UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:29:39 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:46:58 -0500 Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Deardorff >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:20:22 -0000 >Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:22:22 -0800 >>Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:26:27 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns >Nobody's degrading anyone's intelligence, and if you read my >post you'll see I said "meteors, stars and planets". Lots of >people saw lots of lights that night, some apparently near where >radar targets were, some not. And there were a lot of radar >targets to choose from. A lot of the visual reports sound >exactly like meteors - swift streaks appearing "beyond the >atmosphere" - others sound like stars and planets. Many of those probably were indeed meteors. It's the visual (and radar) reports of high strangeness I've been referring to all along. >However if you continue to believe that this is an effective and >persuasive body of evidence strong enough to persuade scientists >to investigate exotic UFO phenomena then good luck to you. We >must agree to disagree. It is this event (July 19/20 and 26/27, 1952) with elements of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:09:02 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:48:46 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Deardorff >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:31:31 -0000 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:57:00 +0000 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:47:11 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >'Science', in the person of Jim McDonald, a high-profile >academic and respected atmospheric physicist, categorically >denied that discrete radar echoes due to near-specular >scattering from small domains moving across thin layers of >extreme RI gradient were physically possible. >Two 'ordinary folk' working for the CAA actually detected these >phenomena and personally measured them, correlated them with >meteorological conditions and wrote a very provocative report on >it all. >McDonald continued to deny that the mechanism was possible. Is that really so? In his address at the 14th Radar Meteorology Conference in 1970, McDonald said, "It is to be understood that I exclude from this discussion (a) all really extensive layer-type returns of the sort now fairly familiar to radar meteorologists from many studies, (b) dot-angels of both wind-independent (insects, birds) and wind-dependent (atmospheric refractive anomalies) types, (c) ring angels, and (d) intense but generally really extensive and only slowly changing ground returns due to AP. After that elimination, there still remains a class of wind- independent returns, often highly localized and often exhibiting apparent speeds of propagation well above ambient wind speeds and sometimes even well above known aircraft speeds." (a) above can be interpreted as eliminating from UFO consideration radar returns of Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities, which occur within a layer of considerable extent. This mechanism and the resulting CAT was known to radar meteorologists at least by 1968. Obvously, the resulting turbulence giving the strongest radar returns could lie within localized regions of the layer. But if there is nothing of "high strangeness" about it, it would not have interested McDonald, for he went on to add: "Cases that I have looked into include targets whose speeds have, within a single tracking episode, varied from zero to several times his [Plank's] suggested upper limit [of 2000 mph]."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:35:25 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:50:22 -0500 Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Deardorff >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:12:50 -0500 >Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:22:22 -0800 >>Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns <snip> >>The quoted report above is as good as it gets. One is not going >>to find an account wherein a UFO observed visually in >>confirmation of one observed seconds previously on radar is >>written down on the sport in some journal like as in: "I/we >>observed an anomalous light in the sky in the very same >>direction as the "angels" we observed on radar and only xx >>seconds later," with further description of both showing high >>strangeness. The observer(s) at the time just don't stop to >>think what all information ufologists might later demand to >>know, especially when the event is highly anomalous and even >>frightening (as in the pacing of an aircraft by the unknown >>object). >Actually something like this happened in the New Zealand >sightings of 1978. Nothing was "written down." However, even >better, it was recorded on audiotape on the plane and at the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:08:38 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:55:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hatch >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:02:35 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:36:38 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:15:18 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' Just a short note Aaron, if I may. I must agree with Sir Richard. Frankly, I think Dr. Leir is full of it. You are always free to think otherwise of course, but for a foot doctor?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:33:23 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:56:52 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Boone >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:14:32 -0700 >Subject: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. >Source: Science Frontiers, No. 157, Jan-Feb, 2005, p. 2 >http://www.science-frontiers.com >ASTRONOMY >No canals, but glassy tubes instead >Reading T. Van Flandern's long article on the "glassy tubes" of >Mars is like perusing P. Lowell's century-old *Mars As an Abode >of Life*. Instead of Lowell's great system of canals built by >Lowell's presumed ancient Martians, Van Flandern describes a >spooky, definitely unearthlike phenomenon that could be either >geological or artificial. >Lowell's Martian canals were drawn from fleeting, terrestrial- >telescope images. The glassy tubes are seen instead through >close-up satellite eyes. The first hints of these remarkable >"tubes" reached earth-based radio antennas in April 1998 in >high-resolution images of the Cydonia region of Mars. <snip> >Satellite photo of a Martian glassy tube with two collapsed >sections: >http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/full_gif_map/M15/M1500465.gif No, no, no, no, no. I ain't buyin' it. Looks like another case of grasping for straws, er tubes. I've seen more interesting and similar formations flying over the frozen Great Lakes. I've seen more interesting formations when my grits cereal is left in the bowl too long. ( Yes, there is a thing called grits cereal). I'm so tired of these vaguely familiar, need a microscope and ten hour lecture to get the idea that some erosion pattern or impact scar is the remnant of some ancient civilization that I could scream. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for scouring the available Mars pics for anything of merit but jumping to conclusions without razor sharp and multiple angles of areas of archaeological interest isn't science it's fun stuff. When we get to a highway sign or a Martian version of "Kilroy Was Here" then we'll be talking turkey.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:39:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:57:59 -0500 Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns - Maccabee >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:51:27 EST >Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:19:12 -0500 >>Subject: Re: False(?) Radar Returns <snip> >http://brumac.8k.com/NEW_ZEALAND/RADARUFOS.doc >>This is a word document, about 240kb. >>It discusses a radar only case in Switzerland and radar-visual >>and radar-visual-photographic sightings in New Zealand. >>Of particular interest is the "double size target" event when >>the airplane target as seen by ground radar doubled in size for >>many seconds just after an anomalous target was seen in the >.>close vicinity of the plane. A target was also seen close to the >>plane after the event. And during the event the witnesses on the >>plane saw a small light apparently traveling along with the >>plane. To get the full impact of this event it is necessary to >>read the history leading up to it. ><snip> >>When I described the "double size target" incident, which >>occurred when the plane was about 80 nm from the search radar, >>to Atlas his immediate response was "UFO" (probably said with a >>laugh... which I didn't record in my notes). Then he went on to >>suggest a flock of birds as the only possible reflector but of >>course, birds couldn't keep up with an aircraft (see the >>RADARUFOS paper to see why this is even considered). >I don't see the mystery. If two aircraft-sized radar blips are >n close proximity, less than the target discrimination >distance, then they will appear to be one blip of about double >the size (or double the radar cross-section). One was the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:17:14 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:59:27 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:14:32 -0700 >>>Subject: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>These are very strange features! >>At first sight they look like dune fields formed in land >>depressions, and there are many similar looking and similarly >>oriented dune-like patches in other parts of the image outwith >>the 'tube', suggesting this. But the oddest thing is the way the >>land cradling the 'tube' has an appearance almost as though it >>were a fabric stretched down under its weight! >>I suppose the dark striations running vertically up and down >>the sides of the 'valley' could be the trace of material that >>has migrated down the slopes, and a collecting of this dark >>material at the foot of scarp along the edges of the dune field >>could possibly explain the apparent "shadows". >>But I'm only wildly guessing. It still looks very weird. >As an amateur Marsologist, (having enjoyed their candy bars) I >hereby toss out my interpretation of the "translucent cylinders" >I think they are sand dunes. Hi Larry, And in support of this, have you noticed that the ripples of chocolate on the top surface of a Mars bar have this same dune- like pattern? Case closed I think. :-)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:20:58 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:00:38 -0500 Subject: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:56:38 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:48:12 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:40:28 -0500 >>>Subject: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? <snip> >If only one UFO UpDater here captured a good photo or image of a >UFO, we could all rejoice, since we wouldn't have to try and >determine if the person was perpetrating a hoax or just goofy. >We could accept the image as a bonafide, and take it from there. There is no "there" to take it from or to, and no such image could be accepted as bona fide without backup, a lot of backup. >Rehashing radar anomalies is fascinating to some (my friend Kyle >King for example) but it won't help us capture data that will >finally resolve the UFO issue. That was my only point. We already have thousands of UFO photos and they do not "finally resolve the UFO issue" all by themselves, and for good reason: Photos do not tell you how large or how far away the object is. Radar can give you a distance and in some cases the altitude. Photos can easily be hoaxed because they do not yield the object's size or distance, hence the image could be a small model at close range or a large ET spacecraft at long distance, there is usually no proof one way or the other and hence it does not "finally resolve the UFO issue." The few exceptions are where there is stereoscopic triangulation in the photos (McMinnville for example) or tracking network triangulation (White Sands). The Condon Committee found and covered up the fact that 16 of its unexplained UFO cases correlated with Smithsonian meteor tracking camera photos. Those cases could prove significant. As I have posted here previously, simple statistics shows that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:32:24 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:03:51 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Ledger >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >I vote for natural causes. If Earth were inhabited by >intelligent beings, Mars would have been taken over long ago. I agree with natural causes, Larry? It was either Martin or Terry that mentioned water forming patterns. I used to SCUBA dive during one period of my life and noticed this pattern on the bottom sand in shallow water, near shore many times. It was probably caused by wave action/currents. Perhaps though, these "rills" were caused by the Martian winds blowing over the sands collected at the bottom of slopes. There's a different ecology at work there where there is very low density atmospheric pressure combined with very dry winds. We don't really have a comparison here on Earth since that pressure is about the same as that experienced at 40 miles and we have no land at that elevation.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: UFO Research Tools - McGonagle From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:18:43 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:07:03 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - McGonagle >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:32:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:34:27 -0000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>Subject: UFO Research Tools >>>Can anyone think of any other tools or comments about the above? >>Don't forget the obvious: >>- Eyes! >>- Ears! >For scientific data gathering research, these are useful in that >its hard to work without them, but since the data gathered with >them are subjective, they are of use mainly to warn of events. The trouble is that the effects of loud music and bright lights tend to interfere with the operation of these. <snip> >>Other "tools" that have been used: >>-Candles > Why? To replace the flashlight/torch or attract UFOs? -To assist with meditation, I believe. I have a film-clip of someone sitting in a field surrounded by candles trying to "attract" UFOs. I'm not sure, but I think the clip is on "Britain's secret UFO hunters". >>-Strobe lights >I mentioned flashing lights in my original post. >>-Ouija board >>-Orgone generator >>-Spiritual battery >You are kidding right? Were any of these 3 reported to work? I >mean reputibly speaking. I can't remember where I saw the reference to the Ouija board, I have been going through a lot of UFO journals from the 60s and 70s recently, it was probably in one of those. For details of the wonderful powers of the orgone generator (including as an attractor of UFOs), see #11 and #13 at: http://educate-yourself.org/dc/dcorgonegenfaq26feb02.shtml The "Spiritual battery" was (and AFAIK still is) used by the Aetherius Society on skywatches, though I don't fully understand it's purpose. >>-Chanting >>-Loud music >Why would sounds attract UFOs? The chanting has been used (most often by the Aetherius Society) to assist in meditation. The loud music may have only been a form of entertainment for the participants, I am not sure, but I believe it was used at some early "Giant Rock" events. It was also an unwelcome feature at a skywatch in Wiltshire that I attended last year, a full-blown rave was in progress nearby, replete with strobes, lasers, and ordinary flashing lights. The reliability of the positive reports from these methods will depend on one's own acceptance of the methods used - for myself, I am sceptical. >>-Hand-waving >What is the effect of hand waving? Does the UFO wave back?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:53:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:07:51 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - White >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >e) - one shot apparently indicates a vehicle/large organism >traveling inside tube. You mean successive photos showed the vehicle/large organism in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 Kicking The Sacred Cow From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 19:37:18 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:13:33 -0500 Subject: Kicking The Sacred Cow Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. Source: Science Frontiers Book Supplement No. 157, Jan-Feb, 2005, p. 1 http://www.science-frontiers.com BOOK REVIEW: Kicking the Sacred Cow: Questioning the Unquestionable and Thinking the Impermissible J.P. Hogan 374+xv pp., 2004 $24.00 Hogan detests orthodoxies and those who defend them in the face of massive contrary evidence. Be warned that there is much heresy in this book, much justified, some questionable. Hogan has raised the corner of that proverbial rug and let light shine upon what has been swept thereunder. His chapter headings reveal where and how deeply he has sinned. - Humanistic Religion: The Rush to Embrace Darwinism - Of Bangs and Braids: Cosmology's Mathematical Abstractions - Drifting in the Ether: Did Relativity Take a Wrong Turn? - Catastrophe of Ethics: The Case for Taking Velikovsky Seriously - Environmental Fantasies: Politics and Ideology Masquerading as Science - Closing Ranks: AIDS in the Viricentric Universe [Drawing caption: Numbers of phyla vs. geological time. (A) According to Darwinian theory. (B) According to the fossil record, which spikes at the beginning of the Cambrian about 570 million years ago. (From: _Kicking the Sacred Cow_)]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 1 This Week`s Stock of the Week! From: "Emmie Rich" <antonov.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 02:49:23 +0300 Archived: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 02:49:23 +0300 Subject: This Week`s Stock of the Week!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:03:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:32:55 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Maccabee >rom: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >I think they are sand dunes. >Not just any old sand dunes mind you, but those left in the slot >canyons of ancient rivers! Martian winds would follow the same >river courses, folding sands into what looks like struts or >support structures. I recently suggested to an interested party that they might be sand bars, left in a river after the water evaporated. The periodicity is unexpected, but we know that sand dunes created by wind are repetitive and sand bars may be the same.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:03:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:37:24 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: UFO Research Tools >I was going over some of the historical work in scientific UFO >data gathering. There are a number of interesting tools that >have been used. What I would like to know is what are the best >tools to gather UFO data. Has this been compiled elsewhere? >Cameras >These seem to be the most common tool but are of limited used >unless multiple cameras are used (or stereophotos) and excellent >recording of camera properties are made. Single photos are, at best, an aide to the witness' recollection. Must be backed up by solid circumstantial evidence (the "back story" behind the photos). Better would be two cameras in a stereo pair, as in some Gulf Breeze sightings, but need to know exact characteristics of a stereo camera and backup by circumstantial evidence. >Videocameras >Somewhat better in some respects than plain cameras but usually >seem to have less quality for the benefit of multiple frames. >Again, good knowledge of videocamera properties is needed. Yes, by all means IF you use the audio channel as well to report impressions, descrptions of phenomena, etc. Even better if backed up by sharp still photos (as in some Gulf BReeze cases). >Spectral imaging/photography >These seem to be of great value in that one may deduce from the >spectra whether the object's fingerprint matches prosaic >objects. May also indicate composition of object or its >operation. The drawback seems to be the need to focus well on >the object and obtain sufficient light. Project Hessdalen has >gotten a few such images. How well has this been used in the UFO >research area? Has it made any difference or have any good >results been obtained? Diffraction grating in cameras were used in Gulf Breeze sightings of "Bubba". In one case spectrum proved that a Bubba light was not a red road flare (spectrum of light and of flare obtained with the same camera, same film, same grating... showed difference in spectra) >Lens types >Include binocular, telescopic, fish eye and computer controlled >tracking/focus/zoom. Unknown how necessary these are. Zoom nice to take wide field shot and then narrow field shot(s). >Infrared/other cameras/videocameras >Unknown how useful these are. Again, Gulf Breeze Bubba case with infrared film proved decidedly interesting. Mexico flir case may not be as interesting. >Audio recording >Useful to document the UFO observation and equipment setup. >Using a parabolic dish, it may be useful to gather UFO audio. By all means, audio record immediate impressions as in New Zealand case, Can be done with video camera, of course. I used a parabolic dish in a Bubba sighting... ran directly into a recorder and earphones. I didn't get any sound at all associated with the UFO. >Audio spectrography >Bruce Cornet had good results using this tool. The drawback is >that you need to be fairly close to get a good signal to >analyze, otherwise you will get too much noise. Still, it is >possible after recording the audio to match it with known >engines/objects. Although you can get an instrument/tool to do >this, you can use a digital or tape recording from a device and >feed the signal into a computer for analysis. Could be useful. I seem to recall a case from Portland Oregon(?) of a UFO in the middle of the river rcorded by a police microphone. Been a long time since this... maybe someone else on list recalls more. >Radios/transceivers >This seems like a useful tool and has been shown as such to >indicate nearby UFOs (since they seem to generate EMFs). Such >devices can be used with triangulation to pinpoint or monitor >UFO position. Yes, have been used in GB for comunication between separated witnesses. <snip> >Magnetometer >This seems like it has mixed results in use and that it seems to >depend on the tool's sensitivity and proximity to the UFO. Too >many other devices nearby (aircraft, cars, clouds) seem to cloud t>he use of this device. If used, it seems that this device >should at least have a recorder and hopefully more than one (an >array) can be distributed at the observation site. >Alternatively, this device has a good use in mapping the region >that UFOs are sited (although this seems tedious in rough >country). Direct measure of magnetic field could be useful. In a Gulf Breeze case there was a remnant magnetic field detected by a gradient magnetometer. >Compass >An inexpensive method which is fairly useless as a warning >device of an UFO approach/event, but could be used after one is >sighted, to observe if there are gross magnetic field >distortions. >Geiger Counter >Any device of this type seems of limited use unless very close >proximity to the UFO event. Obviously it could be used to >investigate landing sites or close approaches to trees/other >objects. Usually, these are too expensive to bother with. Very few cases have any remnant radioactivity. >Gravimeters >Project Hessdalen uses these but with little useful data. >Although it would seem like UFOs violate gravity, the effect >seems as short distance as the nuclear radiation effects. Likely >not a useful tool. >Time device >Since so many temporal anomalies have been recorded associated >with UFOs and since watches and clocks are cheap, then it makes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Happy New Year From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:09:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:38:49 -0500 Subject: Happy New Year
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: A Possible Method For Visual Data Collection? From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:42:02 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:40:27 -0500 Subject: Re: A Possible Method For Visual Data Collection? >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:43:02 EST >Subject: Re: A Possible Method For Visual Data Collection? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:45:23 -0600 >>Subject: A Possible Method For Visual Data Collection? >>I saw this article... >http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/highspeedarray/ >>I was intrigued at the possibility of using such an inexpensive >>array for sky surveying. >>I'm not sure of the feasibility for UFO sky surveying purposes, >>but it sure seems like an interesting possibility. >>If several of these arrays were located in discrete locations >>around an area, we might be able to record... webcam style... >>aerial phenomena at very hi-speed, and might get some really >>good images to work with. >>I could even envision a portable multi-array setup, where >>investigators could deploy several of these arrays in an area of >>persistent UFO activity, and monitor over time for sightings. >>This is another good example of how low-tech can be leveraged to >>produce decidedly hi-tech results. >Unfortunately such camera arrays would generate monstrous >quantities of useless images of nothing interesting and make it >impossible to find the usefel events. This would dwarf even the >NSA's database. >The only way something like this could be useful is if it was >combined with something like a passive radar system that would >trigger the camera array for a particular direction in the sky. >Then the only images will be something with a good chance of >being interesting. Hi Brad, I couldn't agree more. Only in conjunction with additional tech would the volume of gathered images be worth culling through. I specifically am intrigued by the passive radar system. If such a system worked in real-time, and allowed some moments for calibration, the high-speed array described could yield some high-quality images. On its own, I agree that the data would be overwhelming.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 It's the Rael Thing From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:45:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:45:25 -0500 Subject: It's the Rael Thing Source: The Globe & Mail - Toronto http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050101/BKRA= EL01/TPEntertainment/Books 01-01-05 Page D8 Entertainment It's the Rael Thing By Salem Alaton Aliens Adored: Rael's UFO Religion By Susan J. Palmer Rutgers University Press, 226 pages, $21.95 (pb) Spiritual notions centred on UFOs aren't always much further outside rational comprehension than are mainstream religious beliefs The night sky affords visible affirmation of the infinity within which our minuscule existences operate. The possibility of extraterrestrial life somewhere in the vast universe doesn't violate ordinary logic. And in an era when technology is a god, it follows that a form of divinity may be conferred on some imagined, distant species of great technological advancement. Throughout decades of claimed UFO sightings and alien encounters, a modest number of fervent people have responded this way. Canadian photojournalist Douglas Curran once spent years driving around North America to meet them, the effort resulting in a 1985 book called In Advance of the Landing: Folk Concepts of Outer Space. Under a predictably vivid quilting of eccentricity, the rural Alberta gas-station operators and California retirees who had built flying saucers in their backyards evinced an unexpected kind of poignancy. While humans were poised to destroy themselves with their atom bombs, they believed, wiser alien brothers had harnessed technology to better ends, and these space creatures - Jesus was often perceived as one of them - represented hope. Is science fiction as a religion more fantastic than, say, the Judeo-Christian mythos? Lacking the weight of history or broad acceptance, it's certainly easier to ridicule. More to the point, its "prophets" are our entirely visible contemporaries, and its cultish excesses and hypocrisies are subject to present- day showcasing. Nascent Judaism and Christianity endured cataclysms, but it's unclear they could have survived CNN. Which brings us to a Quebec-centred UFO group and its leader Rael, the self-proclaimed son of an extraterrestrial named Yahweh and half-brother to Jesus, Moses and Buddha. There's little poignancy here, except perhaps for followers who lost marriages and custody of their children as the price of membership, or the young women who are proscribed from physical intimacy with anyone but Rael (and the extraterrestrials who created the human race via cloning). Having most of the hallmarks of a cult, starting with a colossally self-aggrandizing autocrat at their head, the Raelians have excited as much anger and hostility as ridicule. That has apparently been all to the good, for one of the peculiar talents of Rael - a racing car hobbyist born in France in 1946 as Claude Vorilhon - has been aggressively to court outrage and inflame general sensibilities while amassing the usual booty sought by charismatic big shots and lesser schlubs alike: power, in this case significantly translated as the fealty of sexually numinous babes. Susan J. Palmer, a teacher of religious studies at Dawson College in Montreal, chronicles this tale from the time of Vorilhon's claimed first encounter in 1973 with the Elohim, the extraterrestrials who designated him a prophet. Palmer had been studying the group for 13 years when Raelians made world headlines in 2000 with their declared intention to clone a human child. That hubbub escalated in 2002 with the group's entirely dubious claim to have done so through its Clonaid lab under a PhD chemist, Brigitte Boisselier. In the school of all publicity being good as long as your name is spelled correctly, the Clonaid caper starring the never-seen baby Eve was a high-water mark for Raelians. They currently claim a membership of 65,000 worldwide but this is no more verifiable than Rael's regular s=E9ances with the Elohim (such contact is forbidden to his followers). In any case, negative attention often works well for groups looking to cull the disaffected. Vorilhon's virulent anti- Catholicism, expressed in such stunts as the distribution of condoms outside Catholic schools, likely wins some Raelian converts in Quebec. An ethos that elevates free-ranging recreational sex to the point of absolving parents of responsibility to their children, draws a heavy plurality of males to the group. Who the Raelian emblem of a swastika inside a Star of David attracts isn't entirely clear, although Jews accosted outside their Montreal synagogues to be told that Rael is the Messiah have not been eager supporters. Author of Moon Sisters, Krishna Mothers, Rajneesh Lovers: Women's Roles in New Religions and a number of other books on fringe sects, Palmer offers a survey of these dreary doings that's almost as curious as the subject. She declares her vantage is that of a sociologist, but plays that card selectively. While dutifully citing the negatives without assessment of their human cost, she is also a declared enthusiast, even happily pointing to parallels between Rael's religion and the Mormonism of her upbringing. She explains in her introduction, "I resolved to write about the Raelian Movement as I had always seen it - as a harmless, delightful religious subculture bursting with vitality, whose values were far more responsive to contemporary dilemmas (overpopulation, sexism, racism, nuclear war) than were those of most of the great traditions - certainly than those of the Catholic Church." Palmer allows being disgruntled when Rael started compelling visitors to bow and refer to him as His Holiness, and his intolerance of criticism verged into paranoia. Still, she admires his "taking the mickey out of his disapproving audience" and feels the sect embodies the "magic" that "our contemporary churches are badly in need of." Palmer even manages to use the term "feminist" a couple of times in relation to the Raelians, praising Vorilhon as "a connoisseur of feminine beauty." Well. While Raelians have not been self-destroying in the manner of the Solar Temple cult and others, to claims of delight and harmlessness a diplomatic and thoughtful response might still be: "Huh?" The upshot for all those lonesome non-Raelian UFO dreamers, of course, is that their pathos-tinged celestial hopes of alien salvation are yet again cast into a media zone somewhere between the farcical and the sinister. Hence, it might seem fair to ask, does Vorilhon himself believe what he says? Palmer thinks so, but it's actually a moot point. Whether you really imagine you're the Messiah or just position yourself that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Martian Cheshire Cat - Stevenson From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 11:29:31 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:50:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Martian Cheshire Cat - Stevenson >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:26:09 -0600 >Subject: Re: Martian Cheshire Cat >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:07:12 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Re: Martian Cheshire Cat >>>From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:06:58 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Martian Cheshire Cat <snip> >>Seems like its fallen to me to break the bad news to you. >>When you see the name "Colin Stevenson" in the header and in >>particular when the title of the message refers to Mars, you can >>safely delete it without even bothering to have to open it. >I'm well aware of "Col's" ufological Rorschach tests. He sees ET >hiding in flower beds and shrubbery as well as battleships in >Martian rock. He's the "boy who cried UFO". The way I figure it, >like the boy who cried wolf, someday he might actually be right >but no one will believe him. I decided I'll look at what he's >got and maybe, just maybe, there might actually be something to >it. Of course with this latest post, like all the other times, >he's delusional. >Sometimes I think he's just yanking our chains. Hi Listers, As an early Retired Architectural Technician used to working with maps and aerial photograph interpretation of buildings and land areas, etc., plus the high extent of my web site visitors together with my and your sense of humour, we may all go forward in this new year of 2005 onward and outward to the realization of our goals of definite proof of ET, their craft and excellent artwork. Always glad to put a smile on anyone's face
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 13:07:04 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:52:23 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >Hello Martin, >Have been in correspondence with Joseph P Skipper >(MarsAnomalyResearch.Com) some time ago (and earlier with Tom >van Flandern on other matters) and have assembled a summary: Hi Ray, Thanks for the links and info. As you seem to have studied this,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: UFO Research Tools - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 15:49:50 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Koi >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:53:01 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: UFO Research Tools >>I was going over some of the historical work in scientific UFO >>data gathering. There are a number of interesting tools that >>have been used. What I would like to know is what are the best >>tools to gather UFO data. Has this been compiled elsewhere? <snip> >I also have a site called 'UFO Tools' at: >http://terrygroff.com/ufotools/ >which I hoped would expand in to an aid for all researchers but >I've had no indication that anyone is actually using it and >except for Ray Stanford no one has contributed to it. <snip> Hi James, Terry et al, I think there is a danger of conflating several separate (albeit potentially overlapping) issues. It is possible to separate the issues in several ways, including the following: (a) Tools for field investigations of past sightings, (b) Tools for instrumented UFO sky searches, (c) Tools for attempting communication with UFOs. Whilst some tools may be used by some researchers in more than one category (e.g. a flashlight), I find it useful to think about each category separately. At the very least, the most obvious sources of discussion of such tools differ in each category. For example: (a) the first category is most commonly discussed in the field investigation manuals produced by various authors and groups, (b) the second category is most commonly discussed in relation to SETV, Project Twinkle, Project Identification and Project Hessdalen, (c) the third category is most commonly discussed in relation to Greer, CSETI etc. A. Tools for field investigations of past sightings In relation to the first category, relevant discussions in field investigation manuals include the following: (a) MUFON's manual - Raymond Fowler discusses The Field Investigator's Kit in MUFON's Field Investigator's Manual - 4th Edition (1995) at pages 102 (in Chapter 4) of the MUFON looseleaf edition. That chapter includes three lists of items, without discussion of their uses. The relevant lists are of Necessary Equipment (identification card, questionnaire forms, investigator's manual, compass, camera, tape measure, flashlight, string, knife, and other items), Desirable Equipement (tape recorder, colour chart, elevation indicator, arc indicator and other items), Optional equipment (Geiger counter, video camera, rangefinder, and other items). The MUFON manual also includes several chapters discussing the use of various items of equipment in relation to specialised categories of UFO reports (eg. Chapter 14, Radiation Survey of Landing Cases by Thomas P Deuley). (b) A longer (albeit somewhat biased) discussion of tools for field investigations is given by David Coomer in his The UFO Investigator's Guide (1999) at page 21-27 (in Chapter 1, Equipment) of the Blandford softback edition. Page 21 advises the preparation of a panic bag to allow rapid response to a UFO report, noting in particular that, once the police or military have sealed off the area, you are unlikely to be able to gain access to carry out tests and analysis. Items included (and discussed) in that chapter are: (1) Notepad and pens (2) Dicataphone/cassette recorder (3) Torch (4) Camera (5) Video camera (6) Tripod (7) Binoculars/telescope (8) Night vision scopes (9) Watch (10) Geiger counter/dosimeter (11) Passive radar/UFO motion detectors (12) Mobile telephone / CB handset (13) Scanner (14) ID Card (15) Tape measure / pegs and string (16) Sundries (with a list of items including a pocket knife, soil testing kits, resealable plastic bags etc) (c) BUFORA includes some relevant material in its UFO Investigation (1976), e.g. para 3.D(4) (in Chapter 3) of the spiral bound first edition includes a check list of items for a basic field kit (with a few words on the uses of each item and/or other comments); para 4.A (in Chapter 4) includes a longer list of items for a kit which applies to those cases where a UFO is reported to have left residual traces at ground level. B. Tools for instrumented UFO sky searches The various field investigation manuals tend to include less material on these types of tools. One exception is Allan Hendry's The UFO Handbook (1979). Although well known for its discussion of the identification of IFOs, it is worth remembering the Tools Section at pages 160-285 of the Sphere softback edition. Whilst the tools referred to in that section extend to multiple witnesses (chapter 14) and statistics (chapter 20), there are various chapters relevant to attempts at instrumented UFO research. For example, in addition to chapters on Optics (Chapter 15) and Photography (Chapter 16), see: Chapter 13 : Magnetic Detectors at pages 186-190 of the Sphere softback edition. Chapter 19 : Radiation Detectors at pages 237- 240 of the Sphere softback edition. Generally more relevant than field investigation manuals, are books or websites discussing SETV, Project Twinkle, Project Identification, Project Hessdalen and Project Starlight. In relation to SETV, see in particular the chronology at the following link (and other pages on the same website): http://www.setv.org/nstrmntd.html I'd be happy to cut and paste into this email lists of references for material on Projects Twinkle and Hessdalen from a UFO chronology I've been working on, but the lists are rather long. Also, most discussions of Project Twinkle are limited to a general overview of sightings of green fireballs rather than a discussion of instrumented searches. Similarly, most discussions of Project Hessdalen focus on a description of the earthlights hypothesis rather than on the equipment used on in the project. You may have more luck looking at the much shorter lists of references for Project Starlight and Project Identification that I've cut and paste from the relevant entries in my draft chronology (below). Some references for Project Starlight: Curran, Douglas in his In Advance of the Landing: Folk Concepts of Outer Space (1985) at pages 70, 71, 72-73 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled In Advance of the Landing) of the updated 2001 Abbeville Press hardback edition. Evans, Hilary in The Age of the UFO (1984) (edited by Peter Brookesmith) at pages 24-25 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled First Catch Your Saucer) of the Black Cat hardback edition. The relevant chapter is an article reprinted from the weekly partwork The Unexplained. Stanford, Ray in his Socorro Saucer (1976) at pages 184-191 (in Appendix B) of the 1978 Fonatana revised paperback edition. Some references for Project Identification: Andrews, George C in his Extra-Terrestrials Among Us (1986) at pages 18-20 (in Chapter 1) of the Llewellyn softcover edition, at pages 21-23 of the Llewellyn paperback edition. Ashpole, Edward in his The UFO Phenomena (1995) at pages 42-43 (in Chapter 3) of the Headline hardback edition. Campbell, Steuart in his The UFO Mystery Solved (1994) at page 179 (in Chapter 12) of the Explicit Books softcover edition. Devereux, Paul in Phenomenon (1988) (edited by John Spencer and Hilary Evans) at page 326 of the MacDonald hardback edition (Part 4, in the unnumbered chapter entitled Earthlights). Devereux, Paul in his Earth Lights Revelation (1989) at page 129 (in Chapter 5), 186-187 (in Chapter 7), 222 (in Chapter 8) of the Blandford softcover edition. Evans, Hilary in Frontiers of Reality (1989) (edited by Hilary Evans) at pages 52-53 (in Chapter 3) of the Guild publishing hardback edition. Evans, Hilary in The Age of the UFO (1984) (edited by Peter Brookesmith) at pages 28-30 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled First Catch Your Saucer) of the Black Cat hardback edition. The relevant chapter is an article reprinted from the weekly partwork The Unexplained. Evans, Hilary in his From Other Worlds (1998) at pages 83-84 (in Chapter 3) of the Carlton hardback edition. Evans, Hilary in his The Evidence for UFOs (1983) at pages 28-29 of the Aquarian softcover edition (in Chapter 1) and pages 117 and 128 (chapter 7) and pages 149-150 (in Chapter 8). Jacobs, David in his The UFO Controversy in America (1975) at page 282 (in Chapter 10) of the Indiana hardback edition, page 251 of the Signet paperback edition. Marvels and Mysteries (Editors Of) in Marvels and Mysteries: UFOs (1997) at pages 86-89 of the Parrallel softcover edition. Phillips, Ken in UFOs: The Final Answer? (1993) (edited by David Barclay and Therese Marie Barclay) at pages 62-62 (in Chapter 3) of the Blandford softcover edition. Spencer, John and Evans, Hilary in Phenomenon (1988) (edited by John Spencer and Hilary Evans) at page 175 of the MacDonald hardback edition (Part 3, in the unnumbered chapter entitled Investigating UFOs - Introduction). Spencer, John in his The UFO Encyclopedia (1991) at page 157 (in an entry entitled Identification, Project) of the Guild hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Avon softcover edition), at page 180 of the Headline paperback edition. Time-Life (Editors of) in The UFO phenomenon: Mysteries of the Unknown (1987) at pages 134, 135 (in Chapter 5) of the Time- Life Book hardback edition. In terms of other material on instrumented searches, I note in passing that the AFU bibliography project has a code for publications that are devoted to Detection & alarm systems, instrumented research. The relevant code is UD and the only English publication currently listed with that code is one that I 'm not familiar with : Viewing, David: The use of analytical instruments in the search for extra-terrestrial spacecraft. (BUFORA science papers, 1), 1976. The relevant list is at: http://www.afu.info/booksbycodeU.htm C. Tools for attempting communication with UFOs I've gone on far too long already, so for this category I'll merely mention that there's been plenty of discussion on this List and elsewhere of Greer and his flashlights. The entertaining list of tools given by Joe McGonagle is far from exhaustive. For example, the use of radio has not been limited to SETI researchers. Apart from Marconi and Tesla, there have been plenty of more recent claims to have used radios (and television sets) to communicate with UFOs. Now, I really must get back to completing my chronology and/or entertaining my wife.