning phenomena related to the storm. And,
 >>lastly, even if someone had seen it and said "Aha, a UFO," said
 >>person would have a relatively high probability of not reporting
 >>it.

 >>So, for these reasons I accept the reality of an object..."out
 >>there."

 >Considering all these things you mention above which we do not
 >know, I would say these are just additional reasons to doubt the
 >reality that a true UFO was out there.

 >Since the luminous UFO in the photo the CF-86 pilot took seems
 >to be surrounded by clouds in shadow, how would you account that
 >they could remain so dark if there was a very bright UFO in
 >their vicinity? Wouldn't these clouds facing the UFO be bright
 >much like the clouds facing the Sun are as I mentioned in my
 >original reply? I still think the reflection of sunlight off the
 >aircraft canopy makes more sense. A large bright UFO near or
 >within the clouds is not supported by what is observed in the
 >photo.>

We don't know really how far the bright object was from the
various clouds. It does seem to be illuminating tiny clouds just
below it, but it may have been too far from the largest clouds
to contribute noticeably to the ambient lighting.

 >Maybe the photo of the luminous
 >UFO taken by the Canadian CF-86 pilot could have been a yet
 >unknown atmospheric phenomena, possibly not unlike the bright
l>ights seen by several commercial pilots over the night skies
 >near Toronto a while back which one Russian scientist seemed to
t>hink could be evidence for his "geophysical meteors".

Maybe,.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:57:54 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 18:56:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee


 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:50:40 EDT
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 19:56:31 -0400
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>

 >>From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >>>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:03:54 EDT
 >>>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>>To: updates@sympatico.ca

<snip>

 >>It is true that the _relative_brightness_ of the bottom of the
 >>UO caught Hartmann's attention (admirable observation
 >>considering that the bottom of the UO appears dark against the
 >>sky background.) What Hartmann noticed was that the bottom of
 >>the UO was darker than the sky but brighter than the nearby
 >>shadows , in particular the shadows under the tank. He noted
 >>that if the UO were a model nearby the bottom would be shaded
 >>from the sky and sun and hence ought to be at least as dark as
 >>the shadows near the bottom of the tank. It was from that
 >>observation that his whole analysis was to spring forth...and
 >>then get criticized by Sheaffer... and then "rectified" by me.

Bruce, et al.:

 >Yes, as I noted in my previous post, Hartmann's densitometry
 >measurements are consistent with a hypothetical mirror
 >reflecting distant terrain:

 >>Table B (Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects,
 >>Bantam Edition, 1969, p 403) gives densitometry results
 >>for different parts of the two negatives. The results are
 >>normalized at 1.00 for the sky near the distant horizon
 >>at 1.00. Listed here are a few results:>

 >>Sky at distant horizon -  1.00
 >>Shaded bottom of the UFO  .675
 >>Foreground underbrush  .417
 >>Hill 1     .63
 >>Hill 2     .71

Yes, and as I pointed out in a more recent message (problenm of
time lag between messages) the coincidence is irrelevant because
the mirror would not have reflected the distant horizon. If the
mirror was covered with some dirt or something else it would
have reflected the ground about 30 ft from the camera.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 29

             Re: Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson - Stacy

From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:50:17 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 18:57:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson - Stacy


 >From: Gar Anthony <garyant@mithrand.karoo.co.uk>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Enquiry - Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson
 >Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 19:13:00 +0100

 >Dear UpDates Colleagues,

 >Can anyone tell me how and where I may contact Beth Collings and
 >Anna Jamerson, authors of the book 'Connections'?

 >Any information would be helpful.

 >All best regards,

 >Gary Anthony


Gary,

Failing all else, write to them care of their publisher.

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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                    Real X-Files Hot Gossip UK - Oct 2000

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 00:28:37 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:45:11 -0400
Subject: Real X-Files Hot Gossip UK - Oct 2000


HOT GOSSIP UK
REAL X-FILES
www.hotgossip.co.uk

To give UFO UpDates readers an opportunity to enter the
competitions, this page is being posted at the same time as it
is uploaded on Hot Gossip UK

Well, after almost two years I am back with my regular �Real
X-Files� column for Hot Gossip UK.

This month�s column is mostly dedicated to three books being
published on the UFO subject, Nick Pope�s 'Operation Lightning
Strike', release date 2 October. Tim Good�s 'Unearthly Disclosure',
release date 12 October, and my own, 'You Can�t Tell The People',
release date10 November.

But first..........

CATCHING UP WITH FRIENDS

On Saturday 23 September I gave a small dinner party for Peter
Robbins, who was visiting London and staying with Nick Pope
after speaking at the Leed�s conference. Other guests included
Nick, Tim Good, Lady Anna Brocklebank and Chuck de Caro. Many of
you will recall that Chuck was a defence journalist with CNN and
investigated the Rendlesham Forest case for the programme
'Special Assignment'.