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Underground Government Site Declassified - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:55:01 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:38:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Underground Government Site Declassified - >From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:42:50 -0000 >Subject: Underground Government Site Declassified >A formerly secret Government underground site near Corsham in >Wiltshire, which was a potential relocation site for the >Government in the event of a nuclear war, was declassified at >the end of 2004. >The full story is on the Ministry of Defence website and can be >accessed at the following link: >http://news.mod.uk/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3049 >Contrary to the views of some of the UK's more excitable >ufologists, this is not where we hid crashed UFOs or alien >corpses.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Underground Government Site Declassified - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:55:01 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:50:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Underground Government Site Declassified - >From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:42:50 -0000 >Subject: Underground Government Site Declassified >A formerly secret Government underground site near Corsham in >Wiltshire, which was a potential relocation site for the >Government in the event of a nuclear war, was declassified at >the end of 2004. >The full story is on the Ministry of Defence website and can be >accessed at the following link: >http://news.mod.uk/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3049 >Contrary to the views of some of the UK's more excitable >ufologists, this is not where we hid crashed UFOs or alien >corpses. What a terrible letdown.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:57:29 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:51:57 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>I suppose the dark striations running vertically up and down the >>sides of the 'valley' could be the trace of material that has >>migrated down the slopes, and a collecting of this dark material >>at the foot of scarp along the edges of the dune field could >>possibly explain the apparent "shadows". >>But I'm only wildly guessing. It still looks very weird. >Have been in correspondence with Joseph P Skipper >(MarsAnomalyResearch.Com) some time ago (and earlier with Tom >van Flandern on other matters) and have assembled a summary: Ray et al., I'd love to know what geologists make of this Y-shaped "tube" junction. Dune-filled ancient watercourses, or what? http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m04002/m0400291a.jpg It looks like an alien landscape designed by Hans Geiger! Is
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos.nul Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:16:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:53:59 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Balaskas >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >Hello Martin, Terry: >As an amateur Marsologist, (having enjoyed their candy bars) I >hereby toss out my interpretation of the "translucent cylinders" >I think they are sand dunes. >Not just any old sand dunes mind you, but those left in the slot >canyons of ancient rivers! Martian winds would follow the same >river courses, folding sands into what looks like struts or >support structures. <snip> >Sand will gather in low spots, but deep river valleys most >selectively. Winds would make "ribs" on the Rorschach "glass >tunnels", and the rest is predictable. <snip> Hi Larry! You are correct. Many of these worm-like structures or tunnels photographed by the orbiting and still functioning Mars Global Surveyor spaceprobe are simply sand dune trains on the lower levels of dried out river valleys or just "Rorschach" glass tunnels, but not all are - so Martin and Terry are right too! Although the worm-like structure or tunnel in the web page below (click for details) is not transparent or even highly reflective, from the MGS data that is given and by the shadows it casts, this artificial looking sructure cannot easily be dismissed as sand dunes or an optical illusion. http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa060302b.htm It would be interesting to compare pictures taken many months or years apart. If these worm-like or tunnel structures were indeed produced by wind blown sand, then we would see very noticeable changes in their structure over time - the same way we proved that those hundreds of dark streaks that seemed to run down the side of mountains was indeed moist soil from recent water flows! Even with the about 200,000 narrow angle or high resolution taken by MGS since 1997, they still only cover less than about 5 percent of the whole surface of Mars with very little overlapping images available or expected in the near term - unless we request them! Only this way can we hope to know more about these very enigmatic features on Mars. Also, with about 95 percent of the Martian surface still not imaged to about 10 meter resolution or better, one wonders just what other amazing things wait to be discovered. In the meantime, continue to check out the Malin Space Sciences Systems web site below for the latest photos from Mars released to the public.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:28:24 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:14:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:02:35 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:36:38 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:15:18 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> >>>Here's a comment for you..... >>>Why does anyone in his/her right mind take the Roger Leir's of >>>the world seriously? >>It's not black and white in my case. Some of us might not know >>what you know, and are exploring it, hence posting to the List >>for feedback and info. Dirt, if any. >>>Advice: Anyone who makes extravagant claims, check their >>>credentials, track record, and reputation. >>You've done this? Great, anything you can provide, I will >>explore as you recommend. >>I have been doing, and am doing what you recommend. >>>Do we apply the standards of the National Enquirer, or those of >>>something more approximating the standards of science? What peer >>>review has there been of Leir's claims? Has anyone ever >>>independently verified any of his claims? >>I don't read the National Enquirer so I don't know how well or >>not they do. To the last question, yes. Contact Leir for names >>that you can check. Some are mentioned in the video. >Good. If you are checking credentials, confirmations, >reputations, etc., then you are on the right track. If I spent >all my time investigating and reporting on all the extravagant >claims and claimants out there, I would have no time for serious >research. They are a terrible and time-consuming distraction. I >much prefer to spend my time on data that are more credibly >reported by more credible people who do not claim wondrous >findings before science is done. >Leir does not even have an M.D., and just as one indication of >his sophistication level, he was highly honored and bragging >about being a MUFON consultant, as if that conferred some >recognition or approval on him. Then consider some of his logic >and reasoning, and the lack of reasonable peer review. It is up >to people like him to establish their case (I won't say 'prove') >in order for it to be taken seriously, not for people like me to >prove them wrong. To me it smacks of pseudoscience. Richard and List, That's the second message on this List in wich you sharply criticize the work, the credentials and the ethical behavior of Dr Leir. Let's see your main arguments: He "does not even have an MD". Does that mean that is not able to participate in a scientific research ? If this were a valid argument, many excellent researchers should be discarded as well. On the other hand, researchers like Dr Mack and Dr Maccabee have not been spared bitter and unsubstantiated critics, in spite of their impeccable credentials. You say that he makes extravagant claims without peer review and independant verification. I asked Roger Leir, who is a friend and a person I respect. His answer is simple, reproduced here with his permission : "Gildas, I have only one short answer which you could elaborate on : He is absolutely correct when he states claims of the caliber I have reported should be questioned and reviewed. However, I would point out these are not my claims but claims of the scientists who have done the work. If they don't like the message then don't shoot the messenger. Anyone who makes these kind of remarks should be willing to put up the bucks to challenge any of the scientific research I have reported." If you read the book of Roger Leir "The Aliens and the Scalpel", and the articles published, notably in the Mufon UFO journal, you will see that Roger Leir has, indeed, reported on the findings of several laboratories. I know personally a bit more of the story (that there is more in store), but I have do admit that it's not a good argument in a public debate. So, yes, there are some scientific studies. However, there has not been yet any article in a "peer reviewed scientific publication". But I ask you : Do you think that such a requirement can be met, in the scientific world of today? To me the answer, is clearly no! I don't see any important lab or university doing such a thing. I think we must be grateful to people like Dr Leir for taking the risk of doing such a controversial research, and publishing it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:38:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:15:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:08:38 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >Just a short note Aaron, if I may. >I must agree with Sir Richard. Frankly, I think Dr. Leir is full of it. >You are always free to think otherwise of course, but for a foot doctor? >I would take my ten or twelve little toes elsewhere.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:41:11 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:17:35 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:09:02 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:31:31 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:57:00 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:47:11 -0400 >>>>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>'Science', in the person of Jim McDonald, a high-profile >>academic and respected atmospheric physicist, categorically >>denied that discrete radar echoes due to near-specular >>scattering from small domains moving across thin layers of >>extreme RI gradient were physically possible. >>Two 'ordinary folk' working for the CAA actually detected these >>phenomena and personally measured them, correlated them with >>meteorological conditions and wrote a very provocative report on >>it all. >>McDonald continued to deny that the mechanism was possible. >Is that really so? Jim Yes it is. In the paper that you cite he dismisses the Borden- Vickers model as "weak" and "merely qualitative" (quoting from memory), 17 years after they published it. At the 1969 AAAS symposium he described the hypothesis as "highly doubtful", and let this stand in the revised and expanded Proceedings published in 1972 by Cornell. Note that in the 1970 Radar Meteorology paper his reference to Borden & Vickers occurs in the context of his repeated (and accurate) contention that the radiosonde profile shows only a slight surface inversion insufficient for ducting or trapping. The same thing appears in his 1968 presentation to the Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute - "only weak gradients incapable of causing the effects reported". As I mentioned, David Atlas's opinion was that McDonald really did not grasp the difference between the broad-brush radiosonde picture and the very sharp (hundreds of N-units or more over centimetres of vertical
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: Happy New Year - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:45:30 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:22:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Happy New Year - Lehmberg >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:09:11 -0500 >Subject: Happy New Year >To All Listerians: >Happy Newufo Year. >Maybe we'll find out this year... what its all about - Alfie.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:45:58 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:28:03 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:33:23 EST >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:14:32 -0700 >>Subject: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >>Satellite photo of a Martian glassy tube with two collapsed >>sections: >>http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/full_gif_map/M15/M1500465.gif >No, no, no, no, no. >I ain't buyin' it. Looks like another case of grasping for >straws, er tubes. >I've seen more interesting and similar formations flying over >the frozen Great Lakes. I've seen more interesting formations >when my grits cereal is left in the bowl too long. ( Yes, there >is a thing called grits cereal). >I'm so tired of these vaguely familiar, need a microscope and >ten hour lecture to get the idea that some erosion pattern or >impact scar is the remnant of some ancient civilization that I >could scream. >Don't get me wrong, I'm all for scouring the available Mars pics >for anything of merit but jumping to conclusions without razor >sharp and multiple angles of areas of archaeological interest >isn't science it's fun stuff. >When we get to a highway sign or a Martian version of "Kilroy >Was Here" then we'll be talking turkey. Hi Greg, Kudos for pointing out the painfully obvious. I'm as intrigued as the next guy with the old glass tube images and all the others... face, pyramid, etc. But to make the kind of perceptual leap that Hoagland, Van Flandern, et.al. feel comfortable making seems premature at best, and denigrating to the nature of science at worst. I certainly cannot say that the face and these other things are not artificial constructs, but to draw any definitive conclusion from the photographic data received to date is just ludicrous. We will have the answers to these questions soon enough. Why build a house from a deck of cards when concrete is just around the corner? It might provide some shelter today but you could
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: UFO Research Tools - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 10:05:03 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:29:42 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Deardorff >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:03:45 -0500 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:40:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: UFO Research Tools >>Audio spectrography >>Bruce Cornet had good results using this tool. The drawback is >>that you need to be fairly close to get a good signal to >>analyze, otherwise you will get too much noise. Still, it is >>possible after recording the audio to match it with known >>engines/objects. Although you can get an instrument/tool to do >>this, you can use a digital or tape recording from a device and >>feed the signal into a computer for analysis. >Could be useful. I seem to recall a case from Portland Oregon(?) >of a UFO in the middle of the river rcorded by a police >microphone. Been a long time since this... maybe someone else on >list recalls more. You could be referring to the March 17th, 1981 case, e.g. at:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: UFO Research Tools - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:07:48 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:30:52 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Rimmer >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:03:45 -0500 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >Single photos are, at best, an aide to the witness' >recollection. Must be backed up by solid circumstantial evidence >(the "back story" behind the photos). >Better would be two cameras in a stereo pair, as in some Gulf >Breeze sightings, but need to know exact characteristics of a >stereo camera and backup by circumstantial evidence. When an improvised "stereo" camera system was introduced at Gulf Breeze the photographs it captured were indeterminate "lights in the sky" images rather than the elaborate "structured craft" images captured by the single camera. Funny that, isn't it?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 18:49:23 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:32:40 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:53:43 -0500 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >>e) - one shot apparently indicates a vehicle/large organism >>traveling inside tube. >You mean successive photos showed the vehicle/large organism in >different positions, as in motion? You're joking - you/we get to see only what http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ and other official sources release, and the logistics means you don't see successive shots of same areas. That suggestion of vehicles/organisms/machines is indicated by several shots - one considered by Joseph P. Skipper is at: http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2000/001/real-smoking-gun.ht m Some of the images are also reviewed by Tom van Flandern - try: http://metaresearch.org/solar%20system/cydonia/asom/artifact_html/default.htm item 23. Point: distribution of "tubes" in landscape is that of artificial or organic networks rather than geology or flow phenomenon - i.e. they follow routes rather than occurring wherever equal conditions would otherwise "create" them. Unfortunately, as J.P.S illustrates, most images seem to have undergone some strange processing/tampering before release, affecting 'reality' of shapes: e.g. a flipped image of a trough would look like a tube and vice-versa. But you could try: http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2001/018/tubesdebate.htm and maybe even sift through http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/9-master/master-director y.htm T.v.F reviews those images and others with different approach at: http://metaresearch.org/solar%20system/cydonia/asom/artifact_html/default.htm items 25, 26 and others Good hunting Cheers
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:01:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:35:03 -0500 Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings Release Date: January 2, 2005 Marathon, Ontario Spinning UFO With Colored Lights Making A Humming Sound Date: 1966 or 1967 ? Time: Evening The strange thing is that when I was about 10 years old I lived in Marathon Ontario, which is about 2 1/2 hours from Thunder Bay Ontario and I experienced a UFO at that time. My mother had sent me to get sugar from my sisters up the street. I had gone on my bike to get it and on the way back down the street I heard a sound like a humming sound. When I looked up it was right over me. It had different colored lights and was spinning. I was extremely frightened and when I got home and screamed to my mother & brother to come out and see it. By the time they came out it was already over Penn Lake. I know that quite a few people had also seen it that night. That was about 1966 or 1967. Thank you to the witness for the report. ---------------------- Abbotsford, B.C. Numerous Erratic Flying Lights Date: Winter of 1995 Time: 8:45 p.m. Location of Sighting: Mill Lake, Abbotsford, B.C. Number of witnesses: Myself. Number of objects: Approx.35 Shape of objects: Difficult to tell due to distance (cylindrical or round). Full Description of event/sighting: While I was out walking at Mill Lake one evening on a clear night I was returning back to my car in the main parking lot when I saw several small white lights moving in a very erratic manner. At first I thought they looked like fire-fly's but how could this be in winter because I had only ever seen fire-fly's in summer. I had opened the window slowly to look more clearly and then got out of the car to look ever closer because they were not fire-fly's but were many flying objects many kilometers away in the north-eastern sky.They had bright white lights and were flying in very random order almost appearing to collide with one another while moving in one direction then totally opposite directions without making a turn. I had never seen flying objects move in that fashion before and it was quite a spectacle. It was as though they were showing off their maneuvers and the speed was incredible for the human eye then after about 10 seconds the objects all formed into a line and began to fly in a huge circle one behind the other and after one complete circle they all went into one white light and then disappeared. Thank you to the witness for the report. ---------------------- Dryden, Ontario An Amazing Sighting Of An Object Date: July 14, 2004 Time: 8:00 p.m. In Dryden, Ontario, I was sitting on my balcony playing a new song I have written on my guitar. My balcony faces south. I looked to my left (south east) and out of no where appeared to be a hazy sphere that I mistook for the moon for a second. It then got larger and larger and a light appeared in the middle of it. I stopped and fixated on it. I told myself it must be a helicopter looking for runaways or something but it then burned so bright that my eyes hurt and I had to look away. It was very close to a star of which I don't know the name and I used the star as a marker to see how much it moved. It dimmed out to a cigar shaped haze and zig jagged a little and then started to glow in the middle and had a haze on top and below the glow. It looked like a star if you were to glance at it quick. Obviously "they" have this way of camouflage (hope I spelled it right) it can trick your eye. I looked at this thing and could not believe I was seeing it so plain. I woke my 66-year-old father at 4 in the morning to have a witness. He calmly told me he had seen one as a little boy and I should keep watching because I will take off really, really fast. I then discovered another one more to the direct east glowing on and off. That is the thing. It glowed on and off. It disappeared and then reappeared about 15 times approx. Totally amazing. I have never had any doubt that there are entities out there but this is an affirmation. It hovered in the relative same spot for nearly 2 hours glowing on and off and slowly moving around. If this was man-made then the man who made it is a friend and will not let anyone in on his or her secret. Howard Hughes eat your heart out. This was real, real, real, real. It disappeared behind dark clouds, as did the other at the same time. Thank you to the witness for the interesting report. --------------------- Montreal, Quebec Beams Of Light Explained Date: December 18, 2004 Time: 5:00 a.m. Number of witnesses: 2 Number of objects: 17 Shape of objects: Beams of light from the ground up to the sky. Full Description of event/sighting: date December 18, 2004 at 5:00 a.m., looks similar to the person who wrote he some beams of lights coming from the ground on December 17 at 5:00 a.m. Woke up on the December 18 at 5:30 a.m. to go to work. Looked outside to check the weather when I saw several strong beams of light coming from the ground up to the sky. Strong beams of light like the ones they use for special events. They were different colors, blue, red, yellow and mostly white. I woke up my wife to come and look. We both were amazed and freaking out. We counted about 17 separate beams at the same time, all were at about 2 block radius. We live on the second floor so we could see where they were coming from. They were between PieIX and Viau near JeanTalon. I had to go to work, so I decided to see if I could find out where they came from. To my surprise I saw what was going on. The beams of lights where coming from regular outdoor lights. They seemed to have transformed into powerful beams of light. Some had covers on them to project them downwards toward the ground but they were going strait up like a powerful beam. It was like pointing a flashlight down but the light would go upward with great intensity. As the sun was coming up the beams were fading away. If you have any explanations of why regular lights turn into powerful beams of light please email me. Thank you to the witness for the interesting report. --------------------------- Scarborough And Whitby, Ontario Beams Of Light Date: December 20, 2004 Time: 5:20 p.m. Happy New Year Brian, I wanted to confirm that I also noticed these white beams of lights in Scarborough and Whitby, Ontario on December 20, 2004 like described from your Montreal, Quebec. report. This happened after work in Scarborough, traveling north on Warden Road and the hwy. 401 at approx: 5:20 p.m. I observed a single pillar of light from high in the sky down to the ground on the Warden Bridge over the 401. The conditions of the weather at the time was light falling snow. I personally have never seen this one before. I thought that the source was from the ground, as an explanation. I could not find any unusual ground lights when I drove in that area. I continued on turning to 401 east to Whitby, until turning off Thickson Road's ramp in Whitby. On the ramp at 6:00 p.m. again looking east, I could see 10-12 of these lights again from ground up to the sky. They were like in a row across my view looking east. When I stopped at the light on the ramp, I rolled down the window and stuck my head out to view these pillar of lights. To my amazement, I could no longer see them. I realized then, the car's windshield being smoked glass, highlighted these columns of light. So at that point, I was satisfied with a plausible explanation. I too, thought the source was from lights on the ground added with reflection of the window and snow. So then I turn north on Thickson Rd. and stopped at the gas station for gas. While I was pumping, I looked north and saw these beams of lights again without the aid of smoked glass, they looked evenly spaced in a row across. I was stumped, they appeared to go straight up to the sky from the ground. So here I sit wondering, what's up with that!!!! Please,could you or anyone else explain this one, as I would put it on the list of the strange, on this sighting. Thanks again for your website, on the information to give me confirmation that other people had also seen this type of phenomena. Take care friend and keep up the good work!!!! P.S. I hope if the the sightings continue, I'll have my new digital camera ready and pictures to come your way. Thank you to the witness for the report. --------------------- HBCC UFO Note: Due to the distance of the object in question in the one photo, it is hard to determine what it possibly might be. But seeing whatever it is, is in the vicinity of a jet aircraft it makes for an interesting photo because of safety issues. Should this object be in the same air space as the jet aircraft ? San Jose del Valle, Guadalajara Jalisco Mexico Date: December 26, 2004 - Time: 2:00 p.m. Hi Brian: I hope you have Merry-Christmas and happy new-year. I am going to annex two photos for your consideration and explanation, see the objects to the left and right in the superior corner. The attached unmodified photo taken with a Kodak Easy Share DX4530 digital camera in auto mode, was taken in San Jose del Valle, Guadalajara Jalisco Mexico Dec 26,2004. I didn't see the object in the sky when I took the photos. The sighting occurred on Sunday , at 14.00 hours. when I , and my family visited this place to took some photos of airplanes. Thanks Photos are =A9 2004 Oscar Franco - Dec 26, 2004 Thank you to the person for sending in the photos. To view photos please visit:= http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2207 -------------------- Surrey, B.C. Large Yellow Light And Flashes Date: December 27, 2004 Time: Approx: 5:30 and 6:00 p.m. Last night December 27, 2004 at approx. 17:30 I happened to glance up at the sky and noticed a large yellow light heading in a northerly direction. It appeared to be a satellite but very large, similar in size to the Space Station. I grabbed for my binoculars but it winked out before I could get them to my eyes. Possibly went into earths shadow or just turned off. Not sure what. I set my camera up and left it running pointed to the same area where the light disappeared, approx at a 45 degree angle to the north. At approx. 18:00 give or take ten minutes. Two bright lights flashed on for approx. one or two seconds approx. as bright as Venus during the summer. First # 1 - Which showed up as a bright red object on the view finder, when I freeze framed it and zoomed in it appeared to be a black oval shaped object with a large white area covered by a reddish cloud which extended out from the upper left hand side. It blinked out and then a few seconds later the other light flashed on.( #2 ) Zooming in on it revealed a perfect black circular object with two oval white areas. It was below and off to the left of the first object. Camera was set at 20X with the night vision on. ( #3 ) White object composed of two large white rectangular lights attached one below and slightly to the rear. It flew through the field of vision heading roughly NNW. Could possibly have been a plane but I didn't see any blinking lights just a steady glow as it flew bye. Camera was set at 40 X zoom so it must have been quite far away. My window was open but I did not see or hear any planes in the area. The attached drawing gives a rough idea of what they looked like. Image of what the witness saw can be found at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D21 92 Thank you to the witness for the report. ----------------------- Kaufman County, Texas Unknown Object Date: December 31, 2004 Time: 5:40 p.m. Hi Brian, What could be more exciting than taking a UFO picture on the last day of the year! I was taking pictures of the pink trails when I took this one at 5:40 p.m. on 12-31-2004. I didn't see it at the time until I downloaded on the computer. This could be anything I guess, but it's sure interesting to look at. I was sure that you would like to see it too, so I'm sending it to you to see what you think. This is a copy of the original, I haven't done anything to it at all. Photo can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D22 12 Thank you to the witness for the report and photo. ----------------------------- San Diego, California Two Brilliant, Pulsating, Red Lights Date: December 31, 2004 Time: 11:55 p.m.-11:58 p.m. Location of Sighting: Bay Park / Mission Bay Number of witnesses: 5 Number of objects: 2 Shape of objects: Larger than Sirius / Bright Red (very high, still round in binoculars). Full Description of event/sighting: 2 brilliant, pulsating, Red lights over Mission Bay/Pacific Beach approx. 11:55 till 11:58p.m. very high in the sky... the higher one stopped pulsating, flickered rapidly, then took off at a very high rate of speed West over the ocean... the second one did exactly the same approx. 1 minute later. This all occurred in the final moments of Dec. 31 2004... just before the new year. Thank you to the witness for the report. --------------------------- Paramount, California Unusual Activity In The Sky Over California Date: January 1, 2005 Time: 12:02 a.m. Number of witnesses: 20 Number of objects: 6 Shape of objects: Not clear enough to determine. Full Description of event/sighting: Shortly after midnight, from the east 2 lights came into view and stopped suddenly, then a second or two later, two more appeared and proceeded to attack the first two by lunging at one another very, very quickly. They were shooting at each other, I observed something like what appeared to be tracer fire. After each one took their shots they disappeared quickly into the sky. Two remained for a couple of minutes in a stationary position. Then all of a sudden took off straight up and disappeared in about 3 seconds. The lights were very bright, more so than the stars around it. They were not planes or helicopters. They were in the flight landing pattern for L.A.X. from the east. Oddly enough, I do not remember seeing any planes descending from the skies as usual in this busy approach. Thank you to the witness for the unusual report. Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 2189 email: hbccufo.nul Website: http://www.hbccufo.org HBCC
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 14:33:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:38:44 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Maccabee >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:20:58 EST >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:56:38 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>Rehashing radar anomalies is fascinating to some (my friend >>Kyle King for example) but it won't help us capture data that >>will finally resolve the UFO issue. That was my only point. >We already have thousands of UFO photos and they do not "finally >resolve the UFO issue" all by themselves, and for good reason: >Photos do not tell you how large or how far away the object is. >Radar can give you a distance and in some cases the altitude. >Photos can easily be hoaxed because they do not yield the >object's size or distance, hence the image could be a small >model at close range or a large ET spacecraft at long distance, >there is usually no proof one way or the other and hence it does >not "finally resolve the UFO issue." The few exceptions are >where there is stereoscopic triangulation in the photos >(McMinnville for example) or tracking network triangulation >(White Sands). The Condon Committee found and covered up the >fact that 16 of its unexplained UFO cases correlated with >Smithsonian meteor tracking camera photos. Those cases could >prove significant. >As I have posted here previously, simple statistics shows that >it extremely difficult and rare to get even marginally useful >closeup UFO photos. The statistics fit an actual phenomenon such >as meteors, and their rate of being photographed (at long range, >not close up). Closeup UFO photo cases would be even more rare >than that. The most widely publicised portion of the New Zealand sightings of Dec 31, 1978 consists of a combined visual - airplane radar -
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 2 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 19:43:48 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:50:58 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 13:07:04 -0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >Thanks for the links and info. As you seem to have studied this, >do you happen to have any idea what the scale is on the image of >the so-called tube with the "two collapsed sections"? >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:57:29 -0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >I'd love to know what geologists make of this Y-shaped "tube" >junction. Dune-filled ancient watercourses, or what? >http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m04002/m0400291a.jpg >It looks like an alien landscape designed by Hans Geiger! Is >this certified legit? Hello Martin & List Haven't been into this stuff for some time so things might have changed a little. 1) Scales - spoke to Joseph P Skipper about this and he explained it's not easy to publish a truthful "scale" to the images except by a one-by-one detailed examination of each image and each feature. That's due to the shots being taken at various and varying angles from various and varying true heights (altitudes). At the time I felt confident enough to say - "Diameters seem to range from 25 m. - c.100+ meters (widths c.100 to about 500 ft). Lengths unknown but long - networks seem to run just under surface for long distances, appearing almost anywhere." 2) Certification - all the images I've seem (from J.P.S and Tom van Flandern) are attributed to official releases - by "GOV" sites or from: http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/. Heartily recommend checking out T.v.F's reports at: http://metaresearch.org/solar%20system/cydonia/asom/artifact_html/default.htm and J.P.S's collection (which has a lot of new stuff I haven't had time to look at yet) at: http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/9-master/master-director y.htm Good hunting Cheers,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 15:24:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:51:38 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:57:29 -0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >Ray et al., >I'd love to know what geologists make of this Y-shaped "tube" >junction. Dune-filled ancient watercourses, or what? >http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m04002/m0400291a.jpg > >It looks like an alien landscape designed by Hans Geiger! Is >this certified legit? Hi Martin, Just jumping in here to note that there is no 'Y-junction' in the cited image. The image shows 3 separate formations that 'appear' to converge, but this is the eye and the mind working. Even on brightening the image, there is no linkage between these formations. Images are often misleading, but not nearly as misleading as the human imagination. We connect dots that don't exist, because it is the nature our perception to find patterns and signal out of noise. Order out of chaos, as it were. As has been repeated here several times, we will know before long the true nature of these formations. Jumping to premature conclusions by relying on 2-dimensional high-altitude images is not helpful. I feel quite confident that a geologist would observe these channels as dry river or stream-beds with wind-blown dunes along their bottoms. The direction of prevailing winds are not a factor, since wind is funneled into the depressions and move along the channel regardless of prevailing wind direction, just as winds downtown flow between buildings. For some intriguing yet terrestrial examples of dunes, see this site: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/deserts/dunes/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:20:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:52:49 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - White >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 18:49:23 +0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> Thanks, Ray, for your extensive references to articles regarding the Mars 'tubes'. Unfortunately, some of the emails I've saved from the 'tubes' exchange have been deleted from my PC (not uncommon.) When I viewed this most recent one: http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/full_gif_map/M15/M1500465.gif I seem to remember a phrase from the original email in this thread which said 'barely visible'. To my eye, all of the 'ribs' on the above large image look like plain old dunes to me, nothing at all tube-like. But the author of that original email said the tubes were 'barely visible', (or so I think) so I'm wondering if we were supposed to be looking at some other type of feature, other than
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:31:37 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:54:27 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Hatch >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:32:24 -0400 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >I agree with natural causes, Larry? It was either Martin or >Terry that mentioned water forming patterns. I used to SCUBA >dive during one period of my life and noticed this pattern on >the bottom sand in shallow water, near shore many times. It was >probably caused by wave action/currents. Perhaps though, these >"rills" were caused by the Martian winds blowing over the sands >collected at the bottom of slopes. There's a different ecology >at work there where there is very low density atmospheric >pressure combined with very dry winds. We don't really have a >comparison here on Earth since that pressure is about the same >as that experienced at 40 miles and we have no land at that >elevation. >We should go there and find out. Hi Don: I agree we should go there and find out for sure. I will let others argue whether the most scientific bang for the buck (as opposed to thrilling the public) would be done with manned or robotic missions. Again, the idea I'm toying with is that long slot valleys may have been created by ancient rivers on Mars. Now dry or nearly so, they would selectively fill with sand and gravel. High thin winds channeled down the same valleys should create dune effects, just as they do on flat land. Glass tubes seem a little much when compared to a simpler more plausible natural mechanism, at least to me. If this has merit, we are left with ancient waters, and not little puddles either... something long lived. This further suggests the possibility of life having formed there, maybe even some complex life forms. I find that far more interesting than any Hoaglandesque constructs.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:55:29 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 07:56:16 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:41:11 -0000 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:09:02 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:31:31 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? <snip> >>>'Science', in the person of Jim McDonald, a high-profile >>>academic and respected atmospheric physicist, categorically >>>denied that discrete radar echoes due to near-specular >>>scattering from small domains moving across thin layers of >>>extreme RI gradient were physically possible. >>>Two 'ordinary folk' working for the CAA actually detected these >>>phenomena and personally measured them, correlated them with >>>meteorological conditions and wrote a very provocative report on >>>it all. >>>McDonald continued to deny that the mechanism was possible. >>Is that really so? >Yes it is. In the paper that you cite he dismisses the Borden- >Vickers model as "weak" and "merely qualitative" (quoting from >memory), 17 years after they published it. At the 1969 AAAS >symposium he described the hypothesis as "highly doubtful", and >let this stand in the revised and expanded Proceedings published >in 1972 by Cornell. >Note that in the 1970 Radar Meteorology paper his reference to >Borden & Vickers occurs in the context of his repeated (and >accurate) contention that the radiosonde profile shows only a >slight surface inversion insufficient for ducting or trapping. >The same thing appears in his 1968 presentation to the Canadian >Aeronautics and Space Institute - "only weak gradients incapable >of causing the effects reported". As I mentioned, David Atlas's >opinion was that McDonald really did not grasp the difference >between the broad-brush radiosonde picture and the very sharp >(hundreds of N-units or more over centimetres of vertical >extent) layers responsible for many CAT returns. McDonald also ignored Thayer's point in the Condon Report (p. 157) analysis of Washington National that the radiosonde data from Silver Hill, Maryland, was from an altitude starting at 289 feet whereas Wash Nat Airport was at an elevation of only 43 feet. Even assuming the Wash Nat radar antennas were at say 60- 70 ft, there is still an "intervening" altitude layer of atmosphere where: "some of the most spectacular super-refractive and ducting layers would be expected to develop." This lower layer of atmosphere has no meteorological data on the nights of the Wash National incidents. So not only is there inadequate horizontal (geographic) sampling of meteorological data but also inadequate vertical (height) sampling. Pockets of refractive anomalies are surely being missed. Thayer found that when Wash Nat did radiosondes from 1945 to 1950 (for some reason they stopped doing these upper air balloon launches in 1950) they found much more evidence of anomalous propagation (AP) radar conditions than one finds at Silver Hill. So the lower altitude of Wash National put it more into the refractive anomaly layer of air than the higher altitude of Silver Hill. Now the Borden-Vickers report when I last read it many years ago was not too convincing to me. The double-speed effect is where anomalous radar targets were found traveling at supposedly twice the upper air velocities, indicating partial reflection of ground returns by these traveling "air radar mirrors" in the sky, so the ground reflections will seem to have twice the speed of the air that mirrors the ground. However as I recall the speed doubling was very poorly demonstrated. It seems only once (?) was the speed actually doubled, at other times there was a wide range of speeds. I would have expected a much closer correlation of wind speeds doubled. Also I seem to recall a poor correlation of radar target direction with the upper air wind directions. I also have a problem understanding how a delicate ducting layer of air can maintain its structure with any kind of wind at all,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:34:33 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:02:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hatch >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:38:46 +0100 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:08:38 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>Just a short note Aaron, if I may. I must agree with Sir >>Richard. Frankly, I think Dr. Leir is full of it. >>You are always free to think otherwise of course .. <snip> >That's a a very small, distressing, piece to begin the year. I >wonder how you can feel authorized to speak that way, publicly, >of someone you obviously don't know. Gildas Bourdais Hello Gildas, Nick and others: I must admit that was an intemperate remark on my part. I do not know Dr. Leir personally, but his very own website is instructive: http://alienscalpel.com/ "This website is the only website dedicated to the victims of the Alien Abduction Phenomenon... click here to help support the research" That's on the front page. Inside, we find more. I always check out the Links page if there is one. There are few better indications of one's opinions, methods and means than their referrals: Here are Leir's: http://www.alienscalpel.com/links.html Where I find only five links: Xfacts.com Jason Martell's Research strieber.com Whitley Strieber's Website www.ufoinfo.com MUFON Skywatch Investigations mars-earth.com Face on Mars, Cydonia Research usufocenter.com US UFO Center .. plus a banner ad at bottom for "Ancient Sumerian Astronomy." The main menu page: http://www.alienscalpel.com/main.htm lists the other contents sections. Beneath those I find another banner for the "Stargate of the Gods Egypt Tour", set for April of 2005. The site is nicely laid out BTW. Note the animated .gif image at bottom. The top contents section is for articles. http://www.alienscalpel.com/articles.html is a mixed bag of stuff, analyses, NIDS, a Brazilian Space Agreement etc., and ending with "An experimental device to stop alien abductions" here: http://www.alienscalpel.com/device.htm This turns out to be a " device [that] works by blocking alien telepathy and mind control, [which Lear calls] a 'thought screen helmet' [which] consists of a leather helmet lined with layers of special conductive plastic... " The helmet is offered for free on an experimental basis. The Egyptian Gods tour costs $3500 per person though (double occupancy) while the items for sale in the Alien Implants Online Store: http://www.alienscalpel.com/store.html are far more affordable. So, I apologize to Leir if my words were too harsh, but my armchair is right in front of the computer screen. Please click on URLs above and look for yourself. Best wishes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:12:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:06:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:28:24 +0100 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:02:35 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>Good. If you are checking credentials, confirmations, >>reputations, etc., then you are on the right track. If I spent >>all my time investigating and reporting on all the extravagant >>claims and claimants out there, I would have no time for serious >>research. They are a terrible and time-consuming distraction. I >>much prefer to spend my time on data that are more credibly >>reported by more credible people who do not claim wondrous >>findings before science is done. >>Leir does not even have an M.D., and just as one indication of >>his sophistication level, he was highly honored and bragging >>about being a MUFON consultant, as if that conferred some >>recognition or approval on him. Then consider some of his logic >>and reasoning, and the lack of reasonable peer review. It is up >>to people like him to establish their case (I won't say 'prove') >>in order for it to be taken seriously, not for people like me to >>prove them wrong. To me it smacks of pseudoscience. >Richard and List, >That's the second message on this List in wich you sharply >criticize the work, the credentials and the ethical behavior of >Dr Leir. Let's see your main arguments: >He "does not even have an MD". Does that mean that is not able >to participate in a scientific research ? If this were a valid >argument, many excellent researchers should be discarded as >well. >On the other hand, researchers like Dr Mack and Dr Maccabee have >not been spared bitter and unsubstantiated critics, in spite of >their impeccable credentials. >You say that he makes extravagant claims without peer review and >independant verification. I asked Roger Leir, who is a friend >and a person I respect. His answer is simple, reproduced here >with his permission: >"Gildas, >I have only one short answer which you could elaborate on: >He is absolutely correct when he states claims of the caliber I >have reported should be questioned and reviewed. However, I >would point out these are not my claims but claims of the >scientists who have done the work. If they don't like the >message then don't shoot the messenger. Anyone who makes these >kind of remarks should be willing to put up the bucks to >challenge any of the scientific research I have reported." >If you read the book of Roger Leir "The Aliens and the Scalpel", >and the articles published, notably in the Mufon UFO journal, >you will see that Roger Leir has, indeed, reported on the >findings of several laboratories. I know personally a bit more >of the story (that there is more in store), but I have do admit >that it's not a good argument in a public debate. >So, yes, there are some scientific studies. However, there has >not been yet any article in a "peer reviewed scientific >publication". But I ask you: >Do you think that such a requirement can be met, in the >scientific world of today? To me the answer, is clearly no! I >don't see any important lab or university doing such a thing. I >think we must be grateful to people like Dr Leir for taking the >risk of doing such a controversial research, and publishing it. >In addition, it has brought him more trouble than money. I must agree with Gildas. I have spent time with Roger and have his book and video. He makes very clear that the implant extractions from other than the foot were done by other surgeons. I have talked to a researcher at Southwest Research Institute who was very impressed with the materials he examined. Roger is a registered Podiatrist licensed to diagnose and treat foot disorders. Has he been claiming anything else? Dick, how about putting things in your gray basket when you haven't spent time investigating, instead of deploring them? You did the same thing with Frank Feschino Jr.'s "Braxton County Monster: Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed". There were references to 70+ newspaper articles and the Project Blue Book File number listed. You hadn't read the book, hadn't reviewed the Blue Book files nor the clippings. And I haven't seen any apology either. You also haven't provided any basis for your claims about either Frank's incredible efforts or Roger's very extensive work.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: Observations Of Mars - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 01:27:04 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:09:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Observations Of Mars - Dickenson Source: http://arthurwendover.com/arthurs/science/mars210.html Mars by Percival Lowell "That we are the only minds in space it takes indeed a very small mind to fancy. But improbable as the absence of ultra-terrestrial life in a general way is, up to the present time we have had no proof of its particular existence in worlds beyond our own. To determine whether a planet be the abode of life, two questions about it must be answered in turn: first, are its physical conditions such as to render it habitable? and secondly, are there any signs of its actual habitation? Unless we can answer the first point satisfactorily, it were futile to seek for evidence of the second. [Lowell goes on to consider the gas giants and also Mercury & Venus] With Mars, on the other hand, no such false modesty balks us at the outset. The planet named after the old God of War - satirically, it would seem, since he turns out to present characteristics quite the reverse of warlike - lets himself be seen as well as thirty-five millions of miles of separation will allow. Now, to all forms of life of which we have any conception, two things in nature are vital, air and water. A planet must possess these two things to be able to support any life at all upon its surface. Fortunately for an answer to this question, air is as vital to change in the inorganic processes of nature as it is to those other changes which we call peculiarly life. Atmosphere is essential not only to life upon a planet, but to the production of any change whatever upon that planet's surface. Since atmosphere, therefore, is a sine qua non to any change upon a planet's surface, reversely, any change upon a planet's surface is proof positive of the presence of an atmosphere, however incapable of detection such atmosphere be by direct means. Now changes take place upon the surface of Mars, changes vast enough to be visible from the earth. When properly observed they turn out to be most marked. We will begin with the look of the planet last June. Its general aspect then was tripartite. Upon the top part of the disc, round what we know to be the planet's pole, appeared a great white cap, the south polar cap. The south lay at the top, because all astronomical views are, for optical reasons, upside down; but inasmuch as we never see the features otherwise, to have them right side up is not vital to the effect. Below the white cap lay a region chiefly bluish-green, interspersed, however, with portions more or less reddish-ochre. Below this, again, came a vast reddish-ochre stretch, the great continental deserts of the planet. The first sign of change occurred in the polar cap. It proceeded slowly to dwindle in size. Such obliteration it has, with praiseworthy regularity, undergone once every two years for the last two hundred. Since the polar cap was first seen it has waxed and waned with clock-like precision, a precision timed to the change of season in the planet's year. During the spring, these snow-fields, as analogy at once guesses them to be, and as beyond doubt they really are, stretch in the southern hemisphere, the one presented to us at this last opposition, down to latitude seventy, and even sixty-five south; covering thus more than the whole of the planet's south frigid zone. As summer comes on they dwindle gradually away, till by early autumn they present but tiny patches, a few hundred miles across. This year, for the first time in human experience, they melted, apparently, completely. This unprecedented event happened on October 13, or forty-three days after the summer solstice of the southern hemisphere, a date corresponding to about the middle of July on earth. Evidently it was a phenomenally hot season on Mars, for the minimum of the polar patch is reached usually about three months after Martian midsummer. It will be noticed how nearly such melting parallels what takes place with our arctic ice-cap on earth. But the disappearance of the polar snows is by no means the only change discernible upon the surface of the planet. Several years ago Schiaparelli noticed differences in tint at successive oppositions, both in the dark areas and in the bright ones. These, he suggested, might be due to the seasons. This year it has been possible to watch the change take place. From the Martian last of April to the Martian middle of August, the bluish-green areas have been steadily undergoing a most marked transformation. There proves, in fact, to be a wave of seasonal change that sweeps over the face of the planet from pole to pole. We will examine this more in detail when we take up the question of water. For the present point it suffices that it takes place; for it constitutes proof positive of the presence of an atmosphere." Cheers,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 23:38:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:12:05 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 15:49:50 -0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools Thanks Isaac and Terry! I can see I have alot of more reading to do! What is baffling me is this. It appears that people have given alot of thought to these UFO research tools. Also, I assume that these tools have been used by at least some serious researchers. Then, why is it that we do not have sufficient data to convince scientists/skeptics that there is a valid phenomena worthy of investigation and funding? The field investigator tools seem very valid to respond to a report, but basically we have not seen that these good tools have provided the required hard data to make the UFO phenomena be taken seriously. The tools for instrumented UFO sky searches is mainly what I was interested in and I have been surprised at the lack of detailed description of these instruments. What I had hoped for was some insight as to what the state of the art was and perhaps why the past /current work not been definitive? Is it a hopeless wish that a reasonable instrument set can provide the needed data to convince scientists/skeptics? >I'd be happy to cut and paste into this email lists of >references for material on Projects Twinkle and Hessdalen from a >UFO chronology I've been working on, but the lists are rather >long. I would appreciate it emailed to me if you think it too long for the List. >I've gone on far too long already, so for this category I'll >merely mention that there's been plenty of discussion on this >List and elsewhere of Greer and his flashlights. The >entertaining list of tools given by Joe McGonagle is far from >exhaustive. For example, the use of radio has not been limited >to SETI researchers. Apart from Marconi and Tesla, there have >been plenty of more recent claims to have used radios (and >television sets) to communicate with UFOs. I found the odd methods to attract UFOs amusing, but if one assumes UFOs _are_ alien craft, then it may not be too unlikely
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 23:41:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:12:49 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:53:01 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >MUFON has a list for Field Investigators of recommended tools. I >have it on the DFW MUFON site at: >http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/tools.html. >Obviously some tools would be more difficult to obtain than >others for the average investigator. >I also have a site called 'UFO Tools' at: >http://terrygroff.com/ufotools/ >which I hoped would expand in to an aid for all researchers but >I've had no indication that anyone is actually using it and >except for Ray Stanford no one has contributed to it. I believe >Ray did purchase a Magnetometer (or some kind of 'ometer') via a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 UFOs Over Mexico City Airport From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 07:43:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 08:16:01 -0500 Subject: UFOs Over Mexico City Airport INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 2, 2005 [Dear readers: this is our fifth year of providing you with on- line reports of "news as it happens". It would not have been possible without your unwavering support. Many thanks and best wishes for the coming year.] MEXICO: UFOs OVER MEXICO CITY AIRPORT Aviation technician and UFO researcher Alfonso Salazar Mendoza has reported the following sightings: On December 20, 2004, the staff at the Mexico City International Airport witnessed a strange flying object shaped like a black- colored saucer with what resembled "a golden spinning top" located on its upper section. It was observed at an altitude of approximately 200 meters at 12:00 hrs. On December 24, 2004, an aviation technician located unknown traffic flying from east to west, passing very close to an airliner inbound from South America. According to the witness, the UFO stopped and then ascended before vanishing into the heights. This event occurred at 4:30 a.m. Subsequently, Horacio Rodr=EDguez shot video of a cylindrical object having a metallic appearance to the east of Mexico City. On December 27, 2004 and at 15:00 hours, a spherical white flying object was seen suspended in the sky for several minutes near the Control Tower at Mexico City International Airport. All these reports were published in the "La Prensa" newspapre dated November 30, 2004 and written by Pablo Ch=E1vez in the General Information Section. Alfonso Salazar believes that UFO phenomenon to be real, since the airport's radar has detected them repeatedly and he himself has been an eyewitness to unidentified flying objects.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 3 UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:56:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:56:31 -0500 Subject: UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 This list compiled from stats generated by Analog 5.22 website log analyser - the [numbers] represent the number of reads. 20 UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames? Capt. Alejandro Franz - [1848] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/may/m27-011.shtml 19 Re: Dorothy Kilgallen Autopsy ebk - [1865] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/mar/m03-010.shtml 18 Police Officer Attacked By Flying Humanoid John Velez - [1894] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/jan/m21-005.shtml 17 Re: Alien Rapture: TR-3B Flying Triangle Revealed Henny van der Pluijm - [2067] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/mar/m12-007.shtml 16 Mexico UFO Video - 284kb file - UK.UFO.NW Crow & Raine - [2174] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m30-010.shtml 15 Mexican Airplane/UFO Collision Case False Captain Alejandro Franz - [2218] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/jan/m23-004.shtml 15 Weekly Filer's Files - #10-2002 George A. Filer - [2218] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/mar/m06-023.shtml 13 Lennon's UFO Experience Stig Agermose - [2240] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/sep/m21-015.shtml 12 The Real Story Of 'The Mothman Prophecies' ebk - [2295] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/dec/m07-011.shtml 11 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape Graham William Birdsall - [2315] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m31-004.shtml 10 Of Sociopaths & Conspiracy Alfred Lehmberg - [2318] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/feb/m07-003.shtml 9 Mexican UFO Video Tape Graham William Birdsall - [2371] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/oct/m26-029.shtml 8 Jaime Maussan Royce J. Myers III - [2405] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/jun/m30-018.shtml 7 Re: Mexican UFO Video Tape Phillip Mantle - [2588] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1997/nov/m02-009.shtml 6 Re: Postmodernism John Auchettl - [2590] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2003/mar/m07-008.shtml 5 NASA - Response To FOXTV's 'Moon Conspiracy' ebk - [2913] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/feb/m16-007.shtml 4 The March Mexico UFOs Footage ebk - [3377] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/may/m11-013.shtml 3 Mantell Refereed Paper Kevin Randle - [3580] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/nov/m16-026.shtml 2 Of Flying Wings & Hover Cars ebk - [6547] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/aug/m03-008.shtml 1 Bob Lazar - True or False? Glenn Campbell - [25249] http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/jun/m22-012.shtml ----- Other Interesting 'Hits' At The Virtually Strange Network's Site in 2004 Various Government Departments World-Wide: 6352: gsi.gov.uk 3743: nasa.gov 3125: usda.gov 2325: alabama.gov 2015: welsh-ofce.gov.uk 1393: dfait-maeci.gc.ca 1279: va.gov 1122: croydon.gov.uk 1098: nsw.gov.au 1068: fnal.gov 942: uspto.gov 772: lanl.gov 707: gouv.fr 703: hants.gov.uk 694: ca.gov 660: dfo-mpo.gc.ca 616: defence.gov.au 524: state.gov 515: ssa.gov 435: noaa.gov 433: usps.gov 411: treas.gov 386: usdoj.gov 382: doe.gov 379: tas.gov.au 356: medway.gov.uk 352: ccra-adrc.gc.ca 350: house.gov 350: gsa.gov 344: hrdc-drhc.gc.ca 329: ordsvy.gov.uk 309: faa.gov 304: bop.gov 295: fda.gov 283: uscourts.gov 259: epa.gov 243: blm.gov 243: hc-sc.gc.ca 242: anl.gov 217: nih.gov 204: dol.gov 197: irs.gov 192: customs.gov 174: dhs.gov 164: sejm.gov.pl 160: dc.gov 156: havering.gov.uk 153: qld.gov.au 148: vic.gov.au 134: tc.gc.ca 124: loc.gov 122: jccbi.gov 121: osmre.gov 121: sanantonio.gov 117: wa.gov 115: wa.gov.au 112: sandia.gov 112: ausport.gov.au 112: pwgsc.gc.ca 109: mo.gov 108: nara.gov 103: tva.gov 102: pch.gc.ca 102: opm.gov 100: nla.gov.au 89: maricopa.gov 85: linz.govt.nz 83: rj.gov.br 80: westsussex.gov.uk 76: ceredigion.gov.uk 76: nyc.gov 74: ec.gc.ca 73: usap.gov 72: dorsetcc.gov.uk 71: irb.gc.ca 71: riq.qc.ca 70: inpi.gov.br 69: ptt.gov.tr 67: ainc-inac.gc.ca 66: rcmp-grc.gc.ca 65: doechicago.gov 65: doe-md.gov 62: bernco.gov 61: wales.gov.uk 53: llnl.gov Various U.S. Military Branches: 5264: 0.05%: navy.mil 5039: 0.04%: af.mil 4056: 0.04%: nipr.mil 3526: 0.04%: army.mil 881: 0.01%: disa.mil 817: 0.01%: usmc.mil 672: 0.01%: uscg.mil 196: : nga.mil 162: : stratcom.mil 120: : dtra.mil
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Frank Edwards Added To Audio History Of Ufology From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 10:49:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 10:49:29 -0500 Subject: Frank Edwards Added To Audio History Of Ufology Greetings to the Listarians, The 9th volume in the Audio History of Ufology series has been completed and available to those interested. Frank Edwards: Flying Saucers and Radio News, contains approximately 8 hours of material dealing with Frank Edwards. Many of these recordings will be new to the vast majority in Ufology. A donation of $20 USD is requested and that includes postage and handling to anywhere in the world. Please visit www.fadeddiscs.com for ordering information. Please note that Volume 1, Ufology: A Primer in Audio, is no longer available and will be updated and expanded in the future.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 14:20:48 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 10:57:18 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Shough >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 15:24:39 -0600 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:57:29 -0000 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>>From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:05:37 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead ><snip> >>Ray et al., >>I'd love to know what geologists make of this Y-shaped "tube" >>junction. Dune-filled ancient watercourses, or what? >>http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m04002/m0400291a.jpg >>It looks like an alien landscape designed by Hans Geiger! Is >>this certified legit? >Hi Martin, >Just jumping in here to note that there is no 'Y-junction' in >the cited image. The image shows 3 separate formations that >'appear' to converge, but this is the eye and the mind working. >Even on brightening the image, there is no linkage between these >formations. Well Kyle, phenomenologically speaking, clearly there is a junction of three branches of a related type of feature. Causally speaking it may be possible to go beyond this, though I don't insist on it - for example, if they are indeed dune-filled ravines as I suggested, possibly ancient watercourses or maybe rift valleys of some sort. Aren't you being a tad pedantic here? >Images are often misleading, but not nearly as misleading as the >human imagination. We connect dots that don't exist, because it >is the nature our perception to find patterns and signal out of >noise. Order out of chaos, as it were. >As has been repeated here several times, we will know before >long the true nature of these formations. Jumping to premature >conclusions by relying on 2-dimensional high-altitude images is >not helpful. How am I jumping to any conclusion? >I feel quite confident that a geologist would observe these >channels as dry river or stream-beds with wind-blown dunes along >their bottoms. Aren't you jumping to conclusions? :-/ >The direction of prevailing winds are not a >factor, since wind is funneled into the depressions and move >along the channel regardless of prevailing wind direction, just >as winds downtown flow between buildings. I seem to recall that in my first post on this topic - possibly the first response to the start of the thread - I suggested that these could be dunes formed in valleys. Why was this a premature
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 10:59:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:12:28 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:28:24 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:02:35 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>>Leir does not even have an M.D., and just as one indication of >>>his sophistication level, he was highly honored and bragging >>>about being a MUFON consultant, as if that conferred some >>>recognition or approval on him. Then consider some of his logic >>>and reasoning, and the lack of reasonable peer review. It is up >>>to people like him to establish their case (I won't say 'prove') >>>in order for it to be taken seriously, not for people like me to >>>prove them wrong. To me it smacks of pseudoscience. >>Richard and List, >>That's the second message on this List in wich you sharply >>criticize the work, the credentials and the ethical behavior of >>Dr Leir. Let's see your main arguments: Yes, I criticize his work, and, yes he does call himself "Doctor". Where did I say anything about his ethical behavior. Although now that you mention it, selling tickets for high- priced trips to crackpot pseudo-archeological expeditions might qualify. >>He "does not even have an MD". Does that mean that is not able >>to participate in a scientific research ? If this were a valid >>argument, many excellent researchers should be discarded as >>well. He calls himself, or allows himself to be called "Doctor". Is that justified? I doubt that the degree he holds even exists outside of California, but I could be wrong about that. >>On the other hand, researchers like Dr Mack and Dr Maccabee have >>not been spared bitter and unsubstantiated critics, in spite of >>their impeccable credentials. Both, at times, have deserved criticisms... of their work. That doesn't make them evil; it just makes them participants of peer- reviewed science. I have been called everything under the sun, but I'm a big boy and will fight back if I think someone is mistaken, as they often are about me. >>You say that he makes extravagant claims without peer review and >>independant verification. I asked Roger Leir, who is a friend >>and a person I respect. His answer is simple, reproduced here >>with his permission: >>"Gildas, >>I have only one short answer which you could elaborate on: >>He is absolutely correct when he states claims of the caliber I >>have reported should be questioned and reviewed. However, I >>would point out these are not my claims but claims of the >>scientists who have done the work. If they don't like the >>message then don't shoot the messenger. Anyone who makes these >>kind of remarks should be willing to put up the bucks to >>challenge any of the scientific research I have reported." Total copout; why should I put up a penny? The NIDS results on their web site do not show anything unusual. As for other alleged tests, anonymous science is an oxymoron; that ought to be carved in stone. Results must be published and peer reviewed throughly. >>If you read the book of Roger Leir "The Aliens and the Scalpel", >>and the articles published, notably in the Mufon UFO journal, >>you will see that Roger Leir has, indeed, reported on the >>findings of several laboratories. I know personally a bit more >>of the story (that there is more in store), but I have do admit >>that it's not a good argument in a public debate. Mostly anonymous results, and the one engineer at New Mexico Institute who has acknowledged his, work says that he has been misquoted and found nothing at all unusual in the arifacts. >>So, yes, there are some scientific studies. However, there has >>not been yet any article in a "peer reviewed scientific >>publication". But I ask you: >>Do you think that such a requirement can be met, in the >>scientific world of today? To me the answer, is clearly no! I >>don't see any important lab or university doing such a thing. I >>think we must be grateful to people like Dr Leir for taking the >>risk of doing such a controversial research, and publishing it. >>In addition, it has brought him more trouble than money. If it can't be met, the results must not be very impressive. And, Stan, judging by some of your recent advocacies you seem to be getting soft in the head with increasing age. Some responses below. >I must agree with Gildas. >I have spent time with Roger and have his book and video. He >makes very clear that the implant extractions from other than >the foot were done by other surgeons. I have talked to a >researcher at Southwest Research Institute who was very >impressed with the materials he examined. Roger is a registered >Podiatrist licensed to diagnose and treat foot disorders. Has he >been claiming anything else? Where are the SRI guy's published findings? Is gossip science? Yes, Leir claims to be a doctor. He has some kind of a certificate to do podiatry work, apparently only in California, but where does he have a medical degree as a doctor? he may be considered such in California. His medical credentials are not very impressive. Again, that doesn't necessarily make him evil or even wrong. >Dick, how about putting things in your gray basket when you >haven't spent time investigating, instead of deploring them? You >did the same thing with Frank Feschino Jr.'s "Braxton County >Monster: Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed". There were >references to 70+ newspaper articles and the Project Blue Book >File number listed. You hadn't read the book, hadn't reviewed >the Blue Book files nor the clippings. And I haven't seen any >apology either. Thanks for the gratuitous advice, Stan. But you see, I have investigated. Beware of false assumptions. See for example Alex Constantine's Political Conpsiracy Research Bin where two reporters interviewed Leir. He wouldn't provide them much of any information about the alleged tests that could be verified. Finally Leir gave them the name of Paul Fuierer at New Mexico Inst. who proceeded to say, among other things, "I found nothing particularly unusual about the objects." The Los Alamos Lab denied even knowing Leir or having anything to do with tests there. And what does Leir do? He keeps insinuating things about tests liikely being positive but never produces anything to support it. NIDS rather clearly made no claims whatsoever for the evidence. Apologize about the Flatwoods baloney? For what? You show me some evidence of vast aerial battles and widespread loss of military aircraft, then I will apologiize. Meanwhile, my advice to you is to take a hard look in the mirror and stop being so apparently gullible. >You also haven't provided any basis for your claims about either >Frank's incredible efforts or Roger's very extensive work. See above. More to come if the 'believers' keep assualting us with nonsense. >Absence of knowledge on your part certainly can't be taken as >evidence for absence of such information. Can it? Absence of ignorance is ignorance of absence, or something like
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:03:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:34:33 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >"An experimental device to stop alien abductions" here: >http://www.alienscalpel.com/device.htm >This turns out to be a " device [that] works by blocking alien >telepathy and mind control, [which Lear calls] a 'thought screen >helmet' [which] consists of a leather helmet lined with layers >of special conductive plastic... " >The helmet is offered for free on an experimental basis. This is sad really because there are people out there who really feel that they are being abducted and they are desparate. Any helmet like this is extremely unlikely to work since we haven't even gotten to the point of repeatible telepathy, so how can we "block" it? To think that our meager technology can stop some hypothetical advanced alien tech is absurd. What abductees and those that wish to help them really need to do is gather proof that they are being abducted by filming/recording the event. Why has it been impossible to capture the abduction event in process? Motion sensors, measurements of temperature/pressure changes in the home atmosphere, electrical/magnetic field changes should pick up something! If the person is whisked away then an attached transponder sending a heartbeat signal should be detectable (at least when it STOPS) and preferably used with triangulation to detect locational shifts. This is all quite bizarre. Still, I will suspend judgement on Dr. Leir because he does claim to have some alien artifacts and I would like to see them analyzed using electron microscopes to see if they are nanodevices/machines or constructed at the nanolevel. However, I agree with you that when researchers start to tie into ideas or concepts even more bizarre than what they are working on, I begin to lose respect for them. I was all impressed with ProjectHessdalen until I read THEIR report on how they thought the phenomena was monitoring them and not appearing when they were ready with their cameras, but appearing when they weren't. Also, they claim that laser shining
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:28:49 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:04:11 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 15:49:50 -0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >Now, I really must get back to completing my chronology and/or >entertaining my wife. After some thought on the matter, I really must say I am impressed with your work. How do you do it? Have you scanned in all the books you list and use the computer to create the references or are you a copious note taker and fast reader or do you use magic? >I've gone on far too long already, so for this category I'll