Being a typical Italian, well American Italian, Chuck wanted to
make dinner, so he ended up taking over my kitchen and cooking a
superb seven course meal � which concluded at 3am. I must say it
was a very pleasant evening and great to catch up with everyone.
Chuck was passing through on his way to Germany so his presence
was completely un-planned. He still finds it amazing that he has
been wri'ten about in several books relating to UFOs, including
Peter�s 'Left At East Gate' co-authored with Larry Warren, Tim�s
'Above Top Secret' and of course my book 'You Can�t Tell The
People'.

Anna is a dear friend, who although does not have a great
interest in UFOs, is a social wonder and great dinner party
guest. She advised us all to make sure we pay special attention
to the younger generation for it seems that her fourteen year
old son and his college friends are very much interested in the
subject.


ULTIMATE UFO!

Probably the best UFO footage ever produced is the world�s
largest collection of UFO footage on two DVDs. I fully enjoyed
these discs which feature 250 film clips from 26 countries,
backed up with US government documents, many formerly classified
as secret. There are five and half-hours worth � covering almost
fifty years of sightings. The really great thing about the DVD�s
is that they include a special bar which enables you to pause,
return, forward, zoom in and everything you ever want to do with
such a superb collection of film. The commentary is made by
Peter Robbins and Antonio Huneeus. For more details and to order
the footage please visit: www.ufocity.com


NICK POPE�S BOOK

OPERATION LIGHTNING STRIKE, the latest book by Nick Pope is
published on 2 October and I will be reviewing it for my
November column. The techno thriller, which is a sequel to
OPERATION THUNDER CHILD is set in the future and deals with the
political and military response to an alien invasion.

The story begins with an alien spaceship heading towards earth
which is beaming powerful messages to world governments and the
media, assuring them of their peaceful intentions and promising
partnership and prosperity. But any chance of a peaceful
settlement is swept aside when a mysterious shadowy group known
as The Enterprise engineers a devastating attack against the
visitors. Forced into a war which earth cannot win but dare not
lose, the government and military struggle to contain an
increasingly desperate situation � but time is running out.

It promises to be an interesting thriller based on factual
information, and believe it or not - I am also a player in this
story. A blast from the past, no less!

Nick�s publishers are giving away ten copies of 'Operation
Lightning Strike' to the first ten people who offer the correct
answer to the following question. Wow, that�s not a difficult
one:

Q: What year was the Roswell incident?

Competition: Please e-mail your answer to the editor
georgina@easynet.co.uk and you could be a lucky winner. (UK
readers only)

Operation Lightning Strike published by Pocket Books: Price 9.99
PR and Publicity: Naomi Creeger 0207 316 1938

PICTURE: Cover of 'Operation Lightning Strike'


TIM GOOD�S BOOK

'Unearthly Disclosure' with a foreword by Lord Hill-Norton GCB
is published on 12 October and I hope to review it for a future
column.

Tim Good�s latest book reveals new information about alien
bases, alien contacts and abductions, genetic mutants, animal
mutilations and government paranoia. It covers important cases
from North and South America and the US Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico. Tim reveals the story of the teleportation of a British
Airways captain and the disappearance of an aircraft and its
pilots after reporting a UFO encounter off the coast of Puerto
Rico. The central section of the book deals with the incredible
story of Filiberto Caponi�s photographs of an alien creature,
which Tim has spent several years investigating.

Above all, a high-ranking source who worked at the pentagon in
the USAF Air Staff and Joint Staff discloses astounding new
information about alien bases on earth.

Unearthly Disclosure: Conflicting Interests in the Control of
Extraterrestrial Intelligence is published by Century on 12
October. Price 16.99

PR and Publicity: Sarah Harrison 020 7840 8614

GEORGINA BRUNI�S BOOK

Well, at last my long awaited book on the Rendlesham Forest
incident 'You Can�t Tell The People' will be published on 10
November. This is the definitive account of Britain�s Roswell,
an incident that took place on the perimeter of RAF Woodbridge
in Suffolk, England during Christmas week 1980. I�ll keep you
updated on this.

The casebook reveals fresh information about the incident and
the possible alien encounter that ensued, as well as the story
behind the cover-up and an explanation of why the key witnesses
have been silent for so long. There are interviews with former
high ranking military officers, special agents, political
figures, police officers and witnesses who have never talked
about the incident until now.

The casebook also re-examines Lt Colonel Halt�s famous
memorandum and tape recording of the incident and discloses the
truth concerning the official witness statements. It also
reveals vital new evidence which aims to prove that the UFOs not
only penetrated British air space but actually landed in
Rendlesham Forest. 'You Can�t Tell The People' answers the
critics, the cynics and the silencers who did not want the real
story to be told.

COMPETITION

Sidgwick and Jackson are offering hard-back books to the first
five people to give the correct answer to the following
question: (UK readers only)

Q: In what county did the Rendlesham Forest incident take place?

Please e-mail your answers to the editor: georgina@easynet.co.uk

You Can�t Tell The People published 10 November by Sidgwick and
Jackson. Priced 17.99

PR and Publicity: Kate Wright-Morris: Telephone 0207 881 8173 or
e-mail: K.Wright-Morris@macmillan.co.uk

Picture: Cover of 'You Can�t Tell The People'


Until next month

Georgina Bruni
London
October 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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

               Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct 2000

From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 00:45:15 +0100
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:47:09 -0400
Subject: Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct 2000


NICK  POPE�S  WEIRD  WORLD

Welcome to the October column, and another roundup of news and
views from the world of ufology, the paranormal, and defence
issues.

Operation Lightning Strike

My new book, Operation Lightning Strike, is published on 2
October by Simon & Schuster.  Although entirely self-contained,
it�s a sequel to Operation Thunder Child, which is published in
paperback on the same day.  The new book is about alien
invasion, and is part science fiction, part politico-military
techno-thriller and part non-fiction, as it incorporates some
real information about UFOs and the way in which the Government
would respond to a national emergency.  I�ve blended fact with
fiction and drawn n knowledge picked up while doing my official
Government UFO work, mixing this with experience that I picked
up while working in the Joint operations Centre during the Gulf
War.  As with the last book this meant that for legal reasons we
couldn�t use the standard disclaimer that is printed in all
novels (�This is a work of fiction.  The events described here
are maginary ��) but had to design something unique that would
satisfy all those parties who have an interest in the contents
of the book.  In many ways this is the most controversial book
that I�ve written, because it explores some aspects of the UFO
situation that I would never have been able to include in my
non-fiction books.  Some of the scenarios covered may have to be
addressed for real someday - perhaps sooner than many might
suppose. Accordingly, although Operation Lightning Strike is
written as a novel, it�s also aimed at a very specific audience,
designed as a speculative brief for various Establishment
personnel.  For obvious reasons I can�t go into too many details
about this, but as it�s unclassified, I can quote briefly from
the review of Operation Thunder Child that appeared in the
Ministry of Defence house journal, Focus, who described it as �A
fast- paced action thriller incorporating genuine UFO incidents�
(My emphasis). The review highlights the statement on the front
cover of the book, which says �The Truth can only be told in
fiction� and says �And one is left with the uneasy feeling that
it is best left that way�. Nobody wants to scare the public
unnecessarily, but I�ve always believed that people have a right
to know about the very serious defence and national security
issues raised by the UFO phenomenon.  We�d all like to hope that
our first open contact with an extraterrestrial civilisation
will be peaceful.  But things don�t always turn out the way we�d
like them to.  Operation Lightning Strike costs 10.00 while
Operation Thunder Child retails at 6.99.


UFO Drama On TV?

Those people who enjoyed Operation Thunder Child may like to
know that one of the principle independent drama production
companies in the UK has just optioned the TV rights to the book.
I�ve signed a contract with Carnival Films, the company
responsible for such films and TV series as varied as
Shadowlands, The Mill on the Floss, Bugs, Crime Traveller, Under
Suspicion and Poirot.  The screenplay is being written by
acclaimed writer Christopher Russell, whose credits include
Bergerac, Eastenders, The Bill and A Touch of Frost.  Watch this
column for more news on this.


Abduction Research Competition

I�ve often commented on the poor shape of abduction research in
the UK, and pointed out how far behind the United States we are
in terms of the support facilities that exist for abductees (see
for example my article in the July/August 2000 edition of UFO
Magazine).  The UFO Investigators Network (UFOIN) have responded
to this situation by announcing an essay competition entitled
�New Directions in Alleged Alien Abduction Investigation and
Research�.  One rule of this competition is that papers mustn�t
propose research initiatives that violate the UFOIN Code of
Practice.  Now here�s the interesting point about this: the Code
of Practice includes a total ban on the use of regression
hypnosis. I�m not sure what to make of all this.  The UFOIN team
are certainly free to make their own rules here, but it seems
odd to be quite this dogmatic, when they are speaking as
ufologists and not as mental health professionals.  John Mack, a
professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, has said that
if regression hypnosis is used responsibly in xamining cases of
alien abduction, it can be a valuable tool both diagnostically
and therapeutically.  While I suppose UFOIN are free to ignore
such expert views, it does seem a little strange.  Most
ufologists would acknowledge Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John
Mack as the world�s leading experts on the alien abduction
phenomenon.  Each have used regression hypnosis responsibly in
hundreds of cases.  And yet, if they were to enter the UFOIN
competition by writing papers that incorporated regression
hypnosis, their entries would be ruled ineligible.  It seems to
me bizarre to proclaim that you want to take forward
understanding of this phenomenon, while closing your eyes and
minds to the views of the leading authorities in the field.


British Abduction Figures

While others are doing a lot of navel gazing on alien
abductions, some people are getting out there, meeting the
abductees and working with them directly.  I� ve looked into
over one hundred cases to date and generally do this work out of
the glare of publicity.  I�ll be publishing some detailed
analysis of these cases in the future, as time permits, but I�ve
been asked to say something about the scope of this phenomenon
in the UK, with particular reference to the ratio of male to
female abductees.  The raw data is as follows:  To date this
year I have 13 new cases, five of which involve men and eight of
which involve women.  Last year I had 30 new cases (pretty much
the average that I receive each year), 17 of which  involved men
and 13 of which involved women.  Further updates and analysis to
follow.