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:00:10 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:07:08 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:55:29 EST >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:41:11 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >McDonald also ignored Thayer's point in the Condon Report (p. >157) analysis of Washington National that the radiosonde data >from Silver Hill, Maryland, was from an altitude starting at 289 >feet whereas Wash Nat Airport was at an elevation of only 43 >feet. Even assuming the Wash Nat radar antennas were at say 60- >70 ft, there is still an "intervening" altitude layer of >atmosphere where: >"some of the most spectacular super-refractive and ducting >layers would be expected to develop." >This lower layer of atmosphere has no meteorological data on the >nights of the Wash National incidents. So not only is there >inadequate horizontal (geographic) sampling of meteorological >data but also inadequate vertical (height) sampling. Pockets of >refractive anomalies are surely being missed. >Thayer found that when Wash Nat did radiosondes from 1945 to >1950 (for some reason they stopped doing these upper air balloon >launches in 1950) they found much more evidence of anomalous >propagation (AP) radar conditions than one finds at Silver Hill. >So the lower altitude of Wash National put it more into the >refractive anomaly layer of air than the higher altitude of >Silver Hill. Hi Brad This is all true. I might have made these same points but..... >Now the Borden-Vickers report when I last read it many years ago >was not too convincing to me. The double-speed effect is where >anomalous radar targets were found traveling at supposedly twice >the upper air velocities, indicating partial reflection of >ground returns by these traveling "air radar mirrors" in the >sky, so the ground reflections will seem to have twice the speed >of the air that mirrors the ground. However as I recall the >speed doubling was very poorly demonstrated. It seems only once >(?) was the speed actually doubled, at other times there was a >wide range of speeds. I wonder if you might be misremembering the statement that, "with only one exception", none of the targets moved _at_ the wind speed or heading at any altitude, i.e they generally moved faster (about 2x) than the winds. >I would have expected a much closer >correlation of wind speeds doubled. Also I seem to recall a poor >correlation of radar target direction with the upper air wind >directions. You're right that they do not anywhere discuss the variance or offer any tests of statistical significance, and the correlations are just that, correlations, not identities. Their Figs 9 and 10 summarise data for Aug 13 and 15. The correlation on Aug 15 is noticeably better than for Aug 13, but on both nights the hypothetical scattering-layer plots (half the echo speeds) do plainly cluster around the wind plots. The speeds match generally within 2 or 3 knots on the second night, more variably on the first but within 10 knots. I agree it would have been nice to see this correlation quantified, but remember that the twice-windspeed model is an idealisation based on equal angles of incidence and reflection from a perfectly plane horizontal mirror. In practice the waves or turbulent patches will not be plane horizontal reflectors and the angles will vary producing a scatter of speeds. The correlation with wind direction is probably more evident from the five scope maps they reproduce for different periods of observation on the two nights. In each case the numerous track tracings all show a strong trend. "It will be noted from Figs 1, 2 and 3 that all targets observed in the first period were moving from the north or northwest. In Fig 6 all targets were moving from the south or southwest, and in Fig 7 all were moving from the west or northwest... In each case target directions corresponded with the wind directions reported aloft." It is possible to verify the general truth of this from the tables of wind directions given from Silver Hill. Again I agree it would have been nice to see this fleshed out, and one can see where McDonald had a point that the analysis was too "qualitative". Nevertheless it was avowedly a "prelimary" study at the time, and their theory can claim to have been justified by its results because it became a basically accepted mechanism. >I also have a problem understanding how a delicate ducting layer >of air can maintain its structure with any kind of wind at all, >which should break it up. I think the analogy might be with ocean wave patterns, which are largely driven by winds. Wave groups form and propagate with a degree of stability at the air-water interface. Other dynamical- but-stable types of feature can form and move with the net current - like eddies for example. But one wouldn't expect them to last all that long, and they didn't on the whole. I think the characteristic track distance they measured at Washington was only a couple of miles before the echoes faded (much stronger echoes were measured at Indianapolis that November). I think the suggestion would be that the effect may have been much stronger at Washington during July, when the record-breaking heatwave had been reaching its height. >If it is clear air turbulence (CAT) >being radar imaged then it's the air itself returning the radar >beam directly and there is no speed-doubling effect as it is not >the ground being picked up, and hence not the Borden-Vickers >scenario. No, the fact that the echoes did not move at wind speed indicates they were not direct returns from windborn reflectors. The localised patch of turbulence scatters the radar energy forward to the ground, possibly over a wide area, and energy may then be back-scattered from the ground to the layer. Where it impinges on the same efficient reflective patches it has the advantage of the same gain, and where it follows the same ray path in reverse it gets back to the receiver. The radar "sees" all of the back-scattered energy as coming from the azimuth and elevation of the reflective patch, but the range displayed will be governed by the total path length.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:19:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:21:48 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Ledger >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 14:31:37 -0800 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:32:24 -0400 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >>I agree with natural causes, Larry? It was either Martin or >>Terry that mentioned water forming patterns. I used to SCUBA >>dive during one period of my life and noticed this pattern on >>the bottom sand in shallow water, near shore many times. It was >>probably caused by wave action/currents. Perhaps though, these >>"rills" were caused by the Martian winds blowing over the sands >>collected at the bottom of slopes. There's a different ecology >>at work there where there is very low density atmospheric >>pressure combined with very dry winds. We don't really have a >>comparison here on Earth since that pressure is about the same >>as that experienced at 40 miles and we have no land at that >>elevation. In text. >I agree we should go there and find out for sure. I will let >others argue whether the most scientific bang for the buck (as >opposed to thrilling the public) would be done with manned or >robotic missions. Give the public what they want and Bob Zubrin, for that matter. Stop wasting money on war and waste it on Mars and space exploration. It's going to get wasted anyway. >Again, the idea I'm toying with is that long slot valleys may >have been created by ancient rivers on Mars. Now dry or nearly >so, they would selectively fill with sand and gravel. High thin >winds channeled down the same valleys should create dune >effects, just as they do on flat land. Sounds good to me. The veturii effects of winds in confined areas is now much better understood in this modern jet aircraft era since drag over surfaces is of prime concern to aircraft designers and the bottom line of the airlines [fuel burn, useful load verses profit]. In marine terms the effects of wind on water depends on distance [called the fetch] and it's no secret that wind in confined straits and bays result in curious short, steep seas or wave patterns. They set up in this washboard effect similar to the photos of the so-called worm tunnels. If these were the result of rushing water over a long thin sandy bottom I would guess that these would have been long since covered over by natural proccesses. So my money is on existing sand deposits, as you siad from the slopes surrounding these "tunnels" and then blown out by the winds in a self repeating proccess. It starts with the first wave which creates the conditions [horizontal vorticies] for the next which creates the conditions for the next etc. I just see sand waves [dunes] myself. >Glass tubes seem a little much when compared to a simpler more >plausible natural mechanism, at least to me. <snip> The only anomaly I see in one of these is the bright point of light. I wonder is this was a small meteor impact caught during
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 17:47:40 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:29:53 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:20:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/full_gif_map/M15/M1500465.gif >But the author of that original email said the tubes were >'barely visible', (or so I think) so I'm wondering if we >were supposed to be looking at some other type of feature, Hello Eleanor & List Don't recognize the image - (but am using small b/w monitor here. Useful info for interpretation, i.e. time/altitude/angle/sun- direction etc is at the image's "index" page: http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/images/M15/M1500465.html which also has clues to scale: i.e. pixel width, plus it says "3 km diameter crater cut/intersected by deep sinuous valley". [But objective info is "3 km diameter crater" only] For review of "dunes versus tubes" question would recommend: http://www.metaresearch.org/home/Viewpoint/archive/010313GlassyTubes/Meta-in-New s.asp There Tom Van Flandern's put four examples, including the famous "bulge" which has been variously called headlight/vehicle/organism. And there's always Joseph P Skipper's large collection and evaluations of Mars images: http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/9-master/master-director y.htm http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-directories/main/main-directory.htm Good hunting. Cheers,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 UFOs Over Chile's 10th Region From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 12:33:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:26:41 -0500 Subject: UFOs Over Chile's 10th Region INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 3, 2005 Source: Diaro La Segunda (Chile) Date: 01.03.05 UFOs REPORTED IN CHILE'S 10th REGION VALDIVIA - An unidentified flying object (UFO) was captured in a photograph taken by a tourist, identified as Raul Jara, at the Los Molinos beach resort in the 10th Region. Jara claims not having been aware of anything abnormal when he pointed his camera toward the heavens of the Valdivian shoreline, while members of the Aedo Lovera and Jara Lovera families were startled by the find, pointing out that "at no time was anything strange seen in the skies." The foregoing is due to the fact that they acknowledge that the object located over the subjects of the photograph has a certain resemblance to a helicopter, according to www.australvaldivia.cl When consulted about this, Boris Lovera stated that "in spite of the noise on the beach, the motor of any aircraft flying over the area would have been heard at the time." Both families, however, were skeptical when it came to confirming the presence of what could be an alien spacecraft. The phenomenon seen by the Valdivians was recorded at around 19:00 hours when both families were about ready to leave the Los Molinos beach and head back to the city of Calle Calle. At that time the temperature was around 24 C and the skies along the coast were clear. Despite the "showy" nature of the object, Raul Jara stressed that "no one else on the beach appears to have seen anything at all" adding: "we didn't notice the UFO. It was only when we got home and downloaded the photos into the computer." In fact, one of two photos taken shows the presence of an object in the air, but it is no longer visible in the second shot. According to Boris Aedo, who appears in the lower left of the photo: "I was crouching when they took the first photo and in a few seconds, there was nothing at all in the skies." Carabineros (State Police) of the Reten de Niebla barracks noted that no phone calls had been received involving the presence of any unusual flying object. This was confirmed by the Pichoy Airport Traffic Control Tower, whose officials were completing their day's work at that time. The Los Molinos sighting can be added to others recorded in the area, which brings up the old question: Are we alone in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Beastie Boy Left Shocked By UFO Encounters From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 15:11:45 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:39:19 -0500 Subject: Beastie Boy Left Shocked By UFO Encounters Source: Contact Music http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/beastie%20boy%20left%20s hocked%20by%20ufo%20encounters 01-03-05 Beastie Boy Left Shocked By UFO Encounters Beastie Boy Adam Horovitz was left spooked on more than one occasion last year (04) - when he spotted what he thinks were UFOs. The Sabotage rapper will remember 2004 as the year US President GEORGE W BUSH was re-elected, against Horovitz's wishes, and for the two occasions he saw what looked like alien objects. He says, "There were two different times last year (04) when I did think I saw something that looked like UFO activity. "All I know is that I saw a bunch of lights go wooosh, really high and way over there. I don't know what it was. I was driving
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 01:29:06 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:48:40 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:07:48 +0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 01:03:45 -0500 >>Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>Single photos are, at best, an aide to the witness' >>recollection. Must be backed up by solid circumstantial evidence >>(the "back story" behind the photos). >>Better would be two cameras in a stereo pair, as in some Gulf > >>Breeze sightings, but need to know exact characteristics of a >>stereo camera and backup by circumstantial evidence. >When an improvised "stereo" camera system was introduced at Gulf >Breeze the photographs it captured were indeterminate "lights in >the sky" images rather than the elaborate "structured craft" >images captured by the single camera. >Funny that, isn't it? My remark regrding the value of a stereo pair of cameras is true regardless of comments about the Gulf Breeze sightings. However, you are correct in that the Nimslo stereo camera produced 10 images of a structured set of lights... no 'body' of a craft was detectable in the photos. However, when two Polaroid Model 600 cameras (which eject the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 10:20:33 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:50:57 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 - >UFO UpDates Archive Top 20 Reads 2004 >This list compiled from stats generated by Analog 5.22 website >log analyser - the [numbers] represent the number of reads. <snip> > 10 Of Sociopaths & Conspiracy > Alfred Lehmberg - [2318] > http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/feb/m07-003.shtml Hey Folks For the interested this paper has been rewritten and updated with more references. For my money I think it's a lot clearer than it was before. http://www.alienview.net/conspire.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:38:01 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:55:31 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - Dickenson >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:20:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/full_gif_map/M15/M1500465.gif >But the author of that original email said the tubes were >'barely visible', (or so I think) so I'm wondering if we >were supposed to be looking at some other type of feature, Hello Eleanor Checked it with a big screen and think I know what your mailer meant by "barely visible". There's a frilly sinuous "thing" running from top down 75% of image. That seems some sort of ground cover over a depression. In that depression - about 15% down the image - you get a brief glimpse, about one inch on my screen, of an uncovered "tube". Then the drift or whatever resumes cover. So try putting scroll bar halfway down screen, then half higher again, then one-third higher again. So that's 50% then 25$ then 16% of image. You should recognize a short stretch of uniform width, equally banded "tube". Hope that helps, Cheers
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:09:52 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:59:55 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 1 January 5, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ UFOs HOVER OVER IRAN'S NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS UFOs returned to Iran in force last week, hovering over the country's nuclear installations and causing the Islamic government to issue a Red Alert. It was the biggest mass sighting of UFOs in Iran since the two-week flap in mid-April 2004. At that time, UFOs were sighted in Tabriz, Ghonbad-Kavous, Azad Shar, Gorgan and Poldokhtar. (For the full details, see UFO Roundup, volume 9, number 16 for April 21, 2004, "UFOs with flashing lights seen in northern Iran," page 5; and volume 9, number 17 for April 28, 2004, "Major UFO flap breaks out in northern Iran," page 4.) "Iran's air force has been ordered to shoot down any unknown or mysterious flying object in Iran's airspace, an Iranian Air Force spokesman reported" on Sunday, December 26, 2004, "amid state-media reports of many sightings of flying objects over Iran's nuclear installations." "Flying-object fever has gripped Iran after dozens of reported sightings last summer and in recent months. State-run media has reported sightings of unknown objects over parts of Iran where nuclear facilities are located." "Flights of unknown objects in the country's airspace have increased in recent weeks. They have been seen over Bushehr and Isfahan provinces, the daily newspaper Resalat reported yesterday (Sunday, December 26, 2004)." "The timing of the reported increases in sighting, coming as the United States is prodding the UN to confront Iran over its nuclear program, has strengthened the Iranian public's perception that the objects under surveillance are hostile aircraft entering Iran." "Gen. Karim Ghavami, (Iran's) chief of air operations, was quoted yesterday as saying that Iran is fully prepared to defend itself against any threat to its nuclear installations. 'We have developed detailed plans to defend our nuclear facilities from any threat. Iran's air force is watchful and and fully prepared to carry out its responsibilities,' he said." "Shining objects were seen in the daytime sky over Natanz, where Iran's uranium enrichment plant is located. One of the objects exploded, causing panic among the civilians of the region." "Iran has been accused by the USA of developing a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Israel has hinted openly that it may strike Iran's nuclear facilities if international pressure fails to permanently freeze Iran's nuclear development." "Iran has denied the U.S. charges, saying its nuclear program is geared towards producing electricity, not nuclear weapons." "Iran agreed last week to suspend uranium enrichment and all related activities under a deal reached with the European Union, helping it to escape referral to the UN Security Council and the possible imposition of sanctions." "Iran says it already possesses the capability to create the entire nuclear fuel cycle--from mining uranium oxide to enriching it. Uranium enriched to a low level is used as fuel in nuclear reactors. Further enrichment produces 'weapons-grade' uranium and plutonium." "Sources in Iran say the Iranian Air Force has admitted to these sightings and assumes that these are U.S. or Israeli spy craft and has directed its fighter pilots to 'shoot them down on sight.'" Easier said than done. The same sources claim that "the Iranian Air Force has thus far been unable to successfully intercept" any UFO "and has failed to shoot down a single object. Many in the Iranian Air Force are complaining about a lack of technical ability in shooting down these mysterious craft." (See the Iranian newspaper Resalat for December 27, 2004; the Jordanian newspaper Al- Majd for December 27, 2004; and India Daily for December 27, 2004, "Iranian Air Force ordered to defend nuclear facilities from UFOs." Many thanks to Robert Fischer, Daniel Wilson and Ayesha al-Khatabi for these newspaper articles.) (Editor's Comment: Welcome to Spotlight on Iran Week here at UFO Roundup. Isfahan and Bushehr aren't the only Iranian provinces where weird events are happening. Read on...) MYSTERY METEOR CRASHES IN SOUTHEASTERN IRAN "A meteorite weighing at least 16 kilograms struck a house in southeastern Iran, the state news agency IRNA reported Thursday," December 29, 2004. "The crystalline meteor penetrated the roof of a house in Saravan, a small town in the province of Sistan- Baluchestan," about 800 kilometers (500 miles) southeast of Tehran, the national capital. "According to local police official Mohammad Arab, the sparkling crystal meteor hit the home in Saravan and shattered into small pieces. No injuries or serious damage was reported." "The police report said most of the meteor had already been broken up and taken away by local people before their officers arrived at the scene." "At least one mullah has called the meteor 'the gift of Allah.' From my friend Kufa Yildaz, I've heard that the Shiites in Saravan believe these crystals from space will protect them when the Israeli attack comes," Ayesha al-Khatabi, UFO Roundup's Middle East correspondent said. (See the Jordanian newspaper Al-Majd for December 30, 2004. Many thanks to Dick Eastman and Ayesha al-Khatabi for this newspaper article.) LUMINOUS ORANGE UFO SIGHTED IN CUBA On Sunday, December 18, 2004, UK tourist Stuart Logan and his family decided to go out to dinner at the Club Amigo, the open-air restaurant at the Hotel Atlantico in Guardalavaca, a suburb of Holguin, a city in eastern Cuba. "We were on the thirteenth night of a two-week vacation at the resort of Guardalavaca on the northeastern side of Cuba," Stuart reported, "Guardalavaca is located one hour's drive from the major city of Holguin and is on the coast." "We had recently started our meal, and with me at a round table were five of us--my brother, my niece, my sister and a family friend. It was a clear sky, and the sun had just about gone down. But it was not yet complete darkness. I had my back to the view facing the coast. The restaurant we were in was only a five-minute walk from the beach." "At precisely 7:05 p.m., my brother, sitting opposite, said, 'What's that light in the sky?'" "We all began to observe a very bright light at about a 45-degree angle in the sky over the sea. We had been observing the stars every night, as they are so clear in the Cuban sky from what we would see in UK, and we knew instantly--this was no planet or star." "The light was a pulsating bright orangeness that was motionless." "My brother said he had been watching it for a few minutes previously and only mentioned it when he saw another bright orange object join it." "To me, it was one light, but some at our table thought it could be up to four lights close together." "I estimated the light to be no more than 3 or 4 kilometers (2 or 3 miles) away." "We all agreed that the light was orange and definitely pulsating or possibly expanding and contracting." "Other diners noticed us looking, and they began to observe the object." "Then the waiters became interested, followed by the kitchen staff, and all came out and went to the edge of the restaurant for the closest view." "This was the best indicator that we were observing something, as the Cuban staff seemed as fascinated as we were. In all, there were 20 people watching the sky." "We observed the object all together for about five minutes." "It was about 7:10 p.m. when the light just faded and was gone." "Unfortunately, I did not have my camera with me that evening. There was some background music playing in the restaurant so we could not hear any other sound." "Coincidentally, the next morning, my niece heard on TV that a UFO picked up on radar, had been reported in the Jakarta region of Indonesia." (For more on the Jakarta flyover, see UFO Roundup, volume 9, number 52 for December 28, 2004, "Sky booms rattle the capital of Indonesia," page 3.) "Was there any connection between the Indonesian incident and the world's most destructive earthquake in the last forty years?" (Email Form Report) SILVER DAYLIGHT DISC SEEN IN ALDERSHOT, HAMPSHIRE On Monday, December 27, 2004, eyewitness Craig W. was outdoors in Aldershot, Hampshire, UK when he saw a shining object approaching from the west. Craig reported, "It was an elongated silvery diamond- shaped craft, slow-moving and silent. It was bright silver in the daylight and dark grey at certain angles. There were two eyewitnesses to the event, myself included. When first observing the object, we both thought it was a type of swift-wing species (similar to observing a sample through a microscope--C.W.)." He described the object as "moving quietly" and "at a height of 20,000 feet (6,000 meters), not made for speed but moved quite slowly. It took approximately four minutes to disappear over the eastern horizon." (Email Form Report) NIGHT SAUCERS HOVER OVER WORTHAM, TEXAS On Friday, December 16, 2004, at 9 p.m., eyewitness John S. "and my two friends were outside" in Wortham, Texas (population 1,082) "when a disk or saucer-shaped object came flying over the small buildings of downtown Wortham. It was a greyish-blue color and had lights all around the rim." The saucer stopped and hovered over the intersection of Route 14 and the county road to Kirvin, then it moved on. "Soon two others followed after it, looking exactly the same. They stayed awhile, hovering and spinning above us. Then they stopped in mid-air and flew away so fast they looked like they disappeared." Wortham, Tex. is on Route 14, approximately 8 miles (12 kilometers) north of Mexia and 45 miles (72 kilometers) northeast of Waco. (Email Form Report) TWO UFOs BUZZ A HOUSE IN ACTON, ONTARIO On Monday, December 5, 2004, at 7:15 p.m., eyewitness C.C. "was sitting outside on the deck with my dog" at her home in Acton, Ontario, Canada (population 6,975) when she was startled by a strange UFO encounter. "I live in a new housing development in Action, and the treeline is actually behind an air base," she reported, "On the other side of the trees lies a grocery store and a small plaza. The sky was clear, and out of nowhere dropped two oval-shaped lights. They dropped straight down over the treeline and went straight over my house. The two objects were very quiet and came to a brief stop as they dropped out of nowhere and then went straight over my house." "I didn't notice how my dog reacted--a soft-coated Wheaten terrier--as she was doing her business, and I was looking up into the sky. The two objects were almost triangle-shaped and bright, silver looking, and they made no noise at all. This all happened in a matter of five to ten seconds." "We live about one hour northwest of Pearson International Airport in Toronto. I could see clearly the planes going over that night. They fly southeast over our house. These objects descended out of nowhere, straight down, hesitated and then straight over my house." Acton, Ont. in on Provincial Highway 25 about 30 miles (48 kilometers) west of Toronto, Canada's largest city. (Many thanks to Canadian ufologist Brian Vike for this report.) HUYGENS CONTINUES ITS SHORT FLIGHT TO TITAN "On target for Titan, Saturn's haze-shrouded moon, the Huygens space probe is headed for a mystery-packed landing." "The European Space Agency's Huygens lander detached from the international Cassini spacecraft on Christmas Eve (Friday, December 24, 2004) and now speeds toward Titan on a precise trajectory to enter the moon's orange-tinged atmosphere." "Whether the 705-pound probe will land on frozen ice, a methane lake or a muddy combination of both remains uncertain." "On (Friday) January 14 (2005), Huygens' landing--the farthest one from Earth ever attempted by any space probe- -is expected to be a scientific highlight of 2005." "The second-largest moon in the solar system and the only one with a dense atmosphere, Titan fascinates planetary scientists. Under its dense clouds, a complex interplay of carbon chemistry is thought to take place, mirroring conditions on Earth at the birth of the solar system." "NASA scientists have pronounced themselves boggled by the cloudy glimpses on recent flybys, a vista of light and dark plateaus that mesh jaggedly, marked with hints of frozen lakes in radar images." "'Despite everything we've seen, Titan is almost as mysterious now as it was 15 years ago,' says Huygens chief scientist John Zarnecki of the United Kingdom's Open University." "Huygens will plunge into Titan's clouds at a 65- degree angle, hitting speeds near 13,000 miles per hour (20,800 kilometers per hour) and raising temperatures on its heat shield to more than 2,700 degrees" on the Fahrenheit scale. "'That's damn fast--a fireball entry,' says Zarnecki, who calls those moments 'the most terrifying' of Huygens' voyage from Earth to Titan." "After its speed drops, the probe will deploy three parachutes and measure the density of Titan's atmosphere. Scientists hope it will return at least two hours' of photos and data to Cassini overhead." (See USA Today for December 27, 2004, "Jan. 14 is a Saturn-day for Titan moon probe," page 7D.) Welcome to 2005, readers. We're starting Volume 10 of UFO Roundup, and I think we've come a long way since the Varginha case and the heady events of 1996. So off we go on another year of hunting for saucers, aliens, Bigfoot, strange mysteries, phantom panthers, ancient artifacts and other Fortean phenomena. Since we're beginning a new year, it's time to repeat the UFO Roundup Pledge. "UFO Roundup will continue to provide attribution wherever possible for each item that appears in the newsletter." "UFO Roundup will also diligently protect the confidentiality of UFO witnesses who are interviewed by our newsletter. No witness' full name or address will be published unless the witness gives UFO Roundup specific and explicit permission in writing to do so." "UFO Roundup pledges to give you complete and comprehensive coverage of the continuing drama of the unidentified flying object." See you next week! UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2005 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup provided on their Web sites or in news groups, 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.nul> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://www.ufoinfo.com/submit/sightings.shtml -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster.nul> UFOINFO: http://www.ufoinfo.com Official Archives for UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian UFO Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine plus archives of Humanoid Sighting Reports (Albert Rosales), Filer's Files, Oz Files, UFO News UK. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- UFO Roundup is only sent to subscribers. If you wish to unsubscribe or feel you have received the bulletin in error, please write to:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:15:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:01:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - LeClair >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >What abductees and those that wish to help them really need to >do is gather proof that they are being abducted by >filming/recording the event. Why has it been impossible to >capture the abduction event in process? Motion sensors, >measurements of temperature/pressure changes in the home >atmosphere, electrical/magnetic field changes should pick up >something! If the person is whisked away then an attached >transponder sending a heartbeat signal should be detectable (at >least when it STOPS) and preferably used with triangulation to >detect locational shifts. This is all quite bizarre. Capturing a close encounter, or abduction is something I have been trying to do for awhile. I think it should be a number one priority. It is with me atleast. Anyway, I can't find any real abductees in my area that have re-occuring abductions. I live in Charlotte, NC. If you know of anyone, get their permission and let me know about them. Now, onto Leir related discussion. Leir has talked about video of a closet of Stan Romanak, where a possible grey can be seen materializing in, or coming out of the closet. If it's not the Stan R. case and another, please correct me. Leir mentioned on a radio interview that a still of the video can be seen at his website. There is no still at his website, so I contacted him about it. He got back with me stating that he doesn't run his website and that he has a webmaster that does. Leir just stated that he thought his webmaster put it up.The video can be seen on one of Leir's videos I think. If anyone out there has seen the closet video, let us/me know what you think. If anyone knows where I can see the vid, or stills on the net, that would be great too. Thanks.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:03:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:34:33 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >I was all impressed with ProjectHessdalen until I read THEIR >report on how they thought the phenomena was monitoring them and >not appearing when they were ready with their cameras, but >appearing when they weren't. Also, they claim that laser shining >affected the UFO flash rate and the next day a simlar laser >light shown at their feet! So what changes from an Earth Lights >phenomena research goes into something weird! And then they >installed the PEAR "EGG" device, which seems to have no clear >physics behind it. This is not really scientific. But it is kind >of interesting. Jim: What you wrote above strikes a chord with us (rrrgoup)... For many years we worked on a project I'll call "predictivity." We noticed that events (some catastrophic, some mundane) were happening in a series: mine disasters, tornados, fires, bus- nappings [sic], et cetera. We kept logs of the events and saw that when a major fire occurred, for instance, another would follow in three days or seven, followed by a third fire eleven days after the initial fire. And if the events (not just limited to the United States) were plotted... the first two... one could predict the third event by extrapolating a line, twice the distance, from the second of the two events. We were able to predict a school bus-taking, several days after two other school bus/hostage events -- the first remembered, perhaps, was the event where the kids were held undergound until discovered by the police. We did this with fires in various cities, and mine disasters here and in Europe and the U.S.S. R. Now the interesting (maybe) part is that when we seemed to be on the brink of perfecting the time and locale sequences, the events became bizarre: the events still occurred in patterns of three or four, but they didn't follow in a straight line. They formed triangles or some other form which prevented is from going further. We have resurrected the process over the years when two events of a like kind take place, but as soon as we set up our system, the events move outside a predictable pattern. (This is akin to the quantum maxim that measured/observed events or experiments are altered by the measurement or the observation: Schrodinger's cat.) So, for us, the idea that the ProjectHessdalen was seemingly scrutinized in a way that prevented the participants from going further, doesn't ring false necessarily.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:26:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:20:19 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Maccabee >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:55:29 EST >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:41:11 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? <snip> >Now the Borden-Vickers report when I last read it many years ago >was not too convincing to me. The double-speed effect is where >anomalous radar targets were found traveling at supposedly twice >the upper air velocities, indicating partial reflection of >ground returns by these traveling "air radar mirrors" in the >sky, so the ground reflections will seem to have twice the speed >of the air that mirrors the ground. However as I recall the >speed doubling was very poorly demonstrated. It seems only once >(?) was the speed actually doubled, at other times there was a >wide range of speeds. I would have expected a much closer >correlation of wind speeds doubled. Also I seem to recall a poor >correlation of radar target direction with the upper air wind >directions. >I also have a problem understanding how a delicate ducting layer >of air can maintain its structure with any kind of wind at all, >which should break it up. If it is clear air turbulence (CAT) >being radar imaged then it's the air itself returning the radar >beam directly and there is no speed-doubling effect as it is not t>he ground being picked up, and hence not the Borden-Vickers >scenario. I, too, am unconvinced by the moving radar "air mirror" hypothesis. Imagine sending the radar pulse nearly straight up to a horizontal mirror at height H which reflects some of the radiation (only some because the mirror is very "weak") back down to the ground where it bounces off a reflector and back up into the sky and then is weakly reflected from the "mirror" down to the antenna. The total path length is (H + H) going to the target on the ground and H + H returning to the antenna, so divide the sum of 4 H's by 2 and get 2H as the distance measured to the target by the radar. Suppose, now, that H increases by a small amount, dH. This adds dH + dH + dH + dH to the total path, or 4 dH. This is divided by 2 to get the added radar measured distance to the target, 2dH. If this happens in time dt, then the radar distance increases at the rate 2dH/dt. But dH/dt is the velocity of the mirror, so the measured radar distance increases at twice the velocity of the mirror. Distance increase with time is, of course, velocity so the radar measured velocity increases at twice the velocity of the mirror. The same calculation applies if the mirror moves downward instead of upward. QED. Problems: 1) this calculation is for radar shooting straight upwards or nearly so which means the mirror moves upwards (or downwards). But the mirror is a hypothetical layer of air... it can't move directly upwards or downwards without extreme shear breaking up the layer. One must assume an air mirror that is moving with the windstream, i.e., a mirror that is tilted with respect to horizontal. 2) If the radar beam hits the mirror at an angle other than 90 degrees. which is the more likely situation, one does not get complete doubling. In this case the increase in radar measured path length is more like 2dH cosA, where A is the angle between the normal to the mirror and the incoming radar ray. When A = 0 one gets doubling. When A = 45 deg the radar velocity is 1.4 times the mirror velocity. The radar range velocity decreases as A increases..... At very flat angles where the air mirror efficiency is the greatest for reflecting radar radiation, A is large (nearly 90 deg) and cos A is small, approaching zero at 90 deg. 3) The speed is measured by the distance between radar blips. This requires the mirror to exist for at least 2 blips, 10 or 12 or 15 seconds depending upon the rotation rate (6, 5 or 4 rpm). To establish a credible track of a target would require at least 3 blips or 20 - 30 sec. The question then, is, can a hypothetical air mirror at some altitude maintain its integrity long enough for this to happen while being blown along "with the wind." 4) Only the air mirrors that have a component of velocity away from or toward the radar antenna will produce the velocity effect (motion perpendicular to the radial distance to the antenna will not increase or decrease the distance). Hence, the velocity doubling effect proposed relies upon the extremely rare(?) situation that an unusually efficient air mirror maintain its integrity for many seconds while being blown directly away from (or toward) the radar antenna and... in order
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 4 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Myers From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:28:53 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:35:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Myers >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:34:33 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris'