Timothy Good�s New Book

Tim Good�s new book, Unearthly Disclosure, is published on 5
October and promises to be highly controversial.  Containing new
information about underground bases, close encounters and some
of the bizarre goings-on in Puerto Rico, this book includes
sensational new testimony from a number of government and
military insiders, and a number of astounding photographs.  Tim
is one of the world�s leading figures in the field, and his
books are always meticulously researched and highly readable.
He�s not afraid to speak his mind and goes where the data takes
him, upsetting believers as well as sceptics with his slaying of
various ufological sacred cows.  It� s this integrity that
places him at the head of the pack, and he�s someone who says
what he thinks as opposed to what he thinks people want to hear.
He backs up what he says with scholarly referencing, and like an
intelligence analyst, is always careful to differentiate between
what he thinks and what he knows.  Unearthly Disclosure is
published by Century and costs 16.99.  As with previous books,
the foreword is written by Admiral of the Fleet The Lord
Hill-Norton GCB.  Watch out for Tim in the media and at
fully-illustrated lectures in London (7 October), Birmingham (9
October) and Manchester (11 October).  Further details are in
UFO Magazine and at www.ufomag.co.uk and there�s a mail order
hotline for these lectures, which is 0113 260 4450.

Bentwaters Witness Statements

The truth has finally emerged about the witness statements from
some of those United States Air Force personnel involved in the
Rendlesham Forest UFO incident. UFO buff James Easton has for
some time now been offering selective quotes from some of the
witness statements in an attempt to support the theory
originally offered by science writer Ian Ridpath, namely that
some of the lights seen in the forest might have been generated
by the Orford Ness lighthouse.  Easton has irritated some
researchers who suspect that he�s simply been trying to write
himself into the Rendlesham affair and wants to be seen as a
�player�.  I don�t know about this, and it may be an unfair
accusation.  What has emerged, however, is the truth about how
Easton came by the witness statements in the first place.
Despite potentially misleading statements alluding to detailed
research and investigation and hinting at the possession of
various sources, it transpires that Jan Aldridge simply sent
Easton the statements (which comprised part of the CAUS file on
the incident) through the post some time ago!  If you want to
see all the statements and not just selective quotes, and if you
want to see how proper research on this material has been done,
all the data is included in Georgina Bruni�s forthcoming book on
the Rendlesham Forest Incident.  You Can�t Tell The People will
be published on 10 November by Sidgwick & Jackson, and costs
17.99.  And by the way, Georgina�s book blows the lighthouse
theory out of the water.


The Unopened Files

Issue 18 of The Unopened Files hit newsagents on 28 September,
and contains the usual mix of fascinating articles on mysteries,
cover-ups, conspiracies and other information that �they� don�t
want you to have.  This really is one of the best magazines on
the market, and anyone who has an interest in defence and
national security issues, the military, intelligence, science,
technology and a whole range of surprising and disturbing data
on the state and the military/industrial complex should
definitely subscribe.

Armageddon Averted?

The Government�s Near Earth Object Task Force report has now
been published. The Task Force members, Dr Harry Atkinson,
Professor David Williams and Sir Crispin Tickell have produced
an excellent report which describes the impact hazard from
comets and asteroids clearly and accurately.  Two of those who
have played a major part in this pioneering work are Lembit Opik
MP, who has championed this issue in Parliament, and Jonathan
Tate, Director of Spaceguard UK (the group that has lobbied on
this subject and briefed the key players). I�ll be keeping
readers informed of progress on the implementation of the Task
Force proposals as things evolve over the next few months.  This
is an issue that cannot be ignored and will not go away.  The
report can be seen in entirety at www.nearearthobjects.co.uk.


Nick Pope�s four books, Open Skies, Closed Minds, The Uninvited,
Operation Thunder Child and Operation Lightning Strike are
available from all good bookshops and from the usual Internet
book sites.  His British publishers are Simon & Schuster.  In
America, his first two books are published in hardback by The
Overlook Press and in mass-market paperback 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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                     McMinnville Photos - Joel Carpenter

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@temporaldoorway.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:28:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:50:06 -0400
Subject: McMinnville Photos - Joel Carpenter

Please post this to the list for Joel...

Thanks.


----------

From: carpenter_joel <carpenter_joel@EMAIL.MSN.COM>,
Date: 9/29/00 11:01 AM:
To: PROJECT-1947@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

Concerning my McMinnville web pages -

I've been stunned by the volume of hits and the amount of
comment generated. Unfortunately I haven't had time to respond
due to personal issues.

The page was obviously incomplete, a work in progress from last
spring. The ideas may or may not be correct. I expect thorough
rebuttals are in progress. I'd guess that Brad Sparks's will be
the most weighty, when it arrives.

I'll attempt to address issues of concern on my site, not here.
Hopefully, others will take a new look at the photos too.

I tried to post this message to UpDates this morning but it
bounced repeatedly. Maybe someone could forward it.

Thanks -

Joel Carpenter


------
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 >
   Sep > Sep 29

                             9/2000 UFO Photos?

From: Charles Chapman <charlesrc@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:32:48 -0700
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:51:15 -0400
Subject: 9/2000 UFO Photos?


Dear UpDates Colleagues,

Today I read a post on the Usenet newsgroup alt.paranet.ufo
regarding some new, September 2000 UFO photographs. I thought
you might find them of interest.

Perhaps the most interesting description, analysis and
photographs are located at:

http://www.lanset.com/sirius/companions/record21y2.html

Other photographs, accompanied by descriptions and analysis, can
be found, in at least my order of interest :), at:

http://www.lanset.com/sirius/companions/record19y2.html

http://www.lanset.com/sirius/companions/record23y2.html

http://www.lanset.com/sirius/companions/record20y2.html

http://www.lanset.com/sirius/companions/record22y2.html

The above web pages include links to pages with earlier
photographs.

Is anyone familiar with these photographs, or with the man,
Anthony J. Sanner, who took them?  Are any of the photographs of
interest?

-- Charles

__________

"Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions."
David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, (1888) Oxford University
Press, Book II, Part III,  pg. 415.








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 30

                      Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans

From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:06:31 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:45:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Evans


 >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
 >Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:18:46 -0400
 >Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:06:46 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout! - Maccabee

 >>Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:41:26 -0500
 >>From: Roger Evans <raka@swbell.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Trent Photos Blowout!
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

Okay, so here is where things get interesting. Previously, Bruce
wrote:

 >>>SO: we could have a 4" mirror 4.1' up and 11.5' radially away
 >>>which is 11.5cos(20.3) = 10.8 ft horizontal measure

 >>>or we could have a 5" mirror, 5.15' up and 14.4' radially away
 >>>from the camera which is 14.4 cos(20.3) = 13.5' horizontal
 >>>measure

We also know from David Rudiak that:

 >Trent [could have] cleverly chose a thread of about the same
 >lightness as the background, meaning that there is insufficient
 >contrast to find it on the negatives.

(I assume Bruce agrees with this)

And, lastly, Bruce wrote:

 >I know the mirror was reflecting the ground. Why don't you?


Now, if we stop right here, what we have is an amazing thing.
According to both Bruce and David it IS possible that the object
in dispute is, in fact, a mirror!

However, Bruce takes issue with my lack of concern over his
density readings. He writes:

 >They represent hundreds of hours of work to me, time that was
 >necessary until I got it right, spread over several years..

 >The density reading are, in fact, quite accurate, whether you
 >have "faith" in them or not.

(Perhaps you are a little _too_ attached to these readings,
Bruce?)

The truth is that I have never doubted the accuracy of your
readings. I merely have pointed out that you have nothing to
compare those readings to. In fact, in an earlier post you
wrote:

 >we have no photography
 >of the ground that would allow an estimate of the relative
 >brightness of the ground (grass, dirt) itself under the same
 >lighting conditions.

However, there is one result of your readings that is _very_
important. You wrote:

 >But you are correct in one sense.... the exercise was
 >"pointless" because it could not prove the object was distant.

So here's how things shake out:

1) We know that object could have been up close.

2) We know that it could be suspended undetected by a piece of
light thread.

3) We know that if it were a mirror, whatever we see in the
mirror is a reflection of whatever was present beneath it.

and most importantly,

4) We know that the thing looks like a truck mirror!

See, Bruce, I never suggested that the mirror was NOT reflecting
ground. What I said is that you have no way of knowing what it
was reflecting, and you still don't. Your issue is that the
"ground isn't supposed to look like that" or some such thing.
You even suggested (half heartedly) that there could have been
something on the ground that was lighter.

The problem is that the area reflected in the mirror is outside
the range of the camera! Therefore, you are reduced to
speculation about what is NOT in the photo and not so much about
what IS in the photo. And, frankly, this is what I've been
edging toward since this whole thing started.

You have density readings of everything in the photo, including
the bottom of the "mystery object". However, the one thing that
you do NOT have, to prove your case, is the only thing missing
from the photo; the ground being reflected by the mirror because
it is outside the range of the camera. In the absence of any
additional data, the only left to do is one of two things:

1) One could take the position that whatever the mirror is
reflecting simply looks like what it looks like. In other words,
if we saw a reflection of Harpo Marx in the mirror, then we'd
have to accept that Harpo Marx was laying on the Trent's lawn
whether it fit our theory or not!

or

2) One could argue that we shouldn't see Harpo Marx in the
reflection in spite of the obvious fact that we DO see Harpo
Marx.

My position is that the thing not only looks like a truck mirror
but, in fact, is a mirror reflecting whatever it "saw"; the end
result being a grainy, fuzzy blotch of dark grey that is
practically too vague to make any sense of with or without
something to compare it to.