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01-04-05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:57:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 05:47:01 -0500 Subject: Subject: Secrecy News -- 01-04-05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 1 January 4, 2005 ** PRESIDENT'S DAILY BRIEFS WITHHELD, RELEASED ** PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED INFO ** SUNSHINE WEEK ** MORE CRS PRODUCTS PRESIDENT'S DAILY BRIEFS WITHHELD, RELEASED The President's Daily Brief (PDB), the daily summary of foreign intelligence prepared for the President by the Central Intelligence Agency, is "inherently privileged," according to the CIA, and therefore cannot be publicly disclosed, regardless of age or content. But the CIA claim that PDBs are somehow categorically exempt from release is being challenged in a new lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, even as two PDBs from 1967 have been newly declassified. University of California historian Larry Berman filed suit in California last month after the CIA refused to release Vietnam War-era PDBs prepared for President Johnson. Useful background on the case is available from the National Security Archive, which is co-representing Prof. Berman. See "Professor Sues CIA for President's Daily Brief," December 23, 2004: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/pdbnews/index.htm Meanwhile, at least two PDBs were declassified and disclosed last month at the Johnson Presidential Library, in a seeming contradiction of CIA's normal PDB non-disclosure policy. One of the PDBs was released in response to a request from researcher Peter Pesavento, who is studying the Soviet manned space program in the 1960s. See this April 25, 1967 PDB, which was released to Pesavento last week: http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/pdb042567.html The state of CIA classification policy is such that one no longer asks why information is withheld. Rather, one wonders why anything is ever released. Why was this PDB disclosed? Based on conversations with library officials, archivists and others, Mr. Pesavento concluded that it could be released because it was not in the standard PDB format, but rather was transmitted to the President by cable when he was at the LBJ ranch. "What is going on is that Style of Presentation is preventing the PDBs from being released," Mr. Pesavento wrote in an email message. "If it's in the 'Traditional' format, they are going to be resistant. If it's in a cable format, or another format, they will release it.... Whatever other researchers are being told, this is the current reasoning by the CIA." PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED INFO Perhaps the single most worrisome trend in government secrecy policy is not the continuing growth in classification activity, but the proliferation of security controls on unclassified information. While there are reasonably well-defined procedures governing classified information, including provisions for declassification and rudimentary oversight, nothing comparable exists when it comes to the multiple, ever-expanding and mutually inconsistent systems for controlling access to unclassified information. The information control category known as "sensitive but unclassified" is the subject of a recent report from the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress. The 32 page report amply elucidates the statutes, regulations and directives that cumulatively regulate access to such information, yet it does not exhaust the subject. See "Laws and Regulations Governing the Protection of Sensitive But Unclassified Information," September 2004 (thanks to RT): http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/sbu.pdf SUNSHINE WEEK Several major media organizations are working to promote a public dialogue on the value of open government during what they call "Sunshine Week" beginning next March 13. The initiative seeks to encourage press and public attention to the virtues of openness and to communicate "why open government is important to everyone, not just to journalists." See: http://www.sunshineweek.org/ With a few important exceptions, national political leadership in defense of open government has been lacking. But in many parts of the country there is a dawning recognition that something is very wrong with current government information policies, and that something vitally important to America is at risk. "To a disturbing degree, we've abdicated our individual sovereignty since the [9/11] terrorist attacks," the Valley Morning Star in Harlingen, Texas editorialized last week. "National security springs from capable intelligence and military organizations, not from autocratic, secretive government that cows ordinary citizens and muzzles the media on which those citizens depend to keep them informed." See "Liberty Can't Be Traded for Security," Valley Morning Star, December 31: http://tinyurl.com/66umh MORE CRS PRODUCTS For no good reason, most reports of the Congressional Research Service are still not made directly available to the public. New or newly updated CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News include: "Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004: 'Lone Wolf' Amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act," December 29, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS22011.pdf "Border and Transportation Security: Overview of Congressional Issues," December 17, 2004: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32705.pdf "Intelligence Community Reorganization: Potential Effects on DOD Intelligence Agencies," updated December 21, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32515.pdf "The National Intelligence Director and Intelligence Analysis," updated December 3, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21948.pdf "Terrorism and National Security: Issues and Trends," updated December 21, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/IB10119.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 05:52:04 -0500 Subject: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need to know of it. Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on more topics released than anyone else I know. Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the same. Thanks Mike! - Jim Klotz ============================================= Listing of Classified and Restricted Documents at the Air Force Historical Research Agency by Michael Ravnitzky mikerav.nul http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/afhra/ Over 500,000 documents cover almost every aspect of US military history from the 1920s to the early 1980s Very few of these documents have been released to the public In response to a Freedom of Information Act request by researcher Michael Ravnitzky, the Air Force Historical Research Agency - which maintains one of the largest repositories of US military historical documents - released in early 2001 a list of its still-classified and still-restricted documents. This unprecedented database contains information on well over _half_a_million_ documents held by the agency. The list was released on a cumbersome data cartridge and stored in an awkward data format. The Memory Hole's tech guru Brett Milner has laboriously extracted and converted this massive file into a series of more manageable Excel spreadsheets. The 550,000+ documents are identified by call numbers, title, date, author, etc.; they include reports, memos, directives, histories, daily operations reports, oral histories, interviews, situation reports, intelligence summaries, speeches, chronologies, logs, minutes, briefings, correspondence, press clippings, newsletters, photos, slides, audiotapes, and more. We have spotted documents that date back to the 1920s and some as recent as the early 1980s. (The FOIA request asked the agency to limit the list to documents more than 20 years old.) Among the many, many areas covered are World War II, the Vietnam War (including Laos and Cambodia), the Korean War, the Cold War, the Balkans, specific aircraft and weapons systems, histories of bases and squadrons, accidents, nuclear weapons, chemical and biological warfare, space exploration, satellites, UFOs, NATO, and NORAD. There appear to be a large number of documents that are not designated as classified but are apparently limited or restricted for other reasons. While documents may be identified as classified or restricted, the passage of time as well as the presidential rules on protecting classified information make it somewhat likely that any particular document would now be declassified and/or released upon request.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Gehrman From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:30:01 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 05:57:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Gehrman >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:10:57 -0800 >Subject: Alien Autopsy Film Review >Rich, EBK, List, <snip> >Were the creatures in this (the AA) dissection ET or could they >be evolved monotremes (echidna, platypus)? This line of mammal >diverged from marsupials about 186 million years ago. More information on Monotremes: "Monotremes are egg-laying mammals found in Australia and on the island of New Guinea (politically Papua-New Guinea in the east and the Indonesian province of Irian Jaya in the west). There are only three extant species, Common name(s) Ornithorhynchus anatinus Platypus Tachyglossus aculeatus Echidna, spiny anteater Zaglossus bruijni Long beaked echidna The platypus is found in rivers on the eastern and south-eastern coasts of the Australian mainland, and on the island of Tasmania, the echidna in most of the eastern half of Australia and in New Guinea, and the long beaked echidna in the highlands of New Guinea[2:ch 2]. While the laying of eggs by the monotremes is the best-known and most obvious similarity that they have to the reptiles, there are a number of other similarities, which will be examined in the next section. It is inaccurate, however, to consider the monotremes and marsupials as "living fossils" -- they have had an independent evolutionary history of some 180Myr, and perform better than placental mammals at some "typically mammalian" tasks, like thermoregulation [3:ch 4,9]. Neither are they a "missing link"; they are neither missing nor are modern monotremes a link between any other modern groups. However, they have retained some features which we would expect to have seen in the more mammal-like of the transitional forms between reptiles and mammals. Reptile-like and mammal-like features of monotremes: Mammal-like features Griffiths [2:app] lists 17 important common features of marsupials and placental mammals, of these, Dawson lists 13 as also common to monotremes. These are, in abbreviated form: 1) Typically mammalian jaw joints 2) 3 bones in the middle ear 3) Young are small, naked and raised on milk 4) Mammary glands; growth and differentiation influenced by ovarian hormones 5) Temperature regulation, assisted by internal heat production and hair 6) Separate left and right sides in the heart 7) Red blood cells have no nucleus 8) Typically mammalian kidney structure & blood supply 9) Nitrogenous waste mostly excreted as urea 10) Respiration using alveolar lungs and diaphragm 11) 7 cervical vertebrae 12) Typically mammalian pelvis 13) Large forebrain, left and right halves connected Reptilian and mixed features 1) Egg laying -- the eggs have a leathery, rather than hard, shell. The eggs develop in the uterus for a relatively long time (28 days) and a large part of the embryonic development occurs there. The eggs are incubated about 10 days. In reptiles more of the embryonic development occurs after the egg is laid. "[monotreme] hatchlings have a sharp egg tooth on the upper jaw (as do many reptiles) which enables them to tear open their rubbery shells"[1]. 2) Excretion and reproduction in the female is all carried out through one orifice, as in reptiles -- the name monotreme (one hole) denotes this. (Marsupial females have a common orifice for reproduction and urine, but a separate anus). 3) Internal testes; this is a feature of reptiles, but some placental mammals (eg. beavers) also have internal testes. 4) Some features of the skeletons are intermediate between those of reptiles and placental mammals. Griffiths[1] notes that the pectoral girdle and the epipubic bones of the pelvic girdle in the platypus have a structure similar to the fossil therapsids and to reptiles. Therapsids are mammal-like fossile reptiles, see also, for example, [4] or Kathleen Hunt's transitional forms FAQ. 5) "Monotreme chromosomes also reflect a mixture of reptilian and mammalian traits. Although these animals are unique in having two categories of chromosomes, large and small, the large ones (macrochromosomes) are typical of those found in mammals, whereas the small ones (microchromosomes) are similar to those found in many species of reptiles, and do not occur in mammals"[1]. 6) "Platypus sperm is long and slender, with a filiform, or threadlike head, much like the sperm of reptiles, the arrangement of the subcellular elements called microtubules, however, are typical of mammalian sperm"[1]. One feature of monotremes which I don't know where it fits is the mechanism for sex determination: "The male is heterogametic, that is, he produces two kinds of sperm, as humans do, one with a Y chromosome and the other with an X chromosome ... platypus and echidna males differ from all other mammals in that sex is determined by the presence of a multivalent XY/XX complex: at meiosis in the male the X and Y chromosomes are associated with small autosomal chromosomes, four unpaired, and four paired"[1]. Where do they fit in the evolution of mammals Few fossil monotremes have been found. Dawson[3] lists: in the Tachyglossidae, Zaglossus ramsayi, Z. hacketti and Z. robusta; in the Ornithorhynchidae, Obdurodon insignis. Unfortunately, these are all relatively recent fossils, the oldest being that of Ob. insignis, about 15Myr, of which only a few teeth were preserved. Griffith[1] mentions two more recent finds. Ob. dicksoni, a complete skull of an adult platypus, again about 15Myr old, and a piece of lower jaw containing three molars, roughly 100Myr old. This leaves a substantial gap to the fossils to which the monotremes are considered to be most closely related, the Morganucodontids, and little structural information about the early monotremes. Morganucodontids have a pelvic structure features very similar to that of modern monotremes. Griffiths [2:app] and Colbert&Morales[4:p241] review current theories about the affinities of the monotremes. To conclude: "[the monotremes] represent a branch of mammals that is quite ancient. They are more closely related to marsupial and placental mammals than to any group of reptiles, yet they have retained a surprising number of ancestral reptilian traits over the course of evolution and posses an interesting mosaic of mammalian and reptilian characteristics". Mervyn Griffiths[1] Peter Lamb (prl.nul)" The creature in the AA footage has one hole, no teeth, no umbilical cord and no secondary sexual features such as nipples, just as we might find in an evolved monotreme. The craft it traveled in seems somewhat advanced but it was vulnerable or it wouldn't have crashed; I don't think it would qualify as a star ship. And the metal from which it was conconstructed does melt. Are there are others on the List who would be willing to discuss these matters? I'm certainly open to other points of view as long as they're based on viewing the AA footage, which can be purchased at the folowing site: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/aafilm/aaindex.html I don't understand the resistance to looking closely at the AA
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:06:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 05:59:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - White >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>"An experimental device to stop alien abductions" here: >>http://www.alienscalpel.com/device.htm >>This turns out to be a " device [that] works by blocking alien >>telepathy and mind control, [which Lear calls] a 'thought screen >>helmet' [which] consists of a leather helmet lined with layers >>of special conductive plastic... " >>The helmet is offered for free on an experimental basis. >This is sad really because there are people out there who really >feel that they are being abducted and they are desparate. Any >helmet like this is extremely unlikely to work since we haven't >even gotten to the point of repeatible telepathy, so how can we >"block" it? To think that our meager technology can stop some >hypothetical advanced alien tech is absurd. I can add to the discussion that the highly manipulative and invasive mind/body effects we in the gang stalking/electronically-assisted camp experience constantly are _not_ stopped at all by the 3M Velostat semiconducting material in those helmets. Not even by a full body enclosure of a Velostat-lined chamber with three other metallic layers. We applaud all who experiment, however, knowing that scientific discoveries do happen by accident in some cases. One of our members in Toronto recently reported that by extensive use of prayer and fasting (she is not working at the present time) she has been able to shed a substantial portion of her invasive mind/body effects. She believes in a creator God but is not a Christian nor a member of any organized church. This doesn't stop the other half of the problem, which is harassment by ordinary humans, but it might pay frequent
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 NASA Rovers' Adventures On Mars Continue From: NASANews.nul Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:00:19 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:02:34 -0500 Subject: NASA Rovers' Adventures On Mars Continue Dolores Beasley Headquarters, Washington Jan. 3, 2005 (Phone: 202/358-1753) Guy Webster Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. (Phone: 818/354-6278) RELEASE: 05-001 NASA ROVERS' ADVENTURES ON MARS CONTINUE NASA lit a birthday candle today for its twin Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) Spirit and Opportunity. The Spirit rover begins its second year on Mars investigating puzzling rocks unlike any found earlier. The rovers successfully completed their three-month primary missions in April. They astound even their designers with how well they continue operating. The unanticipated longevity is allowing both rovers to reach additional destinations and to keep making discoveries. Spirit landed on Jan. 3 and Opportunity Jan. 24, 2004, respectively. "You could have cut the tension here with a knife the night Spirit landed," said NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe. "Just remembering the uncertainty involved with the landing emphasizes how exciting it is for all of us, since the rovers are still actively exploring. The rovers created an amazing amount of public interest and have certainly helped advance the Vision for Space Exploration," he said. The twin Mars explorers have drawn the most hits to NASA Web sites -- more than 9 billion in 2004. Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Director Dr. Charles Elachi said, "Little did we know a year ago that we'd be celebrating a year of roving on Mars. The success of both rovers is tribute to hundreds of talented men and women who have put their knowledge and labor into this team effort." "The rovers are both in amazingly good shape for their age," said JPL's Jim Erickson, rover project manager. "The twins sailed through the worst of the martian winter with flying colors, and spring is coming." "Both rovers are in strong positions to continue exploring, but we can't give you any guarantees," he said. Opportunity is driving toward the heat shield that protected it during descent through the martian atmosphere. Rover team members hope to determine how deeply the atmospheric friction charred the protective layer. "With luck, our observations may help to improve our ability to deliver future vehicles to the surface of other planets," Erickson said. Spirit is exploring the Columbia Hills within the Gusev Crater. "In December, we discovered a completely new type of rock in Columbia Hills, unlike anything seen before on Mars," said Dr. Steve Squyres of Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., principal investigator for the rovers' science payloads. Jumbled textures of specimens dubbed "Wishstone" and "Wishing Well" look like the product of an explosion, perhaps from a volcano or a meteor impact. These rocks are much richer in phosphorus than any other known Mars rocks. "Some ways of making phosphates involve water; others do not," Squyres said. "We want to look at more of these rocks to see if we can distinguish between those possible histories," he said. NASA's next Mars mission, the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, is due to launch in August. "As great as the past year has been, Mars launch opportunities come along like clockwork every 26 months," said Dr. Firouz Naderi manager of NASA's Mars Exploration Program. "At every one of them in the foreseeable future, we intend to go to Mars, building upon the findings by the rovers." NASA Chief Scientist Dr. Jim Garvin said, "Mars lures us to explore its mysteries. It is the most Earth-like of our sister planets, and many believe it may hold clues to whether life ever existed or even originated beyond Earth. The rovers have shown us Mars had persistently wet, possibly life- sustaining environments. Beyond their own profound discoveries, the rovers have advanced our step-by-step program for examining Mars. We will continue to explore Mars robotically, and eventually with human explorers." NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has managed the Mars Exploration Rover project since it began in 2000. Images and additional information about the rovers and their discoveries
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:21:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:17:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:04:16 -0500 >Subject: Mexican DOD Research Report >My 'massive' (4.4 MB) report on the Mexican DOD radar/FLIR >sightings of 5 March 2004 is now available for download at my >web site. Yes it is massive and will take time to go through in order to give it proper review. Starting with Appendix 4 and your use of diagrams showing transponder locations to infer the location of gas burn off flares. You do realize that each platform has at least one but as many 4 flares? Did you attempt to obtain the Landsat images that I located/documented as a good source of high quality positional data for the flares/platforms? These provide
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:28:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:18:23 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 01:29:06 -0500 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:07:48 +0000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>When an improvised "stereo" camera system was introduced at Gulf >>Breeze the photographs it captured were indeterminate "lights in >>the sky" images rather than the elaborate "structured craft" >>images captured by the single camera. >However, you are correct in that the Nimslo stereo camera >produced 10 images of a structured set of lights... no 'body' of >a craft was detectable in the photos. >However, when two Polaroid Model 600 cameras (which eject the >film to immediately after the photo; images develop >automatically outside the camera) were combined to make a stereo >pair, then pictures did show light structures similar to earlier >pictures ("power light" on the bottom and small light on the >top). Would the quality of a Polaroid image surpass the Nimslo even
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 X-Conference Press Release - 01-05-05 From: Stephen Bassett <ParadigmRG.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:32:59 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:20:12 -0500 Subject: X-Conference Press Release - 01-05-05 PRG Paradigm Research Group X-Conference 2005 Press Release - January 5, 2005 Washington, DC - PRG is announcing three more speakers for the 2nd Annual Exopolitics Expo (X-Conference), scheduled for April 22-24, 2005 at the Hilton Washington, DC North/Gaithersburg. Religious scholar, Michael S. Heiser, PhD; Mexican researcher and journalist, Jaime Maussan; and historian Richard Dolan will present. The conference website is: www.x-conference.com. The X-Conference is a unique event which focuses on the political, governmental and social aspects relating to extraterrestrial-related phenomena. It is produced by PRG as part of the ongoing activist movement seeking to end the truth embargo. Topics in 2005 will include: impact of the film industry, MJ-12 Documents, the Rockefeller Initiative, Area 51, underground bases, ET studies during the Carter administration, and much more. Approximately 25 lecturers and panelists will present. Three speakers are being announced. New for this year: Michael S. Heiser, PhD - A devout Christian, Dr. Heiser is part of an extremely important exopolitical development wherein the Christian faith, including fundamentalist denominations, is examining the implications of extraterrestrial-related phenomena - past and present. PRG considers this developing body of work of utmost importance and will be making concerted effort to bring this scholarship to the public's attention. Michael Heiser did his Ph.D. dissertation in the field of Hebrew Bible and Ancient Semitic Languages at the University of Wisconsin- Madison. He holds an M.A. in Ancient History from the University of Pennsylvania (major fields, Ancient Israel and Egyptology), and a second M.A. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (Hebrew Bible and Ancient Semitic Languages). He also attended Dallas Theological Seminary. Michael is the recipient of several academic awards and scholarships, and has written articles accepted in several scholarly journals. He has also taught full time at the undergraduate level since 1992. Dr. Heiser is one of an emerging group of young, brilliant scholars who are reexamining all ancient religious texts, often in their original languages, with an open mind willing to consider and factor in the extraordinary discoveries of the past 50 years. An extended Curriculum Vitae is located at: www.paradigmclock.com/X-Conference/Heiser_Resume.htm Jaime Maussan (Mexico) - since 1991 events taking place in Mexico have had extraordinary implications for exopolitics. Perhaps the greatest sightings flap in history has occurred just outside the borders of the United States. An entire nation was given an intense indoctrination into extraterrestrial- related phenomena. The Mexican military and civilian government became involved. No one is more qualified to present this history than Jaime Maussan. The July 1991 solar eclipse, which passed over Mexico, was the beginning of a wave of mass sightings. Thousands of people across Mexico witnessed and video recorded night lights and daylight disks. Over the past dozen years Maussan has compiled over 5,000 videos and photos from such eyewitnesses and has presented this information around the world. He was born in Mexico City, and earned a B.A. degree in radio and television from the Miami University in Ohio. He has had a 25 year career in the media, during which he has received numerous awards, and is now General Director and Anchorman of "60 Minutes" Mexico. He produced 20 commercial videos for "Programas de Investigacion", achieving leadership for an independent production company in Mexico. He also produces a radio program "Jaime Maussan, UFOs and other Mysteries," one of the most popular shows in Mexico. He also works as an Investigative Journalist/Anchorman and General Producer of the TV show =A8Tercer Milenio" that is broadcast via the Televisa Network to all Latin American countries, Europe, the United States and also through the Sky Satellite System. In 1996, he was producer of the feature radio program "Jaime Maussan, UFOs and Other Mysteries" transmitted through XEW Radio and the RASA Network, which became one of the most popular radio programs in Mexico. Returning from last year: Richard Dolan: studied history, English, and philosophy as an undergraduate at Alfred University. His deep passion for the discipline of history resulted in a scholarship to study at Oxford University and a near miss for a Rhodes Scholarship. He chose instead to do graduate work at the University of Rochester, where he focused on German and Soviet studies before moving on to American Cold War diplomacy. Not wanting to teach, he left academia to write. In 1994 he became interested in the UFO problem, approaching it from the angle of history and politics. He was intrigued by the cultural schizophrenia - the fact that mainstream and academic culture (official culture) continued to treat UFOs as amusement, but that so many intelligent people privately had taken it seriously. Throughout 1995, 1996, and 1997 he conducted a systematic bibliographic search, hunting down the many out-of-print books and UFO documents released over the years through the Freedom of Information Act. He found the amount of information nearly overwhelming. A detailed chronology of relevant events was prepared in advance of writing his critically acclaimed book, UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Coverup, 1947-1973. This book provides a clear, comprehensive, but concise historical narrative of the problem. He is now at work on the study's second volume, which will take the story through the remainder of the 20th century. Speaker information will be posted in the Speaker section at: www.x-conference.com. Contact: Stephen Bassett 202-215-8344 ________________________________________________________ Paradigm Research Group E-mail: ParadigmRG.nul URL: www.paradigmclock.com Cell: 202-215-8344 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, MD 20814
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 17:11:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:22:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - LeClair >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:28:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:34:33 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>"An experimental device to stop alien abductions" here: >>>http://www.alienscalpel.com/device.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 22:41:43 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:25:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:15:07 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >Now, onto Leir related discussion. Leir has talked about video >of a closet of Stan Romanak, where a possible grey can be seen >materializing in, or coming out of the closet. If it's not the >Stan R. case and another, please correct me. Leir mentioned on a >radio interview that a still of the video can be seen at his >website. There is no still at his website, so I contacted him >about it. He got back with me stating that he doesn't run his >website and that he has a webmaster that does. Leir just stated >that he thought his webmaster put it up.The video can be seen on >one of Leir's videos I think. If anyone out there has seen the >closet video, let us/me know what you think. If anyone knows >where I can see the vid, or stills on the net, that would be >great too. Thanks. >I am already informed on the implants and don't want to buy his >video just for a few seconds of ify video that I will probably >end up seeing for free in the future. If not, then I might buy >the video. Aaron, You would be extremely gullible to do so (buy the video). Of course, that's what he would like you to do. Once again, by your own statement of affairs, Leir claimed something that wasn't true (a still of the video was on his web site). He claims a real video of an alien in a closet??? Wow! He must be learning about human gullibility and translating it into $$$. He always makes excuses why none of his claims about tests (or anything else) can be independenlty verified. Pardon me, but I think you or I (or any reasonable person) who thought he had an actual videotape of an alien would submit it to objective laboratory analysis under controlled conditions with many witnesses. Not drop hints in media appearances about how you ought to buy an unverified tape. He would also explain fully how the tape came to be made, and document it as fully as possible.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: UFO Research Tools - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 19:45:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:26:57 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Friedman >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 23:41:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:53:01 -0600 >>Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>MUFON has a list for Field Investigators of recommended tools. I >>have it on the DFW MUFON site at: >>http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/tools.html. >>Obviously some tools would be more difficult to obtain than >>others for the average investigator. >>I also have a site called 'UFO Tools' at: >>http://terrygroff.com/ufotools/ >>which I hoped would expand in to an aid for all researchers but >>I've had no indication that anyone is actually using it and >>except for Ray Stanford no one has contributed to it. I believe >>Ray did purchase a Magnetometer (or some kind of 'ometer') via a >>link from my site though. However, many wonderful sites have >>placed links to it on their sites including The Virtually >>Strange Network. >Thanks, these should help me alot! I would certainly like to add libraries and archives to the list of important research tools.Old newspaper clippings about Roswell have been very helpful; for example, proving that the story wasn't just in the Roswell paper as claimed on that silly Belzer program but was in PM papers from Chicago west. They also proved that the contemporary comment about when the wreckage was found ("Sometime last week"as noted on July 8 1947) was not June 14 as falsely claimed by the USAF to bolster that Mogul nonsense. They also showed that there was a great deal of UFO activity on Sept.12, 1952, the date of the Flatwoods Monster case even though Dick Hall knows "Psychically, I presume" that there wasn't any. It is often cheaper to hire a researcher recommended by an archive to search files. I did this for the Army Archives (Carlyle, PA) to find Corso info including the roster that in June 1960 showed he was the lower ranking of the two people in General Trudeau's "Foreign Technology" group and also in Alamogordo to find the Air Force launched story in 1947 about balloon-radar reflector launch explanation for Roswell. Archives also provide loads of documents showing style and format info for comparison with the MJ-12 documents and for showing that certain MJ-12 documents received by Tim Cooper were phony. They also provided me with lots of surprising info about MJ-12 member Don Menzel. Very little related data was available on the internet... since most Archival stuff has not been scanned.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 18:27:57 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:28:53 -0500 Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 14:20:48 -0000 >Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 15:24:39 -0600 >>Subject: Re: No Canals Glassy Tubes Instead <snip> >I seem to recall that in my first post on this topic - possibly >the first response to the start of the thread - I suggested that >these could be dunes formed in valleys. Why was this a premature >leap of the imagination for me then, but not for you now? Hi Martin, I don't think I'm disagreeing with you or your conclusion. I agree with them, as far as the probable source of the linear stripe formations. My post was more of a cautionary nature, not punitive. My point was that there is no evidence of a connected tunnel or tube system in the image cited... just a suggestion that could lead one to interpret it that way. Unfortunately, in these multi-participant posts, it gets hard to see who is proposing what. Nothing personal intended, and the jumping to conclusions I alluded to was more the general jumping when images present something unusual. For the record, I agree that the most likely cause of these formations is wind-driven soil. I agree that winds tend to funnel down into channels and the soil gets piled up in waves. This happens here just not in such an ordered manner with our thicker and wetter... and presumably more chaotic... atmosphere. For some reason I was thinking you were proposing that they were tunnels with a junction visible in the photo. There is definitely a low spot where the three *valleys, dips, canyons, gullies* meet. Your reasoning seems sound to me. At any rate, luckily we wont have to wonder for too much longer. <g>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:13:33 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:52:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:12:28 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:28:24 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:02:35 +0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> >>>>Leir does not even have an M.D., and just as one indication of >>>>his sophistication level, he was highly honored and bragging >>>>about being a MUFON consultant, as if that conferred some >>>>recognition or approval on him. Then consider some of his logic >>>>and reasoning, and the lack of reasonable peer review. It is up >>>>to people like him to establish their case (I won't say 'prove') >>>>in order for it to be taken seriously, not for people like me to >>>>prove them wrong. To me it smacks of pseudoscience. >>>Richard and List, >>>That's the second message on this List in wich you sharply >>>criticize the work, the credentials and the ethical behavior of >>>Dr Leir. Let's see your main arguments: >Yes, I criticize his work, and, yes he does call himself >"Doctor". Where did I say anything about his ethical behavior. >Although now that you mention it, selling tickets for high- >priced trips to crackpot pseudo-archeological expeditions might >qualify. >>>He "does not even have an MD". Does that mean that is not able >>>to participate in a scientific research ? If this were a valid >>>argument, many excellent researchers should be discarded as >>>well. >He calls himself, or allows himself to be called "Doctor". Is >that justified? I doubt that the degree he holds even exists >outside of California, but I could be wrong about that. Yes, Dick, of course the title is justified, unlike your critcism. He is a Doctor of Podiatric Medicine. He is licensed and had to take loads of Continuing Education courses since first getting his license in 1964. DPMs are licensed to perform surgery, to prescribe medication, to practice in hospitals, to get referrals from MDs. Why not check with the California Podiatric Medical Association in Sacramento, CA 916-448-0248? I did. You could also check with the Maryland Podiatric Medical Association in Towson, MD, at 410-332-0736 or the Virginia Podiatric Medical Association in Falls Church, VA, at 703-536-3668. I also looked in my 2001 "National Trade and Professional Associations of the US" directory. There are 23 groups listed under Podiatry. Probably the most significant is the American Podiatric Medical Association which has 10,500 members and 50 components and an annual budget of about $8 Million. Why not drop by? It is at 9312 Old Georgetown Rd in Bethesda not far from you at 301-530- 2752. Might even be a local call. If ignorance is bliss, you must be very happy. >>>On the other hand, researchers like Dr Mack and Dr Maccabee have >>>not been spared bitter and unsubstantiated critics, in spite of >>>their impeccable credentials. >Both, at times, have deserved criticisms... of their work. That >doesn't make them evil; it just makes them participants of peer- >reviewed science. I have been called everything under the sun, >but I'm a big boy and will fight back if I think someone is >mistaken, as they often are about me. >>>You say that he makes extravagant claims without peer review and >>>independant verification. I asked Roger Leir, who is a friend >>>and a person I respect. His answer is simple, reproduced here >>>with his permission: >>>"Gildas, >>>I have only one short answer which you could elaborate on: >>>He is absolutely correct when he states claims of the caliber I >>>have reported should be questioned and reviewed. However, I >>>would point out these are not my claims but claims of the >>>scientists who have done the work. If they don't like the >>>message then don't shoot the messenger. Anyone who makes these >>>kind of remarks should be willing to put up the bucks to >>>challenge any of the scientific research I have reported." >Total copout; why should I put up a penny? The NIDS results on >their web site do not show anything unusual. As for other >alleged tests, anonymous science is an oxymoron; that ought to >be carved in stone. Results must be published and peer reviewed >throughly. Surely that is an overstatement, Dick. For example, loads of excellent research is done under security. I know, I did some. Sorry no open publication, no real peer review... classified technical reports reviewed by my boss and with limited distribution. I did spend a lot of taxpayer money. I have had professionals tell me and Hynek ,and probably you, that their names could not be associated with the UFO work that they did. >>>If you read the book of Roger Leir "The Aliens and the Scalpel", >>>and the articles published, notably in the Mufon UFO journal, >>>you will see that Roger Leir has, indeed, reported on the >>>findings of several laboratories. I know personally a bit more >>>of the story (that there is more in store), but I have do admit >>>that it's not a good argument in a public debate. >Mostly anonymous results, and the one engineer at New Mexico >Institute who has acknowledged his, work says that he has been >misquoted and found nothing at all unusual in the arifacts. >>>So, yes, there are some scientific studies. However, there has >>>not been yet any article in a "peer reviewed scientific >>>publication". But I ask you: >>>Do you think that such a requirement can be met, in the >>>scientific world of today? To me the answer, is clearly no! I >>>don't see any important lab or university doing such a thing. I >>>think we must be grateful to people like Dr Leir for taking the >>>risk of doing such a controversial research, and publishing it. >>>In addition, it has brought him more trouble than money. >If it can't be met, the results must not be very impressive. >And, Stan, judging by some of your recent advocacies you seem to >be getting soft in the head with increasing age. Some responses >below. I am glad I am no yet as hardheaded as you have become, Dick with your omnipotence. >>I must agree with Gildas. >>I have spent time with Roger and have his book and video. He >>makes very clear that the implant extractions from other than >>the foot were done by other surgeons. I have talked to a >>researcher at Southwest Research Institute who was very >>impressed with the materials he examined. Roger is a registered >>Podiatrist licensed to diagnose and treat foot disorders. Has he >>been claiming anything else? >Where are the SRI guy's published findings? Is gossip science? >Yes, Leir claims to be a doctor. He has some kind of a >certificate to do podiatry work, apparently only in California, >but where does he have a medical degree as a doctor? he may be >considered such in California. His medical credentials are not >very impressive. Again, that doesn't necessarily make him evil >or even wrong. >>Dick, how about putting things in your gray basket when you >>haven't spent time investigating, instead of deploring them? You >>did the same thing with Frank Feschino Jr.'s "Braxton County >>Monster: Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed". There were >>references to 70+ newspaper articles and the Project Blue Book >>File number listed. You hadn't read the book, hadn't reviewed >>the Blue Book files nor the clippings. And I haven't seen any >>apology either. >Thanks for the gratuitous advice, Stan. But you see, I have >investigated. Beware of false assumptions. See for example Alex >Constantine's Political Conpsiracy Research Bin where two >reporters interviewed Leir. He wouldn't provide them much of any >information about the alleged tests that could be verified. >Finally Leir gave them the name of Paul Fuierer at New Mexico >Inst. who proceeded to say, among other things, "I found nothing >particularly unusual about the objects." The Los Alamos Lab >denied even knowing Leir or having anything to do with tests >there. And what does Leir do? He keeps insinuating things about >tests liikely being positive but never produces anything to >support it. NIDS rather clearly made no claims whatsoever for >the evidence. I spoke with a solid researcher who was favorably impressed, but would not let his name or affiliation be used. Unfortunately he is dead. >Apologize about the Flatwoods baloney? I gather you are a skilled delicatessan operator?? >For what? You show me >some evidence of vast aerial battles and widespread loss of >military aircraft, then I will apologiize. Meanwhile, my advice >to you is to take a hard look in the mirror and stop being so >apparently gullible. What you ought to apologize for is expressing opinions having no basis in fact. Perhaps you are psychic and know what is in the book without reading it? You know what was in the Blue Book files files for Sept. 12, 1952, without reviewing them or spending the huge effort Frank made to bring out the barely legible copies? You know what was in the newspapers and what wasn't without reading the articles? I am reminded of Phil Klass, who on the Larry King show with Dave Jacobs, stated that the people in David's book hadn't been abducted, they just had mental health problems... even though the foreword was by John Mack, a mental health professional. Later in the show when Larry asked him point blank if he had actually read the book, the answer was, "No". >>You also haven't provided any basis for your claims about either >>Frank's incredible efforts or Roger's very extensive work. >See above. More to come if the 'believers' keep assualting us >with nonsense. How about the skeptics with psychic knowledge based on ignorance? >>Absence of knowledge on your part certainly can't be taken as >>evidence for absence of such information. Can it? >Absence of ignorance is ignorance of absence, or something like >that. Do you mean we shouldn't complain about your ignorance based on no knowledge? We should just accept your pronouncements and ignore the evidence? And,yes, I have been to the site in Flatwoods and have met Mrs. May and her sons and other witnesses and did seek out more newspaper articles... and did write the foreword and epilog.