Your position is that the thing can't be a mirror because you
don't like what you see in the mirror. Yet, you have nothing to
compare the reflection to, so you are reduced to making
proclamations that have no basis in fact; only assumption.

In short we are at a point where you admit that it could be a
truck mirror successfully suspended without detection at a
workable distance from the camera and such technique would not
be beyond Trent's ability. The only thing that you take
exception to, really, is the one thing you cannot prove because,
despite all your readings, you don't have any data on it.

In the end, who's making the most assumptions, here?

Roger








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 30

              Re: Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under -

From: Roy J Hale <royjhale@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 05:03:28 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:49:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under -


 >From: Bill Chalker <bill_c@bigpond.com>
 >To: <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Strange Nation - The Paranormal Down Under
 >Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:54:09 +1000

 >Check the new 'Strange Nation' site, mainly devoted to the
 >paranormal and strange down under.

 >I've written a book review on Bruce Maccabee's FBI book for the
 >site and an account of my own University of New England
 >"daylight disk" sighting back in 1972.

 >Enjoy,

 >Bill Chalker

 >http://www.strangenation.com.au/bookshelf.htm
 >http://www.strangenation.com.au/sna_uni_ufo.htm

I tried this link but kept getting an error page appear?
I am the only one to have this happen?

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 >
   Sep > Sep 30

               Re: Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct

From: James Easton <voyager@ufoworld.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 06:06:02 +0100
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:52:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct


 >From: Georgina Bruni <georgina@easynet.co.uk>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >Subject: Hot Gossip - Nick Pope's Weird World - Oct 2000
 >Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 00:45:15 +0100

'Go-Go Georgie' wrote:

 >NICK  POPE'S  WEIRD  WORLD

 >Bentwaters Witness Statements

 >The truth has finally emerged about the witness statements from
 >some of those United States Air Force personnel involved in the
 >Rendlesham Forest UFO incident.

The... err... 'truth'... was first revealed in March 1998 when,
after I had published 'Rendlesham Unravelled', Richard Hall
publicly stated, "My forthcoming account of the case in 'The UFO
Evidence: II' is based on direct communications with Colonel
Halt, who has been very helpful and cooperative, and on the same
set of documents from the CAUS files that others are talking
about".

No sweat Nick, it was only 29 months ago... we'll all wait for
you to catch up. You're not perchance part of the British 4 x
100 relay team?

 >UFO buff James Easton has for some time now been offering
 >selective quotes from some of the witness statements...

As you well know, or should if you've actually looked into this,
which I doubt, the full statements were made available long time
ago, either publicly or privately to those who had long
researched the case.

 >...in an attempt to support the theory originally offered by
 >science writer Ian Ridpath, namely that some of the lights seen
 >in the forest might have been generated by the Orford Ness
 >lighthouse.

Zoink! How appalling can your research be? If you have any idea
about these statements, which apparently you haven't, then you
would know they confirm the abortive lighthouse chase.

Don't you understand this basic proof? No. I expect you haven't
a Scooby-Doo.

 >Easton has irritated some researchers who suspect that he's
 >simply been trying to write himself into the Rendlesham affair
 >and wants to be seen as a "player".  I don't know about this,
 >and it may be an unfair accusation.

Your ignorance of any substantive evidence wouldn't stop you
though, and not for the first time, you pitiable little bitch.

 >What has emerged, however, is the truth about how Easton came by
 >the witness statements in the first place.

Only to you and more than two years later.

Welcome to the wide-awake club...

 >Despite potentially misleading statements alluding to detailed
 >research and investigation and hinting at the possession of
 >various sources...

As I say, you're so full of shite.

 >...it transpires that Jan Aldrich simply sent Easton the
 >statements (which comprised part of the CAUS file on the
 >incident) through the post some time ago!

No kidding.. through the post!

Obviously your only source of 'information' is Jan Aldrich's
recent UpDates rage that Brad Sparks or Bruce Maccabee had
informed him how on UFORL I posted 'LIST ONLY' material which
came from a contemporary of [then] Lt. Col Halt and was scathing
about Halt's credibility on base.

Jan - that wasn't you finest hour - you see how clowns like this
pick up on it?

The _true_ story of the six months I spent trying to get Jan
Aldrich, Richard Hall and FUFOR et al to permit publication of
those original witness testimonies - and that I was not only
never given permission, but Halt was 'warned' about my ultimate
intentions - will imminently be told.

Jan, I had hoped, as I said to you here, that it wouldn't be
critical, but, you know, fuck that. Pope and yourself can argue
the toss. He's your pal, not mine.

As you sow... I _do not_ appreciate these widely publicised
accusations. I'm sure you understand that I must confirm the
facts and have _all_ the supporting evidence.

 >If you want to see all the statements and not just selective
 >quotes, and if you want to see how proper research on this
 >material has been done, all the data is included in Georgina
 >Bruni's forthcoming book on the Rendlesham Forest Incident.

Gosh, such objective praise for the sycophantic Ms Bruni.

Excuse us while we reach for a brown paper bag.

 >You Can't Tell The People will be published on 10 November by
 >Sidgwick & Jackson, and costs 17.99.

Important info, the price I mean.

 >Nick Pope's four books, Open Skies, Closed Minds, The Uninvited,
 >Operation Thunder Child and Operation Lightning Strike are
 >available from all good bookshops...

Yes indeedy..

As my UFOIN colleagues will appreciate, if they can stop falling
about laughing, I once experienced a 'psychic premonition' and
prophesised:

"There's no 'middle-ground' anymore. When I revealed the
existence of those original documents - which was a difficult
situation because I chose to do this despite no response to my
_repeated_ requests for permission [I believe it's called an
'awkward silence'] - I became an enemy of the UFO fanatics. Not
for the first time and unquestionably not the last!

We're dealing with worse than that now - fanatical, vitriolic
idiots who will express a disdainful view of the 'stupid
debunkers and sceptics who claim the UFOs were a flying
lighthouse'.

Although I hope I'm being overly pessimistic, I expect the
battle will be a proverbially bloody one, with significant
casualties, primarily I suspect what little credibility
'ufology' has left in the UK. It will also, by necessity, make
hard-core skeptics out of some who were once otherwise.

No big deal; this has been on the cards for a long time and a
while back I commented that such was the state of ufology there
would ultimately have to be a realignment in recompense for the
unstoppable lurch it had taken towards abject stupidity - see
your next major UFO conference for appropriate details [if I
recall, in our case it's 'UFO Magazine' present Larry Warren,
plus Drs Wood on the 'reality of MJ-12' ad nauseous...].

In this relative benign atmosphere of the UFOIN and UFORL
forums, at present we can still discuss the issues, establish
facts with which we all concur and even have momentous
disagreements. Outwith, I'm afraid it's time to prepare some
fortifications for the coming storm. And also, of course, paint
myself with woad.

I expect to be lambasted... and any continued, critical stance
to the coming Rendlefest will incur the publicised ire of twits
like Pope and some 'prominent' American 'ufologists', the latter
offering praise and thanks that their beliefs are being
nurtured.

Lamentably, there's little encouragement for an objective
response under circumstances where the attacks could be personal
and I anticipate, pathetically nasty.

Also, don't be surprised how many, especially when Halt's long
awaited book is published, will disregard established facts and
join the crusade, especially against 'skeptics and debunkers'
and their 'ridiculous lighthouse theory'.

Just you watch... [END]

Nick, it's embarrassing, and I'm sure not just to myself, to
demonstrate how predictable your sad, pathetic and typically
unresearched comments are. It was so obvious this abysmal
diatribe was imminent and so far ahead of you it's scary.

I've always stood my ground on behalf of serious ufology -
whether in heated debates with 'believers' or 'skeptics' - will
above all do so as a team member of UFOIN and, trust me, these
colours don't run.

'Rendlesham' is a fascinating UFO case, with probably more
'witnesses' than any other. I could offer considerable,
unpublished evidence and the significant advantage of two years'
evaluation re those original witness statements. UFORL and UFOIN
subscribers might appreciate what I'm hinting at.

How can I reveal this though, if it's ultimately 'ammunition'
for the likes of Bruni, Pope and the 'SUN' newspaper?

This is the issue I've raised in UFORL discussions - is there
any room left for a 'middle ground' in ufology?

Some might say recent 'Meier' and 'Trent' debates have
illustrated the difficulties. Let's add the 'Ed Walters'
photographs or preposterous claims of a NASA 'cover up', et al.
Same result; where is there any room for an 'objective' stance?
Ideally there is, yet, in practice, there isn't...

Perhaps the issue is that so far as 'Rendlesham' goes, any
'middle ground' has been poisoned by the likes of Pope and Bruni
and we're left to 'take sides'.

Yes, that's the overall disappointment... it's no fun anymore...


Best wishes,

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 >
   Sep > Sep 30

               Contactees, Cults, and Culture Paper Published

From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@home.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:24:45 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:56:19 -0400
Subject: Contactees, Cults, and Culture Paper Published


List,

I have the pleasure of announcing the web publication of a paper
that appeared in the 1976 MUFON Symposium Proceedings. The
paper is titled, Contactees, Cults, and Culture by David Stupple
and William McNeece. Mr. cNeece and John Schuessler have
granted the permission neMeded to publicly post this paper and
Mr. McNeece has added an updated bio to the introduction.

You can view this paper at
http://members.home.net/tlemire/mcneece.html

Todd Lemire
Michigan UFO CENTRAL
http://members.home.net/tlemire/UFOCENTRAL.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 >
   Sep > Sep 30

                   Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Chapman

From: Charles Chapman <charlesrc@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 02:00:10 -0700
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 09:58:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Science's Neglect Of UFOs - Chapman


 >Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 07:55:10 +0100
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
 >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer@magonia.demon.co.uk>
 >Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>From: Brian Cuthbertson <bdc@fc.net>
 >>Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 15:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca
 >>Subject: Re: Meier-Hoax Claims

 >>Let me get this straight: "A panel of _neutral_ recognized,
 >>leading scientists"? Uh huh. Sorry Nathan, when it comes to the
 >>UFO phenomenon you've just stipulated a non-existent species.