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:47:00 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:54:17 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Sparks >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:26:35 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:55:29 EST >>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul>> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:41:11 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? <snip> >>Now the Borden-Vickers report when I last read it many years ago >>was not too convincing to me. The double-speed effect is where >>anomalous radar targets were found traveling at supposedly twice >>the upper air velocities, indicating partial reflection of >>ground returns by these traveling "air radar mirrors" in the >>sky, so the ground reflections will seem to have twice the speed >>of the air that mirrors the ground. However as I recall the >>speed doubling was very poorly demonstrated. It seems only once >>(?) was the speed actually doubled, at other times there was a >>wide range of speeds. I would have expected a much closer >>correlation of wind speeds doubled. Also I seem to recall a poor >>correlation of radar target direction with the upper air wind >>directions. >>I also have a problem understanding how a delicate ducting layer >>of air can maintain its structure with any kind of wind at all, >>which should break it up. If it is clear air turbulence (CAT) >>being radar imaged then it's the air itself returning the radar >>beam directly and there is no speed-doubling effect as it is not >>the ground being picked up, and hence not the Borden-Vickers >>scenario. >I, too, am unconvinced by the moving radar "air mirror" >hypothesis. Imagine sending the radar pulse nearly straight up You lost me there completely. The radars are air traffic control radars hugging the horizon for incoming and outbound aircraft. The MPN-11 has a vertical beam width of 9 degrees, for example. No radar is aimed straight up. >to a horizontal mirror at height H which reflects some of the >radiation (only some because the mirror is very "weak") back >down to the ground where it bounces off a reflector and back up >into the sky and then is weakly reflected from the "mirror" down >to the antenna. The total path length is (H + H) going to the >target on the ground and H + H returning to the antenna, so >divide the sum of 4 H's by 2 and get 2H as the distance measured >to the target by the radar. Suppose, now, that H increases by a >small amount, dH. This adds dH + dH + dH + dH to the total path, >or 4 dH. This is divided by 2 to get the added radar measured >distance to the target, 2dH. If this happens in time dt, then >the radar distance increases at the rate 2dH/dt. But dH/dt is >the velocity of the mirror, so the measured radar distance >increases at twice the velocity of the mirror. Distance increase >with time is, of course, velocity so the radar measured velocity >increases at twice the velocity of the mirror. The same >calculation applies if the mirror moves downward instead of >upward. >QED. >Problems: 1) this calculation is for radar shooting straight >upwards or nearly so which means the mirror moves upwards (or >downwards). But the mirror is a hypothetical layer of air... it >can't move directly upwards or downwards without extreme shear >breaking up the layer. One must assume an air mirror that is >moving with the windstream, i.e., a mirror that is tilted with >respect to horizontal. >2) If the radar beam hits the mirror at an angle other than 90 >degrees. which is the more likely situation, one does not get >complete doubling. In this case the increase in radar measured >path length is more like 2dH cosA, where A is the angle between >the normal to the mirror and the incoming radar ray. When A = 0 >one gets doubling. When A = 45 deg the radar velocity is 1.4 >times the mirror velocity. The radar range velocity decreases as >A increases..... >At very flat angles where the air mirror efficiency is the >greatest for reflecting radar radiation, A is large (nearly 90 >deg) and cos A is small, approaching zero at 90 deg. I am completely confused. Radar beam hits a supposed air radar mirror at distance R, essentially horizontally. Air layer mirror is moving with a velocity V (or dR/dt) so in a small time interval it moves a distance dR. The beam then travels another distance to the ground of R and the air layer's motion moves this reflected beam another dR. Now we have 2 dR's. Hence the velocity shown in the progressive movement of ground blips reflected through this nearly horizontal air mirror will be 2dR/dt = 2(V) or 2x the wind velocity V carrying the refractive "mirror" effect (all assuming a radial direction directly away from the radar site). If that doesn't seem right let's try a concrete example: Air mirror at 50 miles, ground at 100 miles. Air mirror moves forward 1 mile in 1 minute between sweeps of the radar antenna (not the actual sweep rate just a simple example). Air or wind velocity aloft is of course then 60 mph. However the ground is what the radar picks up and it has moved from 100 to 102 miles during the same 1-minute sweep interval. So 2 miles in 1 minute looks like double speed, 120 mph. >3) The speed is measured by the distance between radar blips. >This requires the mirror to exist for at least 2 blips, 10 or 12 >or 15 seconds depending upon the rotation rate (6, 5 or 4 rpm). >To establish a credible track of a target would require at least >3 blips or 20 - 30 sec. The question then, is, can a >hypothetical air mirror at some altitude maintain its integrity >long enough for this to happen while being blown along "with the >wind." It seems extremely doubtful that the ground could backscatter any detectable radar radiation (instead of forward scattering) and then this faint backscatter must reflect off an extremely faint or "lossy" air refractive "mirror" back to the radar receiver. What must be reflective back at nearly horizontal angles is not the earth but vertical metal walls of buildings, like warehouses. Hence one would expect the double-speed targets to coincide with ground locations of industrial areas, city downtown sky- scrapers, and a very faint return from residential dwellings. A double-speed reflection hitting the ground at 100+ mph will not illuminate such small regions of a few miles in size for more than about on the order of 1 minute. >4) Only the air mirrors that have a component of velocity away >from or toward the radar antenna will produce the velocity >effect (motion perpendicular to the radial distance to the >antenna will not increase or decrease the distance). >Hence, the velocity doubling effect proposed relies upon the >extremely rare(?) situation that an unusually efficient air >mirror maintain its integrity for many seconds while being blown >directly away from (or toward) the radar antenna and... in order >to get velocity doubling or near doubling, the "surface" of this >mirror should be perpendicular, or nearly so, to a line from the >radar antenna to the mirror. >Want to buy my bridge?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 23:52:06 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 06:56:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >For many years we worked on a project I'll call "predictivity." >We noticed that events (some catastrophic, some mundane) were >happening in a series: mine disasters, tornados, fires, bus- >nappings [sic], et cetera. >We kept logs of the events and saw that when a major fire >occurred, for instance, another would follow in three days or >seven, followed by a third fire eleven days after the initial >fire. >And if the events (not just limited to the United States) were >plotted... the first two... one could predict the third event by >extrapolating a line, twice the distance, from the second of the >two events. >We were able to predict a school bus-taking, several days after >two other school bus/hostage events -- the first remembered, >perhaps, was the event where the kids were held undergound until >discovered by the police. >We did this with fires in various cities, and mine disasters >here and in Europe and the U.S.S. R. >Now the interesting (maybe) part is that when we seemed to be on >the brink of perfecting the time and locale sequences, the >events became bizarre: the events still occurred in patterns of >three or four, but they didn't follow in a straight line. They >formed triangles or some other form which prevented is from >going further. >We have resurrected the process over the years when two events >of a like kind take place, but as soon as we set up our system, >the events move outside a predictable pattern. >(This is akin to the quantum maxim that measured/observed events >or experiments are altered by the measurement or the >observation: Schrodinger's cat.) >So, for us, the idea that the ProjectHessdalen was seemingly >scrutinized in a way that prevented the participants from going >further, doesn't ring false necessarily. >Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad... even angry. Rich, The more you begin to assume 'triangular' patterns or other save-the-phenomenon alleged patterns, the less scientific you are becoming. The same applies to Project Hessdalen, if indeed that is the sort of thing they are now claiming. There are well-established statistical math methods for determining the significance of events and the probability (or otherwise) of them being random chance. Overt macroscopic events are quite different from microscopic and subatomic events in this regard. Also, until you publish your 'predictive' methods and data for peer review (and I am going to continue saying this until I am blue in the face, or the list is), you are not practicing science. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it needs to be said. I don't have the impression that you are being dishonest in any way, but I do have the impression that you and a lot of other
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Black's Polygraph Test? From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:55:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:00:19 -0500 Subject: Black's Polygraph Test? Hi Bruce, Many months ago, Kenny Young and Jerry Black were wanting you to take a polygraph test. Since then I haven't read anything by Young or Black. Was wondering if you ever went through with the polygraph or not?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:42:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:02:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Maccabee >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:15:07 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >Now, onto Leir related discussion. Leir has talked about video >of a closet of Stan Romanak, where a possible grey can be seen >materializing in, or coming out of the closet. If it's not the >Stan R. case and another, please correct me. Leir mentioned on a >radio interview that a still of the video can be seen at his >website. There is no still at his website, so I contacted him >about it. He got back with me stating that he doesn't run his >website and that he has a webmaster that does. Leir just stated t>hat he thought his webmaster put it up.The video can be seen on >one of Leir's videos I think. If anyone out there has seen the >closet video, let us/me know what you think. If anyone knows >where I can see the vid, or stills on the net, that would be >great too. Thanks.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 08:45:31 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:05:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? - Shough >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:26:35 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Hand Is Quicker Than The Eye? <snip> >Want to buy my bridge? Hi Bruce No, I wouldn't buy your bridge in this instance. Your objections assume that the effect is due to bulk displacement of an essentially 'rigid' feature under the influence of the wind. But this is not the model. The basic idea as I understand it is that a wind shear across the boundary causes waves to propagate across the surface, generating turbulence. In this way patches of efficient reflectivity appear to glide along the layer. The bulk orientation and altitude of the layer remains unchanged. The effect of speed doubling is not limited to radial motions because it is a geometric illusion due to the doubling of displayed range on the scope, not just a product of changing real distance to the reflecting region of the layer. i.e., a constant angular rate produces an increasing linear displacement proportional to linear distance from the scope centre. Of course because of erratic real-world conditions the "doubling" will only be approximated, as the Borden & Vickers data showed to be the case.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 05:17:11 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:09:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Sparks >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:43:30 -0800 >Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:06:21 EST >>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:16:25 -0800 >>>Subject: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>Having always been annoyed by the apparent hypocrisy that >>>Astronomers exibit (specically SETI folk)in regards to >>>evidence/data towards Ufology, I posed the following question to >>>Frank Drake: <snip> >>>However, the rules of evidence for mainstream astronomy and >>>UFOlogy are actually the same. In both cases we look for well- >>>observed, calibrated data, which can be verified by repeat >>>observations or experiments, best done by more than one >>>observer. >Brad, >Thanks for 'chiming-in' - your opinion is very much respected: Thank you. Your post got lost in the pre-holiday avalanche. >Drake says best done by more than one observer, but not a rigid >rule, so it does not always have to be the case. >>Drake should have been reminded of the various phenomena in >>astronomy and astrophysics which are validly accepted one-shot >>brief observations, not repeatable, and not repeated except in the >>sense that something similar happens again at unpredictable >>random times - such as meteor fireballs, gamma-ray bursts, >>and supernovas. These are like UFO incidents in that respect. >I made the point when I said, "it is a "transient uncontrollable >unpredictable event" in reference to UFO sightings, opposed to >observing a "fixed celestial body." Not clear enough. He needed to be reminded that there are valid sciences studying "transient uncontrollable unpredictable events" and given specific examples - as I listed meteor fireballs, gamma-ray bursts and supernovas. I'm trying to be helpful. >>>FW: Allow me to play devil's advocate based on your affirmation >>>of equality in regards to evidentiary protocol of Astronomy and >>>Ufology. <snip> >>>1). Can we state emphatically that there aren't "other forces" >>>in the universe that aren't currently known that would "mimic >>>the pull" caused by gravity of a "Jupiter sized planet?" Could >>>another "space borne" object of the same mass cause the wobble? >>>2). Are there other actions that could affect "Doppler Shift," >>>or any other form of detection in the same manner that "star >>>wobble" does, e.g., pulsations etc.? >>>3). Given the fact that the most detection methods of "extra- >>>solar planets" is relatively new, (with technology expanding by >>>leaps and bounds) and not without controversy, i.e.,( "Barnard's >>>Star and possible planetary bodies, David Gray's disputation of >>>51 Peg,") isn't possible that either "new information" could >>>surface, or the interpretation of the data may change, and >>>affect the current conclusions? >>>IMHO if the answers to any of the afore mentioned questions is >>>"unknown" or "it's possible," then that would leave "some" >>>doubt, albeit little to the "absolute existence" of extra-solar >>>planets based on the current methodologies used for their >>>reality; that said, what we're left with is strong >>>"circumstantial evidence" in support of the "theory" of extra- >>>solar planets." <snip> >>After Drake read this he no doubt came away confirmed in his >>mind once again that UFO activists are typical extremist >>fanatics who can't meet a scientific argument headon with solid >>scientific facts so they nitpick around the edges arguing for >>the most extreme positions, with special pleading "it's remotely >>possible... it could be... maybe" etc. Either you have solid >>scientific evidence of UFO's or you don't. He must conclude once >>again after 40 years of similar encounters with UFO enthusiasts >>that they don't have any solid scientific evidence, and >>furthermore they are too naive even to realize that they don't. >First let me say that I don't think my correspondence with Drake >confirmed anything for him - his mind is/was made-up, and he >doesn't want to be bothered with the evidence. Very much like >Carl Sagan. You gave him nothing but hypothetical arguments about methodology, thus confirming to him that UFO advocates have nothing but skirting around the edges of an argument, instead of giving him some solid unexplaianble UFO data - in a form that he can digest. Like a long paragraph on a scientifically challenging UFO incident that might shake him up. Maybe he is too hardened in his "mind made up" position, but we'll never know. >I posed the questions about "extra-solar planets," in >particular, because I feel that is what we get from them - >nitpickism, if you will. When the subject of "evidence" was >brought up in the debate between Stan and Seth, Seth nitpicked >what Stan brought to the table, he clearly didn't want to hear >what Stan had to say, and there was nothing "scientific" about >his criticism. Stan has gotten into the habit of referring to papers instead of pounding away at details of solid UFO cases, so that they can't get away with broad-brush misinterpretations. "Nitpickism" is a lot easier if all you have are abstract concepts to nitpick. >Brad, I think you misunderstood the reasoning behind my >questions in regard, in this instance to "extra-solar planets," >or better, the "evidence" for ESPs - the idea was to show the >hypocrisy that Astronomers exhibit in relationship to how they >perceive evidence to support their ideologies, and how those >rules change apparently, for Ufology. <snip> If you convince anyone the standards are double standards and unfair then they're immediately going to think and say "so the hell what?" And so then it goes right back to square one: You either have solid scientific evidence of UFO's or you don't. Which is what should be presented from the start anyway. >>What they want to hear about is cases where top scientists have >>made the observations, multiple observers, triangulations, >>measurements, calibrations, instruments, quantitative data, >>error bars, etc. >As I pointed out to Drake, although there are obvious advantages >in "scientific study" for a "fixed celestial body" this doesn't >negate the fact that there is "ample scientific evidence" to >study in regards to Ufology. Why should he believe you or anyone else on their mere word that there is "ample scientific evidence" for UFOs? Just present the evidence! See my next quoted paragraph below: >>Instead of the tired old repetitions of Arnold, Roswell, >>Rendlesham, and other controversial cases, let's hear more about >>cases like the world's leading meteoritics astronomer who with 3 >>other witnesses sighted a 200-foot white ellipsoidal object >>maneuvering at high speed in and out of clouds at known distance >>in broad daylight, with all the numerical data, date, time, >>azimuths, elevations, angular size, speeds, distance, error >>bars, etc. Or the Defense Dept.'s top R&D official who sighted a >>600-foot metallic sphere hovering in braod daylight which shot >>up out of sight, and was witnessed in part by an airline pilot >>whose plane the official saw in the sky, and who provided a >>triangulation that confirmed the DOD official's distance >>estimate. Or the supersecret ELINT (Electronic Intelligence) >>aircraft on a training mission that tracked a radar-emitting UFO >>pacing and overtaking the jet at the same time that a known >>ground radar was also detected on the ELINT equipment, thus >>providing the world's first real-time "calibration" of a UFO >>instrumented measurement which proved the accuracy and working >>condition of the equipment, and which detection was further >>confirmed by the crew's visual sighting and ground and airborne >>radar tracking of the UFO. Or the Army and AF UFO tracking >>networks that obtained multiple triangulations of UFO's, etc. >I never mentioned specific cases to Drake, only "evidence in >general," and the fact that there is more then enough for >"scientific investigation." <snip> I know you didn't cite any specific cases and my point was that you needed more than even "mention" cases but put forth something like a long paragraph like I wrote above (with the dates, locations, names, etc.) for each case. And I said forget the controversial UFO cases or incidents
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Alien Abductee Stress From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:19:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:19:02 -0500 Subject: Alien Abductee Stress Source: ScienCentral.Com http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?article_id=3D218392122 12-05-03 Alien Abductee Stress by Karen Lurie Thousands of people claim that they have been abducted by aliens. Are they lying? Research suggests that, in many cases, those making the claim truly believe it happened. "In case after case after case, I've been impressed with the consistency of the story, the sincerity with which people tell their stories, the power of the feelings connected with this, the self-doubt," John Mack, a psychiatrist at Harvard University who has worked with people who claim to have been abducted, told PBS' NOVA. " I worked with people over hundreds and hundreds of hours, and have done as careful a job as I could to listen, to sift out, to consider alternative explanations. And none have come forward. No one has found an alternative explanation in a single abduction case." Research in the journal Psychological Science sheds light on the consistency of those powerful feelings by showing that those who claim to have been abducted share traits with people who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. Previous research has shown that when Vietnam veterans with PTSD heard 30-second audio "re-enactments" of their trauma, they exhibited psychophysiological activity. "For example, their heart rate will go up, their skin conductance activity, the sweating on the palm of the hand, will increase," says Richard McNally, a psychology professor at Harvard University. "Individuals who do not have PTSD but who have experienced traumatic events typically will not show that reactivity." When McNally gave a similar test to people with memories of alien abductions, he found that their reactions were the same. "In fact, the actual magnitude of the reactions was at least as great as those reported in previous studies on people with post- traumatic stress disorder," says McNally. "It seems to underscore the power of emotional belief, that if you genuinely believe these things have happened, these terrifying events have happened, then you tend to show the emotional profile, the physiological profile consistent with that belief." drawing of space alien Budd Hopkins, executive director of a foundation for people who believe they've been abducted by aliens called the Intruders Foundation, thinks this validates their stories. "I thought this was quite a wonderful thing, because it's exactly the results we thought the scientific community would present if they actually looked into the cases." But McNally believes these are false memories formed during "sleep paralysis," a common condition where someone is half awake but can't move, and sometimes experiences dream-like hallucinations. "Merely because someone experiences intense emotions surrounding a particular memory does not itself confirm that the memory actually indicates something happened," says McNally. Hopkins, who gets about five new reported abduction cases a week, would counter the sleep paralysis contention with the fact that not all abductions are reported to happen at night, and that there are also physical marks left after abductions, which are called "scoop marks." While McNally thinks such insights into the power of false memories has important implications on court cases involving "recovered memories," others believe we might not get to the truth using conventional science. "We're dealing with a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Medusa Probe On Track To Find Life In Space From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:23:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:23:28 -0500 Subject: Medusa Probe On Track To Find Life In Space Source: IC Wales - UK http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/tm_objectid=15036706%26method= full%26siteid=50082%26headline=welsh-skills-put---medusa-probe-on-track----to-fi nd--life-in-space-name_page.html 01-04-05 Welsh Skills Put Medusa Probe On Track To Find Life In Space Sion Barry Western Mail Welsh scientists are leading the way in the search for life on other planets. American space agency NASA has turned to Welsh expertise in its quest to find life in outer space. Complex machinery designed and manufactured by experts at Cardiff University's Manufacturing Engineering Centre (MEC) is enabling NASA scientists to develop a "life detector" to look for exotic life forms under a sea that may exist on Europa, a moon of Jupiter. Scientists are assembling a prototype life detection system called the Medusa at Oregon State University. Medusa is an instrument package which will sense life by analysing samples from severe environments on Earth similar to conditions on Europa, Mars and other planets in the solar system. Small submarines will be used to carry Medusas to the bottom of the ocean research sites to gather scientific data. NASA scientist Michael Flynn said, "Our goal is to find Earth life that exists in environments that are similar to conditions that we know exist on other planetary bodies. "Identification of such life forms would help to build the case that extraterrestrial life could exist in our solar system. "We are looking below the surface of Earth's oceans near hydrothermal vents because they could be similar to vents scientists theorise may be under an ice-covered ocean on Europa." A hydrothermal vent is a hole in the ocean floor where hot liquids, often containing minerals and gases, rise from subsurface magma. Cardiff experts have utilised highly-sophisticated equipment in the centre to create components, including special conical flasks, for the storage and preservation of the sample microbes. The flasks are built to withstand huge pressures externally in the depths of the world's oceans. They are also design to contain these pressures once they are recovered in the sampler at sea level. The flasks will ensure that microbes are not destroyed if exposed to atmospheric pressures at sea level. Frank Marsh, marketing director of MEC, described the project with NASA as a major coup. "We have had six scientists working on this for several months and this is the first time to my knowledge that the centre has worked with NASA," said Mr Marsh. "Our expertise will allow NASA to carry-out sampling under extreme conditions in terms of pressure and temperature. The first test could be carried out, possibly in the Atlantic Ocean, next year. "The expertise we have in the centre is truly exceptional. It has taken along time, but we are now being recognised by prestigious organisations like NASA, which augurs well for the future." NASA approached MEC after a recommendation from a third party. "It took some tweaking of our existing technologies and equipment, but we are progressing extremely well," said Mr Marsh The study of life in extreme environments on Earth provides important facts that scientists can use in the search for extraterrestrial life. The ultimate source of energy for all known life forms on Earth comes from the sun. Scientists believe that for life to exist much farther away from the sun in places with thick ice crusts, such as Europa, life would need other sources of energy. Sunshine by itself is not enough to support life on Europa. However, if scientists can find a terrestrial example of a life form completely de-coupled from the sun, the case for life on Europa would be greatly strengthened. Some scientists theorise that one environment that might foster life, independent of the sun, is in the deep subsurface of Earth. This underground environment may contain organisms that exist solely on chemical energy that comes from off-gassing magma. Hydrothermal vents may be openings into the subsurface community of life, or "biosphere", Mr Flynn said. "The goal of our work is to develop an instrument capable of testing this hypothesis. The Medusa system can monitor chemistry and biology in remote and harsh places." If tests progress well it is possible a Medusa device could be
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:28:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:28:29 -0500 Subject: Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens Source: MTV.Com http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1495291/01042005/story.jhtml 01-04-05 Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens In Sneak Peek At 'War Of The Worlds' Remake, directed by Steven Spielberg. Robert Mancini As the title might indicate, the alien visitors in the upcoming "War of the Worlds" remake do not come in peace. In fact, based on the first image released from the Steven Spielberg-directed film, they have some dark intentions for the human race. Spielberg and "War of the World" star Tom Cruise are still shooting the film, and it won't hit theaters until June, but filmmakers unveiled a first glimpse of what lies ahead this week. In the shot =97 the first official look at Spielberg's take on the sci-fi classic =97 a battered and tattered Cruise shields his daughter, young Dakota Fanning ("The Cat in the Hat," "Uptown Girls") as the two seek refuge with others in a tunnel. Paramount Pictures, which released the image, is keeping mum about the details of the film but did note that it will focus on a family man (Cruise) trying to keep his loved ones safe as alien invaders attempt to claim Earth as their own. The studio also noted that the film would draw chiefly from the themes of H.G. Wells' original 1898 sci-fi lit masterpiece, War Of The Worlds, instead of the numerous works it has inspired (1953's War of the Worlds, 1996's Independence Day and 2002's Signs as well as television's V and War of the Worlds: The Series, to name just a few). War Of The Worlds" is expected to hit theaters on June 29. Visit Movies on MTV.com for more from Hollywood, including news,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Before The Beginning From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:45:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:45:46 -0500 Subject: Before The Beginning There are many fascinating links in the article not reproduced below. The URL is well worth the visit --ebk ----- Source: Astrobiology Magazine http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1 373&mode=threadℴ=0&thold=0 01-05-05 Before the Beginning Stellar Evolution Summary : Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin Rees discusses the limits to our knowledge of what might have preceded the big bang. Everyong asks the question, what was there the instant before everything came to be, but the question may not go as deep as the answers it spawns. Before The Beginning Interview with Sir Martin Rees, Part 2 Helen Matsos Britain's Astronomer Royal, Martin Rees, took time from his busy schedule to talk with Astrobiology Magazine's Chief Editor and Executive Producer, Helen Matsos. His three-part interview considers a broad range of alternative planetary futures, while highlighting today's changes in one of the oldest sciences, astronomy. Martin Rees earned his degrees in mathematics and astronomy at the University of Cambridge, where he is currently professor of cosmology and astrophysics and Master of Trinity College. Director of the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge, he has also been a professor at Sussex University. He has been Britain's Astronomer Royal since 1995. He has modeled quasars and has made important contributions to the theories of galaxy formation, galaxy clustering, and the origin of the cosmic background radiation. His early study of the distribution of quasars helped discredit the steady state cosmological theory. He was one of the first to propose that enormous black holes power the quasars. He has investigated the anthropic principle, the idea that we find the universe the way it is because if it were much different we would not be here to examine it, and the question of whether ours is one of a multitude of "universes." He has written nine books. Through his public speaking and writing he has made the Universe a more familiar place for everyone. Helen Matsos (HM): Last year the big "science event" was measuring the cosmic microwave background and dating the big bang to 13.8 billion years ago, within an 8 to 10 percent margin of error. Can you give us some idea of the boundaries of the big bang -- what was it like in the first seconds, and how far will the universe expand in the future? Martin Rees (MR): It is remarkable that in the last two years we have been able to firm up some of the basic cosmic numbers about the age of the universe, the way it's expanding, and also what it's made of. What it's made of turns out to be rather surprising because atoms are only 4 percent of the total, another 25 percent is so-called dark matter - probably some particles made in the big bang that have no electric charge but just swarm around. And there's also some energy latent in empty space itself, something we call dark energy, and that's what's controlling the expansion of the universe. So we've learned that the universe has these rather mysterious ingredients. The long-range forecast is that the universe will go on expanding forever. Stars will eventually burn out, the atoms they're made of will eventually decay, and the stars will erode away. Distant galaxies will not merely fade but will get further and further apart and disappear from view because of the red shift. So the long-range future is a universe that is a very cold and empty place. Nonetheless it will go on for an infinite time. That's the best guess, but I think we can't have great confidence in that forecast because it depends on the nature of dark energy, which at the moment is making the expansion of the universe speed up. If it continues that way then we can forecast an infinite future, but the dark energy may be more complicated than we know, so we can't be sure about the future. As regards the past, we can trace things back to the initial instant of the big bang. When the universe had been expanding for one second, at a temperature of about 10 billion degrees, the density of atoms still was not very high. But when we go back to the first microsecond, the first nanosecond, the first tiny fraction of a second, then things become slightly more uncertain because conditions were more extreme. If we go back to times earlier than of a trillionth of a second, then the conditions were so extreme that we don't have any confidence in explaining the physics. In the first trillionth of a second, every particle in the universe was moving with more energy than can be produced in the biggest possible accelerator on Earth, and the density was far higher than the density of the atomic nucleus. So the very early universe is a matter or conjecture rather than consensus, because we don't understand the basic laws. Nonetheless, there are many fascinating ideas about what happened in the very early universe in that first tiny fraction of a second. Certainly the key features of the present-day universe were imprinted at that time. The fact that the universe contains matter but not antimatter, the way it is expanding, the fact that it is fairly smooth but has these fluctuations which were the seeds for galaxy formations - all those features were determined at very early stages by physics. HM: So here it comes Professor Rees, my favorite slumber party question: What happened before the big bang? MR: (laughs) People always ask, "What happened before the big bang?" We certainly can't answer that question, because we have to worry about what the question might actually mean. One of the most popular ideas by physicists is that when you extrapolate back to the very beginning, we have to jettison many of our common sense ideas about space and time. Maybe it's no longer the case that space has just three important dimensions and time just ticks away. That makes the early universe more complicated to analyze. If you don't have a clear idea of clocks ticking away, the idea of a direction of time - a "before" and "after" - doesn't have any clear meaning. There are lots of ideas of what might have happened at the very beginning, but we can't say whether there are other big bangs apart from ours. If there are, we can't say whether they are before or after or alongside ours, because to make such a statement implies that you can have a single coordinate system covering them all and a single clock that can be coordinated and synchronized between the different universes. So we can't trace things right back to the beginning, we can't say whether our universe is the only one, and we can't even say whether there are only three dimensions of space. HM: Are you alluding to the string theory? Does this theory shed new light on multiple universes? MR: One feature of string theory is it requires six extra- spatial dimensions. The debate is about whether those dimensions all are so tightly wound that they manifest themselves on a microscopic scale. Each point in our ordinary space would be like origami, tightly wound to six other dimensions. But the more exciting possibility is that not all the extra dimensions are tightly wound together. There could be other universes that are separate three-dimensional spaces, separated from us because we are all embedded in four-dimensional space. We are unaware of them in the same way that bugs crawling around on a sheet of paper might be unaware of bugs on a different sheet of paper. Each think they are in a two-dimensional universe, and have no concept of a third. So there could be another universe just a millimeter away from us. That's one of the many ideas opened up by string theory. The ideas are very speculative because there's no direct measurement we can make, but they have made people more open-minded about different possibilities. Physical reality is much more complicated than we can observe with our telescopes. Indeed, some extreme versions of this idea suggest that physical reality might be as complicated as biology, and that what we call our "observable universe" may be, in the perspective of cosmic reality, no more than one twig on one tree in some enormous forest. HM: Almost like a fractal analogy. MR: Yes, but on a vast scale. HM: Do you personally believe in string theory? MR: When it's so uncertain, it's best to remain agnostic and open-minded about all these new ideas. I certainly think it's good that people are seriously exploring these ideas in the hope that there will be some way of firming them up. It's an inspiring conception: a physical reality even grander than the part people can see. Just as we regard our Earth as a rather special oasis in our galaxy, so we might regard our whole observable universe as some friendly oasis within a huge multi- verse.