 >>"Leading scientists" aren't neutral when it comes to UFOs, it
 >>tends to prevent grants being renewed. And one can just imagine
 >>what could happen to the careers of your esteemed panelists if
 >>by some chance they decided in favor of Meier.

 >We hear this claim a lot. Can anybody come up with a documented
 >example of a scientist losing research grants after having taken
 >a serious - repeat, serious - interest in UFOs?

The following does not directly answer your question, but you may
nevertheless find the information interesting.

In the book UFOs and Abductions, Challenging the Borders of
Knowledge, (2000) University Press of Kansas, edited by David M.
Jacobs, the second chapter is entitled "Limited Access: Six
Natural Scientists and the UFO Phenomenon." Said chapter is by
Ron Westrum, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology and Interdisciplinary
Technology at Easter Michigan University.

In the section entitled "Barriers to Entry and Limitations on
Inquiry," Westrum states:

"UFO work also hurt the reputations of those who did it. Of the
six men considered [i.e., Donald Menzel, Carl Sagan, James E.
McDonald, J. Allen Hynek, Jacques Vallee, Edward U. Condon],
only one (Sagan) emerged unscathed from his involvement. Stigma
is a real risk for those entering taboo research areas. A
variety of restrictions, from informal pressures (evident in the
case of Hynek, inferred in the case of Sagan) to outright
sancitons against research in this area (McDonald), are
evident."

Id. at 52 (brackets added, parenthesis in original).

Speaking of Hynek, Westrum states:

"Hynek's early involvement with the field is a case in point.
Brought in by the air force as a consultant in 1948, Hynek
recognized the pressures brought to bear not only on himself but
also on the air force project (successively Projects Sign,
Grudge, and Blue Book). Hynek knew he was supposed to keep a low
profile, and he did. Only later, as department chair of
astronomy at Northwestern, and thus in a basically unasailable
position, was he persuaded by the Invisible College (in support)
and James McDonald (in accusation) to make a positive position
public. He stated during a 1973 interview that he knew that any
other course of action would have ended his participation and
sidelined his career."

Id. at 52 (parenthesis in orginal).

Westrum discusses the situation regarding McDonald at some
length at pages 38 to 40.









   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 30

                         Friedman On Siegel, Oct. 2

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 08:20:39 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 10:01:41 -0400
Subject: Friedman On Siegel, Oct. 2


I was asked on Thursday to be on the Mike Siegel Coast-to-Coast
show on Monday Night from 2AM (Tuesday morning) Atlantic Time
until 6:00AM.. I intend to take a strong stand about Robert
Park's totally unscientific and irrational book "Voodoo Science:
the Road from Foolishness to Fraud" with a special focus on the
really bad chapter about Roswell. The book is a splendid example
of voodoo science! Park is a PhD and very active in the American
Physical Society of which I have been a member  for about 45
years. The book has unfortunately had favorable reviews...
obviously from people who have checked nothing.

I intend to challenge him to a debate, though I understand he
had a bad accident and might still be in the hospital. Reminds
me of  Dr. Krauss ("Physics of Star Trek") with whom I tangled
on Jeff Rense's show. He refused a debate challenge on his
campus.... after all as the mantra for nasty noisey negativists
goes "Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up."

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 >
   Sep > Sep 30

                         Check Out This Crop Circle!

From: Kelly Peterborough <kellymcg@attcanada.ca>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 08:41:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 10:08:58 -0400
Subject: Check Out This Crop Circle!

Reconstruction Of The 2000 Chilbolton Radio Telescope Crop
Formation -

http://cropcircleconnector.com/2000/chilbolton/chilbolton2000reconstruction.htm

Courtesy of Sightings http://www.sightings.com








   UFO UpDates
   A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
   'Its All Here In Black & White'
   Location: VirtuallyStrange.net > UFO > UpDates Mailing List > 2000 >
   Sep > Sep 30

             UpDates Off-Line Until Wednesday, October 4th, 2000

From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 10:26:34 -0400
Fwd Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 10:26:34 -0400
Subject: UpDates Off-Line Until Wednesday, October 4th, 2000

Those of you have been readers of UFO UpDates for several whiles
will recall that, periodically, 'work' drags me away from screen,
keyboard, text editor and Eudora.

A manufacturer of 4-wheeled transpo demands to give me money in
return for assistance with the launch of their 2001 line of
vee-hicles. So, being like so many others in this field,
monetarily disadvantaged, I need to heed the call.

Consequently, as of this post UFO UpDates will be off-line until
p.m. this coming Wednesday, October 4th.

I realise that this will, for differing reasons, cause angst for
some. And to the severely addicted I 'pologise. Try not to use
news.groups in the interim, you never know what you'll pick up.....

ebk