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 5 Inflation-Theory Implications For ET Visitation From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:42:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:42:19 -0500 Subject: Inflation-Theory Implications For ET Visitation Source: UFO Skeptic http://www.ufoskeptic.org/JBIS.pdf Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation JBIS, Vol. 58, pp. 43-50, 2005 J. DEARDORFF1, B. HAISCH2, B. MACCABEE3 AND H.E. PUTHOFF4 1. 1689 S.W. Knollbrook Pl., Corvallis, Oregon 97333, USA. 2. National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), Post Office Box 1535, Vallejo, California, USA. 3. Fund for UFO Research, Post Office Box 277, Mt Rainier, Maryland, 20712, USA. 4. Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, 4030 W. Braker Ln., Suite 300, Austin, Texas 78759, USA. Email: puthoff.nul It has recently been argued that anthropic reasoning applied to inflation theory reinforces the prediction that we should find ourselves part of a large, galaxy-sized civilisation, thus strengthening Fermi's paradox concerning "Where are they?" Furthermore, superstring and M-brane theory allow for the possibility of parallel universes, some of which in principle could be habitable. In addition, discussion of such exotic transport concepts as "traversable wormholes" now appears in the rigorous physics literature. As a result, the "We are alone" solution to Fermi's paradox, based on the constraints of earlier 20th century viewpoints, appears today to be inconsistent with new developments in our best current physics and astrophysics theories. Therefore we reexamine and reevaluate the present assumption that extraterrestrials or their probes are not in the vicinity of Earth, and argue instead that some evidence of their presence might be found in certain high-quality UFO reports. This study follows up on previous arguments that (1) interstellar travel for advanced civilizations is not a priori ruled out by physical principles and therefore may be practicable, and (2) such advanced civilisations may value the search for knowledge from uncontaminated species more than direct, interspecies communication, thereby accounting for apparent covertness regarding their presence. Keywords: Fermi paradox, extraterrestrial hypothesis, extraterrestrial visitation, UFO phenomenon, Condon Report, SETI 1. Introduction The ever recurring question of why Earth has seemingly not been visited by extraterrestrials (ETs) has received considerable discussion under the topic of 'Fermi's paradox'. The problem originated as a quip by Enrico Fermi to colleagues in Los Alamos over lunch one day in 1950. Whether one assumes the existence of only one other civilisation or of many alien civilisations in our Milky Way galaxy, and whether one assumes colonisation involving interstellar travel at near-light speed or far below, diffusion modeling predicts colonisation or at least visitation of all habitable planets in the galaxy on timescales of tens of millions of years, far less than the approximate 13 x 109 year age of the galaxy itself. Thus the paradox: Where are they [1]? Theoretical possibilities unknown to Fermi make the paradox even stronger today. One can now rationally conjecture about prospects afforded by adjacent M-brane universes [2]. Indeed, if the multidimensions underlying superstring and M-brane theory are correct, there could be inhabited universes separated from our own by minute, orthogonal distances. Also, anthropic reasoning has recently been applied to inflation theory, arriving once again at the conclusion that we should find ourselves within an enormously larger galactic civilisation [3]. While the 'We are alone' solution to Fermi's paradox was once a seemingly valid one, this answer is now incompatible with the infinite universe and random self-sampling assumption consistent with inflation theory. We thus find ourselves in the curious position that current cosmological theory predicts that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation. At the same time, current physics and astrophysics suggest that such visitation may not be as impossible as had been thought. 2. Recent Scientific Advances In recent astronomical discoveries, over 100 exoplanets have been catalogued, with detection sensitivity now increased to the point where, in one instance, a Jupiter-sized planet was deduced to be in a Jupiter-like orbit around a Sol-like star [4]. In the field of exobiology, much recent activity suggests that some of the building blocks for life may originate in space as well as be transported by meteorites [5- 6]. The possibility of widespread panspermia has received new impetus [7-8]. These findings and studies make plausible the hypothesis that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. This is, of course, the fundamental assumption made by the proponents of SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence using microwave or optical means of detection. The extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH), that intelligent life from 'elsewhere' in the universe could be visiting Earth, has become less implausible through suggestions that the velocity- of-light constraint=97 'they can't get here from there'=97is not as restricting as had been assumed previously. This restriction has its origin in the special theory of relativity, which we do not question. However, within the context of general relativity (GR) there are three approaches which may permit legitimately bypassing this limit, given sufficiently advanced (perhaps by millions of years!) knowledge of physics and technology. One approach popularised by Thorne and Sagan concerns the possibility of wormholes, or cosmic subways, a form of shortcut through the space-time metric [9]. Using the standard GR as a basis, certain mathematical requirements for traversable wormholes have been derived and published in the scientific literature and it appears that there is the possibility of engineering a wormhole metric, at least in principle [10]. A second more recent approach published in the GR literature has been dubbed the 'Alcubierre Warp Drive' [11-12]. Unlike the speed of light limit through space, there is no limit to the speed at which space itself might stretch. Faster than light (FTL) relative motion is part of inflation theory, and presumably the universe beyond the Hubble distance is receding from us faster than c. It was shown that a spaceship contained in a volume of Minkowski space could in principle make use of FTL expansion of space-time behind and a similar contraction in front, with the inconvenience of time dilation and untoward accelerations being overcome. A related approach involves constructing a 'Krasnikov tube' [13] to connect spatially remote locales. Of course so-called exotic matter would be required for either case. If GR itself were to be reinterpreted in terms of a polarisable vacuum as first proposed by Dicke [14], this would open the possibility of a different type of metric engineering in which the dielectric properties of the vacuum might be altered in such a way as to raise the local propagation velocity of light. In effect one would be creating a local index of refraction of less than unity [15]. Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative possibility. Clearly when it comes to engineering warp drive or wormhole solutions, seemingly insurmountable obstacles emerge, such as unattainable energy requirements [16] or the need for exotic matter [17]. Thus, if success is to be achieved, it must rest on some yet unforeseen breakthrough about which we can only speculate, such as a technology to cohere otherwise random vacuum fluctuations [18]. Nonetheless, the possibility of reduced-time interstellar travel by advanced extraterrestrial (ET) civilisations is not, as naive consideration might hold, fundamentally ruled out by presently known physical principles. ET knowledge of the physical universe may comprise new principles which allow some form of FTL travel. This possibility is to be taken seriously, since the average age of suitable stars within the 'galactic habitable zone', in which the Earth also resides, is found to be about 109 years older than the sun [19] suggesting the possibility of civilizations extremely advanced beyond our own. There are further reasons why the 'We are alone' solution to Fermi's paradox should perhaps be set aside in favor of the ETH. A previously preferred solution, that biogenesis is an exceedingly rare event in conjunction with both panspermia and interstellar travel being inoperative [1], is now scarcely tenable in light of the cosmological considerations already discussed. The ETH appears to be the most viable remaining solution, where 'ET' is taken in a general non-Earthly sense that could include extra-dimensional realms, as in M-brane and superstring theory. Given the highly advanced ET science and technology to be expected in considerably older civilisations, coupled with the many observational reports since WWII of highly advanced technology seemingly operating at will within Earth's skies, it is only logical to search for evidence of ET visitations in at least a fraction of the ongoing, unexplainable reports popularly referred to as 'UFO sightings.' Reluctance to do so could result in our failure to realize that observations of 'genuine' ET visitations have been occurring. This approach, which we follow here, explores the likelihood that 'we actually do belong to a large civilisation but are unaware of that fact' [3]. 3. U.S. Air Force Response (1947-1969) Reports of unknown objects in the skies, appearing as some sort of flying craft and exhibiting extraordinary manoeuvres, first became known to the general public in 1947. The first publicised sighting occurred on June 24 of that year, after which there were many hundreds of sightings during the following months. The phenomenon has been continuing ever since [20-24]. At first the U.S. Air Force collected the sighting reports for analysis in its operation Project Sign (1948-1949). This was succeeded by Project Grudge (1949-1952) and then Project Blue Book (1952-1969) [20,25] . Some 20% of Project Blue Book's sightings from 1953-1965 were left unexplained, if their 'insufficient data' category is included [22]. The Battelle Memorial Institute (BMI; Columbus, Ohio) discovered, in their study of 3,201 reports from 1947 through 1952, that the percentage of unknowns (unexplainable sightings) increased with increasing quality of the sighting information and reliability of the observers [21]. A surprisingly high percentage, 30%, of the civilian sightings, and an even more surprising 38%, of the military sightings rated as excellent in quality were listed as unknown. On the other hand, only about 15% of the civilian and 20% of the military sightings rated as poor were unknown. The increase in the percentage of unknowns with increasing quality of the report is an unexpected result if sightings were all explainable as mistakes (failure to correctly identify the sighted phenomenon) by either the observer(s) or the scientists who analysed the sightings. In this collection of 3,201 sightings none were listed as hoaxes and only 1.5% were listed as caused by psychological effects. This result discovered during the several year long BMI study refutes the claim, made in the Condon Report [22], that UFO reports are from 'less well informed individuals,' who are 'not necessarily reliable.' It is worthy of note that Condon had access to the results of the BMI study but there is no reference to it in the Condon Report. Project Blue Book culminated in 1969 with the government sponsored Condon Report [22]. In the opening section of the Report its director concluded that, after years of investigation, the U.S. Air Force had found nothing truly new=97nothing that supported claims of new physics or the ETH=97and that continued investigation probably would not find anything truly new in the future. The Report recommended that the Air Force end its investigation project, which it did in late 1969. 4. The Condon Report (1968) In the late 1960's, the U.S. Air Force issued a contract to the University of Colorado to carry out a scientific study of evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon. The director of the project was Prof. Edward U. Condon, a distinguished and influential physicist who made no secret of his opinion even at the outset that no substantive evidence for extraterrestrial visitation was liable to result. The study was relatively brief (2 years) and had a notably low budget (app. $500K) for a serious scientific study. When the Condon Report was released in 1968, the American scientific community accepted its apparently negative conclusion concerning evidence for extraterrestrial visitation in a generally uncritical way, and to some extent even an enthusiastic way since it offered an end to a troublesome situation. An endorsement of the Report by the National Academy of Sciences took place following an unusually rapid review and the Air Force quickly used the Report as a justification to terminate any further public involvement with the topic. The negative conclusion of the Report is more apparent than real however, since there is a substantial discrepancy between the conclusion in the "Summary of the Study" written by Condon singlehandedly, and the conclusion one could reasonably draw from the evidence presented in the main body of the Report. Such a dichotomy was possible because the study was a project for which the director, Condon, had sole authority; it was not the work of a committee whose members would have to reach some consensus conclusion. An analysis of the Condon Report by Sturrock [26] details the many disagreements between Condon's dismissive summary and the actual data. Given the thousand-page length of the Report, one can safely assume that very few in the scientific community would have devoted the time necessary to read the entire document. The impact of the Report was thus largely due to Condon's leveraging his prestigious scientific reputation into an acceptance of his own personal views as representing the apparent outcome of a scientific investigation. Indeed, as Sturrock documents, Condon actually took no part in the investigations and indicated the conclusion he intended to draw well before the data were properly examined, hardly a scientific approach. The portion of the Condon Report that contains its sighting analyses does not support the "Summary of the Study" written by Condon [26]. Many of the events presented within its Case Studies section do fall into the 'unidentified' category of UFOs, for which the Report's definition was, in essence: 'A puzzling stimulus for a report of something seen in the sky or landed on the earth that could not be identified as having an ordinary natural origin.' In a detailed review of this Report, however, it was noted that 'The sheer bulk of the report, much of it "scientific padding", cannot conceal from anyone who studies it closely that it examines only a tiny fraction of the really puzzling UFO reports, and that its scientific argumentation is often unsatisfactory. Of roughly ninety cases that it specifically confronts, more than thirty are conceded to be unexplained' [27]. Four of the cases, reanalysed and reported in detail at the 1969 AAAS Symposium, disclosed how unscientific the Condon Report's treatment of them had been; the reanalyses have since gone unrefuted. Hence we cannot agree with the Condon Report's assertion that the phenomenon provides no new subjects for science to explore, given that many sightings were left unexplained. Furthermore, in many of the cases that the Report claimed to have identified, that goal was achieved merely through assuming that the witnesses had seen something differing in detail from what they had reported. Also, a committee of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in 1971 found 'it difficult to ignore the small residue of well-documented but unexplainable cases that form the hard core of the UFO controversy'[28]. Clearly, the Condon Report was left in an unsatisfactory state [20,24-26,29-30]. The primary conclusion of the Condon panel sidestepped the main issue, the failure to explain every sighting, by saying: 'The evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security' [22]. This is not inconsistent, however, with some fraction of unexplained reports representing actual ET visitations. 5. Re-Evaluation of the Phenomenon Needed 5.1 Sightings Since the Condon Report The self-inconsistency of the Condon Report, along with the strengthening of Fermi's paradox through recent developments in cosmology, physics, astronomy and astrobiology, are but two reasons to reevaluate the UFO phenomenon. Another reason is that remarkable sightings did not cease with the publication of the Condon Report in 1969. Many detailed sightings since then have become available for examination. Scientists should not feel reluctant to study these inasmuch as the Report's executive summary stated that 'any scientist with adequate training and credentials who does come up with a clearly defined, specific proposal for study [of UFO reports] should be supported.' One example of sightings worth studying are those that occurred on December 31, 1978 off the northeast coast of South Island, New Zealand. These involved several channels of information recorded on tape and film during the sightings, correlated visual air- and ground-radar detections and light phenomena recorded on colour movie film as well as reports by the eight witnesses who were involved. Analysis of the recorded data and of the witness testimony indicates that unknown objects emitting bright light were detected on radar, filmed and apparently moved in response to the motions of the airplane carrying the witnesses. The sightings have defied all mundane explanations [31-32]. Some investigations of unexplainable sightings have been sponsored by governments outside the U.S. Since 1977 the French Space Agency has carried out an official investigation of UFO reports with its project GEPAN, later called SEPRA. In the Belgium sighting wave of 1989-90, civilian and military officials cooperated in sharing eyewitness, radar and video- image data of triangular-shaped craft. 5.2 Withheld Information Now Available The Condon investigators did not have full access to the information and analysis compiled previously by the U.S. Air Force Office of Intelligence (AFOIN) or to all the information collected by Project Blue Book. Much of this information has been disclosed in the years since 1968. The information release has come about on five fronts. First, the U.S. Air Force released the complete files of Project Blue Book in 1975. This release included the previously unavailable files of the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI). Second, the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, which went into effect in the mid 1970s, resulted in the release of relevant information from other agencies (Federal Bureau of Investigation: FBI, in 1977; Central Intelligence Agency: CIA, in 1978; etc.), though often in a censored form [23-24]. A third new source of information is the collection of previously withheld reports and analyses carried out by the AFOIN in the late 1940s and early 1950s. This information has been released in the last 20 years as a result of standard declassification requirements for old documents. It shows that Air Force intelligence privately concluded that as many as 5% of the sightings were unexplainable even though they were apparently accurate reports made by credible observers, thus contradicting the public statements of the Air Force that all sightings could be explained. The documents provide an explanation as to why Air Force intelligence told the FBI in August and again in October, 1952, that some top Air Force officials were seriously considering the 'interplanetary' explanation [33]. Fourth, governments of countries other than the United States, over the last 25 years, have released relevant information collected by their armed services and police. Not only has the French government, through GEPAN and SEPRA, released sighting documents but also England's Ministry of Defense recently released a number of documents. The governments of Spain and Canada also released documents in the 1970s and 1980s. Moreover, some governments besides that of France have official investigative groups on this topic. In 1997, in response to civilian and military sightings over the previous years, the Chilean Air Force formed the Committee for the Study of Anomalous Phenomena (acronym, CEFAA in Spanish) directed by a former Air Force general and headquartered in the Technical School of Aeronautics in Santiago. One of us (Maccabee) was invited to Chile in 1999 to lecture at a symposium sponsored by the CEFAA and to discuss the sightings. The Peruvian Air Force set up a similar group in 2001. Brazil and Uruguay also have comparable investigative groups. A fifth new source of information not available or utilised by the Condon group consists of the many witnesses to events in the 1940-1960 decades who had worked for the government or the military and after reaching retirement age, have come forward to divulge their first-hand knowledge [34]. They have felt it was more important for the citizens to know what has been taking place than to continue to obey instructions to maintain silence about it. A reluctance to report UFO events arose because of a curtain of ridicule which, since the 1950s, had settled over the subject. It was induced in part by the CIA's 1953 Robertson panel that recommended a debunking programme against the reality of the phenomenon [20,22-23]. The debunking is most often implemented by an authority figure asserting, at his own volition and without interviewing the witnesses, that whatever was observed and reported as extraordinary was instead the misidentification of something mundane. This is demeaning to sincere, credible witnesses. The major news media quickly picked up on sarcastic phrases like 'little green men' and 'UFO buffs', then gradually weaned themselves away from the topic=97reporters, editors and corporate owners fear ridicule, whether just or unjust, as much as do scientists and politicians. The refusal of the U.S. Air Force in the 1950s and 1960s to release sighting data it had collected only added to the problem, since evidence collected by the government was not available to support the witnesses [33]. The first director of the CIA assessed the situation in 1960 as follows: 'Behind the scenes, highranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But, through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense=85 to hide the facts, the Air Force has silenced its personnel' [35]. The Condon Report also added to the problem, since it demonstrated that men of science could simply allege that witnesses are mistaken or dishonest and they would be believed by most of their colleagues even though they had no evidence to back up their allegations. This in turn led to greater reluctance on the part of witnesses to come forward. As a result, 'the most credible UFO witnesses are often those most reluctant to come forward with a report of the event they have witnessed' [27]. This ridicule factor has prevented many serious investigators from even attempting to report their findings within the journals preferred by most scientists. Therefore, one of the recommendations made by the moderator of a 1997 panel of scientists is that journal editors should change their policy of refusing to even seriously consider publishing articles related to the UFO phenomenon, so that this difficulty may be alleviated [36]. 6. Inferring an ET Strategy If one allows that at least some unexplainable sightings may be manifestations of extraterrestrial intelligence, then there is yet another reason for reevaluation: a growing recognition over the past two decades that a large part of the behavior manifested can be viewed as being quite rational. The topic of ET behavior has received considerable discussion in connection with SETI in the past three decades. SETI has proceeded on the assumption that Fermi's paradox is to be solved through continued and enhanced searching of the sky for electromagnetic signals indicative of ET communications [37]. Several possible reasons for lack of success to date have been proposed [1,37- 38]. Since the 1970s advocates of a covert ET presence in our vicinity have also been advancing their hypotheses or scenarios. They reject as improbable the assumption that space-faring ETs must be dominated by the most evil and aggressive of their kind=97 an assumption whose consequence would be that we should not be existing as a freely developing civilisation within a fully colonised and/or explored galaxy. Contact optimists instead presume that many advanced ET groups are at least as ethical as we are, while still attending to their own safety and security. The ET motivation for space travel could be to increase their knowledge through exploration of space rather than to colonise and seek domination [39]. Thus hypotheses have been set forth regarding why such ETs would be aware of our presence but not yet have contacted us overtly. Among these are the zoo, nursery and quarantine or embargo hypotheses [1,38,40-42]. Most of these posit that the ETs involved have frequently scouted us out semi- covertly and have concluded that we are either not yet mature enough for open contact, or not prepared for it, since any abrupt, overt contact could cause societal chaos and governmental downfalls. Also postulated is that ET interference with our society would prematurely bring an end to our civilisation's continued development if it occurred before our knowledge has progressed to the point that we could understand where the aliens could have originated and how great their head start over us could be [39]. A serious inconsistency in this reasoning, however, is that maintenance of total ET covertness towards Earth and the solar system would still lead to societal chaos whenever the covertness or embargo was eventually lifted, unless the ETs carried out a programme of gradual disclosure=97a 'leaky' embargo [1,43]. Although the zoo or embargo hypothesis may be unverifiable, the leaky-embargo hypothesis may be verifiable if the UFO evidence is taken into account. Much of this evidence appears to constitute just such a leak in the embargo: a grass- roots educational programme in the form of the phenomenon, which has been in operation since 1947, if not before. Many sightings have been of a nature to attract attention to their craft and let isolated groups of witnesses know that its occupants are aware of us [24,44]. A key category of such cases involves reports wherein persons within a traveling vehicle frantically witness an object pacing them even though their automobile or aircraft makes turns that rule out the sighting of an astronomical or other ordinary object as any explanation. Similarly, in a number of the aircraft cases the unknown object, which was either pacing the aircraft or presenting itself to it, was detected on radar as well as visually [23-25,27]. The object's extraordinary appearance, manoeuvreability and oft- times coincidental interference with the vehicle's electrical system additionally rule out mundane explanations [23-25]. Although individual, localised and usually brief sightings may have provided sufficient evidence to be convincing to the observers and sighting analysts, the fact is that, since the widely-reported sightings began in 1947, no event has persisted in a prominent place a sufficient number of hours at a time, or demonstrated its abilities to enough witnesses at a time, for the news media to congregate and publicise it to the world. Nor have they left quite enough evidence behind to be totally convincing to very many scientists [25]. We suspect that this chary behavior may be no accident. To put it another way, from the viewpoint of investigators studying such phenomena, individual close-encounter and other sightings can be very intrusive and overt. However, from the viewpoint of the scientific community and society as a whole, this is not the case, because of the relative rarity in time and space of convincing sightings and because of the limited numbers of witnesses in most instances. The inference is that, by not providing sufficient evidence to make their reality totally obvious to scientists and society in general, the ETs are following a strategy or programme that avoids inflicting catastrophic shock to society as a whole, which any overt contact could cause, while preparing us for eventual open contact. This could say something about their level of ethics. Proposing a certain level of ET ethics is not new; it was suggested in 1981 that advanced ETs may abide by a Codex Galactica that would require them to treat emerging civilisations delicately [1,45]. Such a standard of behavior is consistent with reality of the UFO phenomenon and the fact that not in the past 56 years, nor in past millennia, have we been colonised, conquered or exterminated, nor has society been traumatised by any ETs or by their sometimes postulated robotic probes [1,41]. It is also consistent with the failure of investigative panels to find that UFOs constitute any direct threat to national security. On the other hand, it appears all too evident that ETs have not intervened in world affairs in any benevolent manner that would have forestalled human warfare, famine and disease. In fact, ample cases exist wherein the witnesses, when too close, were injured or harmed. Other cases exist, however, in which a witness was healed of some injury or medical condition [46]. All this suggests that ET interactions with humans are based on a neutrally benevolent ethical level overall. 7. Conclusions Despite the UFO phenomenon having continued now for over two generations, the huge technological head start of the presumed ETs would still come as a great shock to many scientists as well as citizenry, as the Brookings Report indicated [47]. It could be so great as to seriously challenge our consensual reality, a not insignificant danger. The implication that we would be powerless relative to their presumed capabilities and evolutionary advantage may be most unwelcome, with it being no surprise that science would have difficulty coming to terms with the situation [48]. Nevertheless, the reality of the phenomenon and of our having long since been discovered by advanced ETs now may be more probable than that Fermi's paradox is to be resolved through either the non-existence of advanced ETs or their inability to explore or colonise the galaxy. Hence open scientific research on the subject is needed with special attention paid to high quality UFO reports exhibiting apparent indications that ET intelligence and strategy are involved. 8. Acknowledgments We thank P. Sturrock of Stanford University and T. Roe of the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP) for suggested improvements. References 1. S. Webb, "If the Universe is Teeming with Aliens=85Where is Everybody? Fifty Solutions to the Fermi Paradox and the Problem of Extraterrestrial Life", Copernicus Books, New York, 2002. 2. E. Dudas, "Theory and phenomenology of type I strings and M- theory", Class. Quant. Grav., 17, R41, 2000, (hep-ph/0006190). 3. K.D. Olum, "Conflict between anthropic reasoning and observation", ANALYSIS, 64, p.1, 2004, (gr-qc/ 0303070). 4. S. Udry, M. Mayor, and N.C. Santos, "Statistical properties of exoplanets. I. The period distribution: Constraints for the migration scenario", Astron. Astrophys. , 407, p.369, 2003. 5. B.C. Coughlin, "Searching for an alien haven in the heavens", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 98, p.796, 2001. 6. D.P.Glavin, O. Botta, G. Cooper, and J.L. Bada, "Identification of amino acid signatures in carbonaceous chondrites", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. , 98, p.2138, 2001. 7. M.K. Wallis and N.C. Wickramasinghe, "Interstellar transfer of planetary microbiota", Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 348, p.52, 2004. 8. W.M. Napier, "A mechanism for interstellar panspermia", Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 348, p.46, 2004. 9. M.S. Morris, and K.S. Thorne, "Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity", Am. J. Phys., 56, p.395, 1988. 10. M. Visser, "Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking", AIP Press, Woodbury, New York, 1996. 11. M. Alcubierre, "The warp drive: Hyper-fast travel within general relativity", Class. Quant. Grav., 11, p.L73, 1994. 12. H.E. Puthoff, "SETI, the velocity-of-light limitation, and the Alcubierre warp drive: An integrating overview", Phys. Essays, 9, p.156, 1996. 13. S.V. Krasnikov, "Hyperfast Interstellar Travel in General Relativity", Phys. Rev. D, 57, p.4760, 1998. 14. R.H. Dicke, "Gravitation without a Principle of Equivalence", Rev. Mod. Phys., 29, p.363, 1957. 15. H.E. Puthoff, "Polarizable-vacuum (PV) approach to general relativity", Found. Phys., 32, p.927, 2002. 16. M.J. Pfenning, and L.H. Ford, "The unphysical nature of warp drive", Class. Quant. Grav., 14, p.1743, 1997. 17. M. Visser, S. Kar, and N. Dadhich, "Traversable wormholes with arbitrarily small energy condition violations", Phys. Rev. Lett., 90, p.201102-1, 2003. 18. H.E. Puthoff, S.R. Little, and M. Ibison, "Engineering the zero-point field and polarizable vacuum for interstellar flight", JBIS, 55, p.137, 2002. 19. C.H. Lineweaver, Y. Fenner, and B.K. Gibson, "The galactic habitable zone and the age distribution of complex life in the Milky Way", Science, 303, p.59. 2004. 20. D.M. Jacobs, "The UFO Controversy in America", Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 1975. 21. Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, 1955. 22. E.U. Condon, and D.S. Gillmor, "Final Report of the Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects", Bantam Books, New York, 1969. 23. R.M. Dolan, "UFOs and the National Security State", Hampton Roads Publishing Co., Charlottesville, Virginia, 2002. 24. R.H. Hall, "The UFO Evidence", vol. II, Scarecrow Press, Lanham, Maryland, 2001. 25. P.A.Sturrock, "The UFO Enigma: A New Review of the Physical Evidence", Warner Books, New York, 1999. 26. P.A. Sturrock, "An analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO project", J. Sci. Exploration, 1, p.75, 1987. 27. J.E. McDonald, "Science in Default", in "UFO's-A Scientific Debate", Eds. C. Sagan and T. Page, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1972, p.52, 1972. 28. S.J. Dick, "The Biological Universe: The Twentieth-Century Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science", Cambridge University Press, England, 1996. 29. D.R. Saunders and R.R. Harkins, "UFOs? Yes! Where the Condon Committee Went Wrong: The inside story by an ex-member of the official study group", World Publishing, New York, 1969. 30. J.E. McDonald, Review of "The Condon Report, Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects", Icarus, 11, p.443, 1969. 31. B. Maccabee, "Photometric properties of an unidentified bright object seen off the coast of New Zealand", Appl. Opt., 19, p.1745, 1980. 32. B. Maccabee, "Analysis and discussion of the images of a cluster of periodically flashing lights filmed off the coast of New Zealand", J. Sci. Exploration, 1, p.149, 1987. 33. B. Maccabee, "UFO-FBI Connection: The Secret History of the Government's Cover-Up", Llewellyn Publications, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2000. 34. See, e.g., http://www.nicap.org/bigsurdir.htm 35. R. Hillenkoetter, New York Times, February 28, 1960. 36. P.A. Sturrock, et al. "Physical evidence related to UFO reports: The proceedings of a workshop held at the Pocantico Conference Center, Tarrytown, New York, September 29-October 4, 1997", J. Sci. Exploration, 12, p.179, 1998. 37. J. Tarter, Book review (astronomy): "Ongoing debate over cosmic neighbors", Science, 299, p.46, 2003. 38. B. Gato-Rivera, "Brane worlds, the subanthropic principle, and the undetectability conjecture", (physics/ 0308078), 2003. 39. T.B.H. Kuiper, and M. Morris, "Searching for extraterrestrial civilizations", Science, 196, p.616, 1977. 40. J.A. Ball, "The zoo hypothesis", Icarus, 19, p.347, 1973. 41. G.D. Brin, "The 'Great silence': The controversy concerning extraterrestrial intelligent life", Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 24, p.283, 1983. 42. E.R. Harrison, "Cosmology", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1981. 43. J.W. Deardorff, "Possible extraterrestrial strategy for Earth", Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 27, p.94, 1986. 44. R. Haines, "CE-5 Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind", Sourcebooks, Naperville, Illinois, 1998. 45. W.I. Newman and C. Sagan, "Galactic civilizations: Population dynamics and interstellar diffusion", Icarus , 46, p.293, 1981. 46. P.E. Dennett, and C. Dennett, "UFO Healings", Granite Publishing Group, Columbus, North Carolina, 1996.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Filer's Files #2 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 07:46:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 07:16:48 -0500 Subject: Filer's Files #2 - 2005 Filer's Files #2 -- 2005, Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern Vice President of Skywatch International January 5, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com Do UFOs Warn of Disaster? How old do you get before you regret the things you've never done. Make a resolution to do something good this year. Terrible disasters and wars are occurring, and the terrorist threat is intensifying. Life rushes by, then its over. Sooner or later it ends so you might want to enjoy it. The purpose of these files is to report the UFO eyewitness and photo/video evidence that occurs on a daily basis around the world and in space as reported each week. Many people claim it is impossible for UFOs to visit Earth, I ask you only to keep an open mind and watch the evidence we accumulate each week. These Files make the assumption that extraterrestrial intelligent life exists and my hypothesis is that of the over one hundred UFOs reported each week many represent a factual UFO sighting in our skies. *** Mars Global Surveyor spots Pine Trees on Mars. UFOs were seen over California, Florida, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Texas. Sightings were also reported in Canada, Chili, Mexico, India, Iran, China, and Russia. Did UFOs try to warn us about the tsunami disaster that killed over 150,000? =91If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.=92 2 Chronicles 7:14 I hope 2005, brings you peace and prosperity. Happy New Year Mars -- Pine Trees Show Life Norman Bryden writes, "I have a new image of Mars for you. This is an image of what looks like pine or other similar type of trees. I think this image is important because the trees seem to be on a hillside, and for the first time tree trunks can be seen from this perspective rather that just an overhead view which makes the trees easier to identify as life on Mars. They look like a rugged type of tree you might find at higher altitudes and in tough environments. [Image] This is a part of a Mars Global Surveyor image. The full image has many formations that look like living trees and/or other forms of vegetation. On the enlarged image branches, roots, tree trunks and what looks like existing foliage can be seen. This is one of many images from the Mars Global Surveyor that shows existing live vegetation on Mars. There are also large areas of what look like ancient structures and even current looking intelligent structures indicating Mars is currently inhabited by intelligent beings. Thanks to Norman Bryden http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi- bin/forum.cgi?read=3D4389 1 NASA link: http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/e07_e12/medium_jpg_tiled/E07/E07 01717.jpg Pilots Report Cockpits Light Up NASHVILLE --There have been a series or reports from pilots that their cockpits are suddenly illuminated by green lasers from different altitudes from different cities creating a safety hazard. There is speculation that lasers are deliberately being aimed at aircraft. The fact that at least eight cases appeared recently all over the country makes this quite unlikely to be just random events by mischief makers. Reports have come from Cleveland, Colorado Springs, Medford, Oregon, Nashville, etc. The lasers that can be purchased in your local store do not have this capability. If lasers are the cause they must be powerful and sophisticated. One pilot suffered eye damage and the plane was able to land safely. It should be noted that periodically aircrews have reported similar cockpit illumination in conjunction with sighting UFOs particularly when they accelerate away from the observer. There have been cases of UFOs illuminating cockpits with green lights in the past such as the Coyne, Ohio helicopter case. While I was in the Air Force, Military Air Command pilots would report similar instances. Only specific types of sophisticated lasers can do what is being reported with the ability to track and spread out a beam of light to engulf the cockpit and damage pilot's eyes. Russian fishing boats during the Cold War were accused of this tactic. Motorists occasionally report similar UFO tactics. These instances should be closely watched. Terrorists who have been moving into the US through our borders may be practicing targeting aircraft for a new wave of terrorist activities. I encourage you to send me any similar reports. Follow That Cat,... Dog or Elephant! Nurse Mindy Gerber writes, "In the movies a person jumps of the running board of a car and says, "Follow that car." My good friend Jim Berkland, who is a retired geologist for San Jose, Calif. says that we should monitor the movements of runaway cats and dogs to see when an earthquake will happen. This can be done by monitoring the "Missing Cats and Dog" section of large news papers. Just a few day before large quakes the dogs and cats will run away in unusually large number. They also ran away prior to the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, in Italy, before the ultimate destruction of Pompeii. So, I recommend the watching of cats, dogs, rats and everything to see if they are running away. They will come back when things are safe. So, I say follow that cat, dog or whatever. I once also asked my teacher and Guru how high should a person get in order to escape any world disaster and he said, "About 2,000 feet elevation." During the recent Tsunami, elephants started running for high ground and saved the lives of many of their owners and the tourists they were carrying. Animals once again demonstrated that they have a 'sixth sense' about natural impending disasters. The elephants used their trunks to pluck the foreigners from the ground and deposit them on their backs. The elephants charged up the hill through the jungle, then stopped. The tsunami drove up to 1 km (1,000 yards) inshore from the gently sloping beach which had been so safe for children it made Khao Lak an ideal place for a family holiday. But it stopped short of where the elephants stood. Additionally, animals often give warning of UFOs near by. Thanks to Mindy Gerber. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=3Dstory2&u=3D/nm/20050103/od_n m/quake_thai California - Two Brilliant, Pulsating, Red Lights SAN DIEGO BAY PARK -- Five witnesses saw two objects larger than the star Sirius that was bright red and very high over Mission Bay a Pacific Beach, in the final minutes of December 31 2004. The two lights were red brilliant, pulsating, lights from 11:55 till 11:58 PM. Using binoculars the objects appeared round and were very high in the sky. The higher one stopped pulsating, flickered rapidly, then took off at a very high rate of speed west over the ocean. The second one did exactly the same thing one minute later. This all happened just a few minutes before the New Year. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research PARAMOUNT -- Shortly after midnight on January 1, 2005, from the east two lights came into view and stopped suddenly, then a second later, two more appeared and proceeded to attack the first two by lunging at one another very, very quickly. They were shooting at each other at 12:02 AM, in something like tracer fire. After each one took their shots they disappeared quickly into the sky. Two remained for a couple of minutes in a stationary position, then all of a sudden took off straight up and disappeared in about three seconds. The lights were very bright, more so than the stars around it. They were not planes or helicopters. They were in the flight landing pattern for L.A.X. from the east. Oddly enough, I do not remember seeing any planes descending from the skies as usual in this busy approach. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research MT. SHASTA -- Mariola in Northern California writes, "Just want to send you some pictures of something that looks like a UFO and also strange spheres, from our trip there at the end of the past summer." Thanks to Mariola [Image] Florida -- Diamond UFO COCONUT CREEK -- On December 8, 2004, about 7:30 PM, the witness and his daughter saw the North Star brighter than they had ever seen. But it only got brighter and brighter as if it was getting closer. The witness states, "My daughter and I just froze as the light was heading down in a 45 degree angle, and then flew back up again." It flew slowly yet smoothly. We could see its shape take form as it flew over us. It was diamond shaped with lights at each end and more lights symmetrical to the shape of the aircraft. We thought it might have been a rare shaped plane. But what's been bugging us is that at first it just appeared to hover without moving. It got bigger and brighter, and made no sound. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com Mississippi -- Boomerang UFO BILOXI -- The witness was standing outside watching the meteor shower on December 14, 2004, at midnight when a boomerang of lights seemed to appear out of nowhere. It was close to the ground, but made no sound. It turned in different directions rapidly then just disappeared. I live close to Keesler Air Force Base and figured it was probably just a plane, but I could see no outline of a plane even though it was close to the ground and I could hear no engines. It looked like a flock of geese all wearing orangish~yellow lights, but of course birds don't have lights. I'm the biggest skeptic I know, but this has me puzzled and wondering. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com New Hampshire - Video PLYMOUTH -- Paul Spera writes, " My girlfriend and I took a ride up the highway on December 17, 2004, and we noticed something hovering in the eastern sky, so I pulled over. The object remained motionless at around 2000 feet or so until a plane at about 5000 feet started traveling towards it from the south. The object then began to slowly move away from us heading east. High traffic on the highway allowed me to take only short footage but when analyzing this clip it clearly shows the object changes color and strobes brightly. Images can be seen at my website. Thanks to Paul Spera nhufohunter.nul - New Hampshire UFO Hunter Website http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeomxpk/ [Image] New Jersey -- Four UFOs KEASBEY -- Reverend Barna reports, "I think it was a close encounter of the third kind since I had an understanding of intelligence from the phenomenon." On December 17, 2004, at 4:45 PM, on a clear evening during sunset while standing still in the traffic at the Union Toll Plaza, I noticed four orbs in the sky. They were large round luminous balls of white light about 10,000 feet high. At first the four balls of light were loosely knit and spread apart, then they moved towards each other, then one of them stopped moving up, while the other three moved to the left, and up. One of the three broke off and began moving in a separate motion and direction towards the west. The other two continued their journey southwest slowly and at a measured pace. They came to rest briefly above the one that stopped moving initially. They formed a perfect triangle, the two at the top "quite level" to the horizon about ten inches above the tree line 1/4 mile away. The three others in the perfect triangle came closer and then stood still for fifteen seconds then began to slowly drift westward toward the setting sun eventually dipping below the tree line. They stayed in the last position for a fifteen seconds while in the triangle pattern they gently pulsed brighter each second. This was observed by at least 500 people. How many reports do you have about this? What really pains me deep down, is the apparent ignorance of our species and can only wonder what other minds comprehended. If the species rejects the visual data that is presented to them, what must we suffer through next? Look up! I fear our time is short! God Bless. Thanks to Reverend L. Damian Barna North Carolina -- Orb Photo on New Years Eve HIGHPOINT -- Alan Caviness writes, "I shot this really nice orb image Friday night (New Year's Eve) out at the local UFO hotspot I've told you about in Davidson County. Nice structure and color, huh. It was the best image out of 195 pictures. " The orb was small in the original picture. I had to zoom in on it quite a bit. Thanks to Alan Caviness [Image] Pennsylvania -- Flying Triangle Follows Lady MARTIN'S CORNER -- Mary E. Spitz a former Captain in the Army, reports she was driving to her Mother's house on Mother's Day of 2004, at 10:10 PM, when she saw a triangular UFO with flashing red and white lights. It had no sound. It flew in very low and started to followed her car. She states, "I was alone and very scared after I cited it in the town of Martin's Corner and it followed me to my Mother's house which is Wagontown." I traveled on Highway 340 east bound and then on some country roads ending at Red Mill Road in Wagontown. She states, "The craft followed me at only 100 yards above my car until I got to my Mother's house, and I ran inside the house very frightened." The craft hovered and seem to land in the field across the road. It seemed as though it wanted to take me, but did not force me to go. I kept on telling it to leave. After ten minutes hovering above the open field it flew away towards the east. It was about 50 feet on each of the three sides. There were three blinking lights, probably the red one was in the center. What I really want to know is who flies in triangular space craft? Thanks to Mary Spitz, Ohio -- Several Sightings STRONGSVILLE -- Diane writes, "We spoke a few months ago about the sightings in Olmsted Falls in September. I get the feeling that something or someone does not like my telling you anything about this. I have now really seen a UFO several different times. The last one being December 21, 2004, as I was leaving the Post Office in Strongsville, Ohio, and driving home I saw the lights in the sky very much like our pictures that were taken in Olmsted Falls by the police. A few days before that, I was sitting at my computer and heard a static kind of sound and turned around to see a round ball. It was about the size of a large grapefruit or small melon, that looked like the sun, yellow and orangey bright about 10 inches or so above the floor and it moved along the wall across from me in a straight line. It doubled back to about the middle of the wall then disappeared, gone just like that. That night I had such strange things happen in my sleep, they are bizarre but I can't get them out of my mind. I am a nervous wreck, I feel angry, cranky, scared and very concerned. So much so that I have had bumps on my back for about a week now. I am putting antibiotic ointment and cortisone cream on them and they seem to be responding. My husband thinks I am crazy and need to see a Doctor and he's right. I am angry, they did not like me wearing gold, my beautiful ring has a crack in it and it is bent. My bracelet is squished by the clasp. I will try to tell more at another time. Thanks to Diane in Olmstead, Ohio. SOUTH WEBSTER -- Dave Crisp writes, "On Christmas Eve, December 24th, 2004 at 7 PM, I walked out of my house to bring in my cat for the night and noticed a star falling 90=B0 down in the southeast." It fell in one to three seconds. Its color was antifreeze green or maybe blue green and there was no trail. All the other meteors I've seen had trails. I always look up into the sky because I am an amateur astronomer and photographer. This object was about the size of Venus or -1 magnitude star. The moon was nearly full and the sky was cloudless. This object was about 40=B0 high in the sky when I first noticed it. Thanks to Dave Crisp FOSTORIA -- George Ritter continues to send UFO video of UFOs operating over the farm near his home. It is difficult to obtain hig quality photos due to what appears to be a plasma interferrence to the video camera. [Image] Rhode Island - Unusual Light In Sky EXETER -- The witness was driving north on Route 2, on December 13, 2004, at 8:35 PM, and went around a curve near the RI Veteran's Cemetery, when all of a sudden something in the sky caught my eye. It kind of looked like a star, but the partly cloudy skies made seeing stars very difficult. It was a bright white or blue light that moved west, curving a little bit before disappearing behind a cloud. The way it moved reminded me of a kid playing with a laser pointer on a wall...kind of an S-shaped curve. It was fast...but I've seen meteor showers before and it definitely wasn't as fast as a meteor. It was way too fast for an aircraft. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director South Carolina TRIO -- The witness reports, "My husband and I were returning home from Georgetown heading west on 521, on December 13, 2004, at 10:30 PM when we saw three bright lights in a triangle pattern. There is lots of sky activity around here and we are starting to wonder if there is military testing going on? These were not as orange as the previous lights we saw in other sightings, but they faded pretty quickly in the same way. Just after we got home to Salter's, my husband stayed out in the yard to catch a glimpse of the meteor showers. He saw six lights at a time, paired in threes in three different vectors. They were located east of us, and the lights lit up, stayed on and then faded just as before. There was no noise to be heard. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com Texas -- Flying Triangle GREENVILLE -- On December 11, 2004, about 10 PM, the observer saw triangle shaped lights that slowly faded out and disappeared. Traveling west bound on I-30 the observers noticed what appeared to be three bright "stars" in a triangle shaped above the horizon. The lights appeared stationary and they emitted the same white light of a star, but much brighter. The couple noticed all three lights slowly faded out until they were gone. I thought at first it was a plane that made a turn and we had simply lost view of the lights. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com GARLAND -- The witness was trying to spot Geminid meteors in his suburban back yard, when a 737 flew across his house on the glide path into Dallas Love Field. Then, he saw a dim indeterminately shaped object. While trying to divert my gaze from the 737 landing lights, I noticed a very dim object about 1 degree of arc in length and of an indeterminate width, moving south perpendicular to the path of the 737. It flew silently about 1.5 degrees per second on December 14, 2004, at 12:30 AM. It seemed to occult some stars as it traveled at an indeterminate altitude. It had no luminescence except for the faintest shimmer as it moved across the starry sky. Its magnitude was between 4 and 5. It made no noise. I observed it for about ninety seconds until it was no longer visible. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com FRIENDSWOOD --A triangular shaped craft was seen near Houston, on December 12, 2004, at 2 AM, while taking my dogs outside. The sky was unusually clear and the stars were more visible then I have seen so I stopped to enjoy them. It was then that I noticed a triangular shape of lights while I was looking to the northwest. I realized that there was a solid object inside the triangular shape of lights. I ran inside and called my husband, brother and a friend who both confirmed that they were seeing the same thing. We all watched it for awhile but the object never moved and the lights would blink sometimes a red or blue. The size of the object was 1 inches. A light was on each tip with more lights lining the sides of the object. The object hovered and two shooting stars were seen to the south, but may not be related to the sighting. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.UFOcenter.com Canada -- UFO Sightings High TELKWA, BRITISH COLUMBIA -- Brian Vike returned a telephone call to Gordon who on December 16, 2004, at 11:00 PM witnessed a long narrow tail of light. The light was coming from the north and had some color to it. He saw a large dark object with a tail following behind. Iit was visible due to the brightness of the starlit night. The object moved extremely fast and it disappeared or burned out roughly over the Houston area. Gordon was one of many witnesses who reported an amazing object that flew low through the Bulkley Valley back on July 29, 2003. That case turned out to be a major story both for myself and the newspaper out of Smithers, B.C. Thanks to Brian Vike. Director HBCC UFO Washington - Frequent Sightings and Photos MOUNT ADAMS -- Spar Guideman as taken a series of photos of disk shaped UFOs near the mountains. Picture show the edge of conference building under construction. A UFO is flying just above and left of the jet contrail. Thanks to Spar Guideman [Image] Canada - Sightings Continue Chile -- UFO Photo PISCO ELQUI - A variety of tests established the veracity of the images taken on November 6, 2004, by a group of travel agents that reached the area to tour the valley. At around 5 PM, we were taking photos with the intention of redoing a traditional post card of the region. Tatiana Cornejo, representative for the Deltour Travel Agency, decided to have a photo taken of herself in the town square. Above the local church Cornejo we noticed something that shows a strange lenticular object. She submitted the photo to the Altovalsol Space Center to discard the possibility of a UFO presence. After making this decision, several expert analyses were made and experts from Ovnivision Chile validated that the object appearing in the photo was indeed a UFO. Now the material shall be subjected to scrutiny by ufologists from Mexico, Spain, France and the U.S. [Image] Ovnivision and the Altovalsol Space Center consider this to be a legitimate image, since it made it through the tests. It is further impossible that it could be a bird, since to be seen thus, it would have to have a 5 meter wingspan," explains Riffo. Thanks to Translation (c) 2004. Scott Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology. India -- News Of Alien Presence Startles HIMALAYAS -- India was startled by four reports last week, which appeared to confirm the rumors of a large underground base staffed by extraterrestrials in the Ladakh region of the Himalayas. In New Delhi, India's capital, a senior officer of the Indian Army told freelance journalist Subha Jain that aliens were indeed in the Himalayas. In Bangalore, a recently-retired officer of the Indian Air Force described the underground base to his youngest son's elementary school class and said aliens had met with high-ranking officials of India's government. In Leh, a city in the Ladakh region, a local official confirmed that the Indian Army had moved armored brigades into the area and was limiting access to civilian residents and tourists. In Joshimath, another Ladakh town, workers at an auto repair shop claim they witnessed a strange broadcast on their TV set. "According to Subha Jain, a very senior military official claimed the extraterrestrials have been visiting India and the rest of the world for thousands of years." "In recent years, most of the super-powers have been visited. India is no exception." "'They always make contact through the ground radar stations run by the military, she says." "The Himalayas and Ladakh are where they have made their most recent contact. They want to let Indians know the rules and regulations of the multidimensional universe." "India is planning an unmanned moon and later an advanced unmanned Mars expedition. India's Space Research Organisation (SRO) has been given the galactic do's and don'ts." "Last week, a flight commodore of the Indian Air Force (IAF), who recently retired, was asked to provide a little talk to his youngest son's class at a school in Bangalore." "Guess what he picked as a topic? Yes, you got it right. It was the advanced landing base for UFOs in Ladakh." "He started by saying new technology is evolving, and new advancements are being made in aerospace. The students started questioning him on these new technologies and where this technology came from. At that moment, he began giving a vivid description of the landing base." "Surrounded by two of the world's highest mountain ranges, the Himalayas and the Karakorams. Residents live at altitudes ranging from 2,750 meters (9,000 feet) at Kargil to 7,672 meters (25,170 feet) at Saser Kangri in the Karakorams. In summer, temperatures rarely exceed 27 degrees Celsius, while in winter they plummet to minus 20 degrees Celsius, even in Leh." "In Leh, Ladakh according to Tsering Spalzang, a senior official, paranormal activities are happening with regard to the buildup of the Indian Army" in the region. "These are zones that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force block for security reasons. The Ladakh valley has been heavily secured by the Indian government. It is a 'sensitive area' and no one is allowed to enter from either the Indian side or the Chinese side." "According to some in New Delhi, UFOs have made contact with high-ranking officials of the Indian government. The government was initially baffled, not knowing how to react. Later, things became quiet, and it seems that everyone understands that the extraterrestrials are friendly." Krishnari Bai Dharapurnanda, UFO Roundup correspondent in India, reported, "I am trying to learn more about a strange incident that occurred in Joshimath. A family was working on an automobile engine at their repair shop. They had a small, battery-powered Chinese black-and-white television set and it gave out a weird squealing noise. When they looked, they saw on screen a crystal clear picture--in color!" "The screen showed a young Chinese woman wearing a white halter top. She had long, glossy black hair, parted in the middle and with a shelf of bangs just touching her eyebrows. She had almond eyes and prominent cheekbones. And spoke in a strange language, then another, a third, and a fourth language recognized as Uighur." "Next a Pathan man from northern Pakistan appeared who had a rather fleshy face and a small moustache. He was dressed very strangely in a kind of scale-mail armor and a spiked helmet covered with a puggaree (turban). He, too, spoke in an unknown language. Then, he paused and spoke again in Urdu, which everyone in the shop understood." "He said he and the Chinese woman were emissaries of the extraterrestrials. He said the aliens mean no harm and have placed the Ladakh valley under their protection. He advised the people to go about with their lives and rest assured that they would not be troubled in any way by the UFOs. The color image then vanished, replaced by a screen full of crackling static." "Our ufologists believe the woman addressed her message to people living north of the Himalayas, in China, while the Pathan was addressing the mountain people here in India and in Pakistan. We have only heard of this one incident. If the aliens building this base wanted to communicate with the people of Ladakh, why didn't they themselves appear on the TV? Why would they use two humans as their emissaries?" (See the newspaper India Daily for December 19, 2004, "ET contacts with India's government and military." Many thanks to John Winston, Robert Fischer and Krishnari Bai Dharapurnanda for these reports.) Thanks to UFO Roundup Vol. 9 #52 December 29, 2004, Editor: Joseph Trainor Masinaigan.nul Mexico -- Photo SAN JOSE DEL VALLE, GUADALAJARA JALISCO -- I am going to annex two photos for your consideration and explanation, see the objects to the left and right in the corner. The unmodified photo taken with a Kodak Easy Share DX4530 digital camera in auto mode, was taken in San Jose del Valle, Guadalajara Jalisco Mexico December 26, 2004, at 2 PM, I didn't see the object in the sky when I took the photos. The sighting occurred on Sunday , at 14.00 hours. When I , and my family visited this place to take some photos of airplanes. Thanks to Brian Vike and Photos from =A9 2004 Oscar Franco To view photos please visit: [ http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid07 ]http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file;=3Darticle&sid; 07 [ http://www.hbccufo.org/images/reports/100_0873_1use.jpg ][Image] UFO is in upper rightof photo. India Daily -- Did UFOs Try to Warn of Tsunami? UFO 'Guardian Angels?' An enormous number of UFO sightings occured before the Indonesian tsunami and sea quake in south and Southeast Asia. There is speculation that UFOs were trying to warn mankind of the impending megadeath which has now claimed 150,000+ lives?! -- Lots of people now from the Tsunami and earthquake hit areas are reporting about strange UFOs they saw a few days before the mega quake and Tsunami. People in Indian state of Tamil Nadu, Andaman and Nicobar Island as well as many in Indonesia were reporting for some time about strange flying objects in the sky. It seems now from the reports that many UFOs were in the sky and were trying to communicate something. In Port Blair, the capital city of Andaman Island of India, last week some tourists saw strange silent flying objects. In Sumatra, remote places also had similar experiences for quite some time. According to some UFO experts, UFOs always hover around the epicenter of major calamities. They somehow sense these coming natural disasters. Some believe that they try and communicate with us to warn. Some even believe these UFOs simulate natural disasters in the earth. India especially in the Himalayas, China, Indonesia were experiencing heavy UFO sightings in recent days. snip Thanks to Web: www.indiadaily.com/ Note: There are only a few ufologists worldwide collecting data on UFO sightings and in turn informing the public. Yours truely, Peter Davenport, Brian Vike, Hatch and Joe Trainor are those in the US. All need your support. We all operate on a shoestring budget. Iran and Russia To Study UFOs With a rash of recent sightings of unidentified flying objects in the Eastern Hemisphere, Russia and Iran have agreed to jointly study the UFO phenomenon. According to the Islamic Republic News Agency, the two nations are stressing "expansion of bilateral cooperation particularly in space research and construction of satellites." In addition to the scientific look at UFOs, Russia and Iran are finalizing agreement for the construction of the Zohreh satellite for Iran, which has been on the drawing board for years but has been hampered by bureaucratic obstacles. News of the UFO study comes as skywatching mania strikes Iran. This week, the Associated Press reported Tehran's Air Force was ordered to shoot down any unknown or suspicious flying objects in its airspace amid state-media reports of sightings of flying objects near Iran's nuclear installations in Bushehr and Isfahan provinces. "Flights of unknown objects in the country's airspace have increased in recent weeks. "We have arranged plans to defend nuclear facilities from any threat," air force General Karim Ghavami told the paper. "Iran's air force is watchful and prepared to carry out its responsibilities." Resalat also reported "shining objects" in the sky near Natanz, where Iran's uranium-enrichment plant is situated. One of those objects is said to have exploded, prompting "panic in the region." As WorldNetDaily previously reported, Iran has been struck by UFO fever all year long, with dozens of sightings of strange objects. In April, state-run television broadcast a sparkling white disc flying over Tehran. Snip thanks to WorldNetDaily.com "Life on Mars" UFOs over Mars Your chance to get your (fingers) on the throttle of significant and up to-date UFO info as well as the real deal on the Mars expedition. Get your official and private DVD copy now for $25. Send your contact info to: jlpromo2001.nul or mail your check to Fast Street Productions, 37 Surrey Lane, Willingboro, NJ 08046 or pay: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul DONATE TO KEEP THESE FILES COMING Dear Readers - Filer=92s Files has been brought to you free on a weekly basis for eight years. Filer's Files has operating expenses of over a $100 each month and is operated on a "Not For Profit" basis. You can help to keep Filer's Files operating by sending a donation of $25 per year. Frankly, these files cannot exist without your help. Donations can be sent to: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. You can also mail your check to George Filer, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ 08055. I will send you a CD or DVD copy of the eight years of Filer's Files for a donation of $40 or more. MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL. A MUFON membership includes the Journal and costs only $45.00 per year. To join MUFON or to report a UFO go to http://www.mufon.com/. To ask questions contact MUFONHQ.nul or HQ.nul Filer's Files is copyrighted 2004 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the COMPLETE files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue. These reports and comments are not necessarily the OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters to Majorstar.nul Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name or e-mail confidential. CAUTION, MOST OF THESE ARE INITIAL REPORTS AND REQUIRE FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 07:31:03 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 07:20:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens - Lehmberg >Source: MTV.Com >http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1495291/01042005/story.jhtml >01-04-05 >Tom Cruise Runs From Aliens In Sneak Peek At 'War Of The Worlds' >Remake, directed by Steven Spielberg. >Robert Mancini >As the title might indicate, the alien visitors in the upcoming >"War of the Worlds" remake do not come in peace. In fact, based >on the first image released from the Steven Spielberg-directed >film, they have some dark intentions for the human race. Well, at least Cruise had the sense to run... John Wayne was typically oblivious to his..... http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv Keep your attention in the upper left corner of the shot. It's shocking. How is it that it was never noticed before? From
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:21:17 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 07:25:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:21:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO Report >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:04:16 -0500 >>Subject: Mexican DOD Research Report >>My 'massive' (4.4 MB) report on the Mexican DOD radar/FLIR >>sightings of 5 March 2004 is now available for download at my >>web site. >Yes it is massive and will take time to go through in order to >give it proper review. >Starting with Appendix 4 and your use of diagrams showing >transponder locations to infer the location of gas burn off >flares. You do realize that each platform has at least one but >as many 4 flares? Did you attempt to obtain the Landsat images >that I located/documented as a good source of high quality >positional data for the flares/platforms? These provide >absolutely indispensible data for correlating the oil platform >gas burnoff flares with the FLIR lights. >Is there a reason you did not wish to consider that data? It is >from an independent source. I know that there are gas flames in the direction the FLIR was looking and I know that each platform can have several flares. However,I also know that it isn't sufficient to say that there were gas flames in the direction they were looking and that proves all the light were gas flames. What would be sufficient would be to match up exactly more than half of the FLIR lights with specific flames. When I began the test of the oil flare hypothesis I assumed that I could find the expected one-to-one match between oil flares and FLIR lights at least in the "twins" and "double triplets" sequences. As I described in Appendix 4, one can determine from the gas flame locations and the known distance from the oil field how the gas flames should appear to the FLIR. As I pointed out in the appendix there is some agreement... and some disagreement. After I spent hours trying to locate a "perfect" match I essentially "threw up my hands in despair" because I knew I shouldn't have to be doing this. I knew, also, that the answer would be "simple" to determine if the Mexican DOD would do the flight experiment I requested or re-fly the 5 March flight. That is why I wrote in the paper that it is essentially incomplete until an experiment is done. Franz tried to do something like it, but I guess he was not able to. Franz's photos do confirm that there is a reflection in the water below a fire which might explain the dim images below the "twins". I, of course, am well aware of your work. What you have done makes the oil field hypothesis for many of not all the lights plausible. This helps in "horizontal correlation" between the fires and the FLIR lights. It would be even better if we had fire height information for all the platforms so that we could get "vertical correlation" as well. But the best would be a FLIR picture of the oil field from a point 100 miles southeast of the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:59:36 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 07:30:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:13:33 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:12:28 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >I spoke with a solid researcher who was favorably impressed, but >would not let his name or affiliation be used. Unfortunately he >is dead. >>Apologize about the Flatwoods baloney? >I gather you are a skilled delicatessan operator?? No, but I have worked in a market and can identify baloney. >>For what? You show me >>some evidence of vast aerial battles and widespread loss of >>military aircraft, then I will apologiize. Meanwhile, my advice >>to you is to take a hard look in the mirror and stop being so >>apparently gullible. >What you ought to apologize for is expressing opinions having no >basis in fact. Perhaps you are psychic and know what is in the >book without reading it? You know what was in the Blue Book >files files for Sept. 12, 1952, without reviewing them or >spending the huge effort Frank made to bring out the barely >legible copies? What you ought to apologize for is advocating wild tales and then demanding that I buy a book which contains the evidence. I have a book that proves dead aliens are buried in caverns underneath Brentwood, Maryland. Send me $50 for the book which contains all the evidence. Why can't you show me some evidence in newspaper morgues (names and dates of papers for example). <snip> >>>You also haven't provided any basis for your claims about either >>>Frank's incredible efforts or Roger's very extensive work. >>See above. More to come if the 'believers' keep assualting us >>with nonsense. >How about the skeptics with psychic knowledge based on >ignorance? >>>Absence of knowledge on your part certainly can't be taken as >>>evidence for absence of such information. Can it? >>Absence of ignorance is ignorance of absence, or something like >>that. >Do you mean we shouldn't complain about your ignorance based on >no knowledge? We should just accept your pronouncements and >ignore the evidence? Aw, shucks. I am adjudged so ignorant that I am not even authorized to have an informed opinion. Apparebntly I have commited the cardinal sin of disagreeing with and disputing Stan Friedman. >And,yes, I have been to the site in >Flatwoods and have met Mrs. May and her sons and other witnesses >and did seek out more newspaper articles... and did write the >foreword and epilog. Why don't you send me a few copies of the newspapers that coinfirm vast alien-human aeial battoles with widesp[read loss of military aircraft? I'm quite eager to see them. >I think another tool UFO researchers need is some humility and a >large 'gray basket' and a willingness to recognize when they >know-not of what they speak. Your definition of 'gray basket' apparently includes every nonsensical claim that can't be absoultely refuted (when it should be up to the claimant to present the evidence). My 'gray basket' certainly does not include wild and woolly, grossly conspiratorial, extravagant claims for which not a shred of evidence can be produced in public records. No, I must buy another book. And if I refuse to do that on general principles, I am a know-it-all and ignorant. My, my! Who exactly is pontificating here, and who is asking for some reasonable evidence? As for Leir's medical credentials, I read (I think on his own web site) that he is by the laws of California authorized to perform surgery "from the anke down." Any general practitioner has more authorization than that. My whole point is that his credentials are not very impressive, not that podiatry is worthless. Some people get help from chiropractors, who also undergo rather extensive training, but I (having experienced them and others) would prefer a physiotherapist or a trained M.D. specialist. But what do I know, ignorant clod that I am. - Dick Hall Who thinks he knows the difference between science and engineering (technology development); the latter can be done in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Governments Conspired In UFO/Tsunami Controversy From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 10:38:19 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 08:32:13 -0500 Subject: Governments Conspired In UFO/Tsunami Controversy Source: India Daily News http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-03d-05.asp 01-0-05 Many Governments knew but did nothing to evacuate coastal areas - global conspiracy, UFO threats or concerted failure? Sudhir Chadda - Special Correspondent Now it is slowly coming out that almost all the Governments affected by the Tsunami knew about the earthquake and possible Tsunami hours before their countries were hit by the killer tidal waves. The only local Government that did not have a chance to react or evacuate was in Sumatra and Andaman Nicobar islands. Based on the analysis of the time sequence in which these Governments received information and failed or decided not to act is alarming. In Sri Lanka, India, Maldives and Thailand rumors in the main street are rampant that their respective Governments were told not to act by someone or some entity. Indian Military for example clearly got the information two hours before the Tsunami hit the India's mainland. An Indian Air Force base was wiped out in Andaman Nicobar island near Sumatra close to the epicenter if the earthquake two hours before the Tsunami hit the mainland India. When Indian Military tried to inform the Government, the Government did nothing as if they did not hear. Same story is being repeated in Thailand, Sri Lanka and Maldives. How can all the countries decide to let Tsunami come and not evacuate a single human being? Some are concluding that the Governments knew of some experiments by some country, agency or entities. They were clearly told not to react because it was in a controlled environment. Or, they may have just asked to keep quiet. Recent alien contacts have been reported with the South Asian Governments especially India. UFO sightings have been rampant over the region affected. Some in Nicobar Island say that it was an experiment conducted by the alien extra-terrestrial entities to correct the wobbly rotation of the earth. And some of the Indian scientists are actually seeing that wobbly rotation of the earth has been corrected since the massive underwater earthquake and Tsunami. In Indian capital of New Delhi, faxes were being sent to wrong fax numbers so that nothing much is done even though the Government clearly knew about the coming Tsunami. People have started asking the question "was this utter failure or global conspiracy to accommodate some entity or interest or was this for the good of the earth?" If this was an utter failure, how do you justify that all six Governments failed separately in their own domain one by one. According to some extraterrestrial UFO observers, the UFO sightings before the earthquake and Tsunami were very unusual in that part of the world. They claim the world's Governments were told not to act for some reason. The most amazing thing is that United States Geological Survey and Ocean Monitoring agencies came to know about the Tsunhe Tsunami and earthquake but decided not to do anything. Well it seems the whole world decided to fail to do anything together at the same time. Are we missing something? Can it be that all the Government Agencies knew what was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:18:34 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >To: PROJECT-1947.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >to know of it. >..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >more topics released than anyone else I know. >Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the >same. I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: ufo unidentified flying object flying saucer unidentified unconventional Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection of Korean War sightings. Also in history_01 at row 10544 mention of a UFO at Hanford Research plant sometime in the time frame April-June 1949 Also in history_01 I at row 19790 got a hit on flying saucer: a poem, "the flying saucer" Amusing: "The Flying Saucer" poem document is listed as "privileged information" ad associated with "Falcon." (Some other documents are also listed with "Falcon" I noted in this same history_01 that there were numerous references, many recent (90's) to Aviano AFB in Italy. I recall there have been UFO sightings in that area. Someone might want to check th dates of the sightings and then search the file for "Aviano". There might be a US report of UFO activity. In this file there were two Top Secret documents related to U-2 and SR71 flights. Many TS that had been downgraded to S and numerous Secret documents. Nothing under the above search names in AF_history_02 In AF_history_03 got one hit: UFOs over Alaska , Sept. 8, 1948 No hits in AF_history_04 or 05. Of course, no hits doesn't mean there is nothing in the documents. Someone may have other ideas for searching.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:20:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>I was all impressed with ProjectHessdalen until I read THEIR >>report on how they thought the phenomena was monitoring them and >>not appearing when they were ready with their cameras, but >>appearing when they weren't. >What you wrote above strikes a chord with us (rrrgoup)... >For many years we worked on a project I'll call "predictivity." >We noticed that events (some catastrophic, some mundane) were >happening in a series: mine disasters, tornados, fires, bus- >nappings [sic], et cetera. <snip> From what I understand about Pear's Egg is that they think somehow the consciousness of everyone affects randomly occuring events. I have seen the technical research reports for this on an individual basis and it seems to have merit, at least for veyr short time spans, but not for a collective test for much longer time spans PEAR has tried to show correlations of unrandomness in their EGGS due to World events. I am unconvinced. I cannot judge your predictive observations either unless I see suitable data, but I will keep an open mind about it until I do. We have not explained everything in the Universe yet so there may be unknown factors to cause these things. But what is baffling me is the oddity that UFOs may actually be harder to research than I thought. I naively thought I could bring to bear some nice research instruments and gather some data to not only confirm the existence of them (to the skeptics, and mainstream world) but help figure out how they operate. Then I read Project Hessdalen's reports of intelligent interaction and Project Indentification's amazing reports of the same and I begin to grow concerned. Here we have guys who have invested their reputations and careers in investigating a phenomena in the grand science way of wanting to show a reasonable explanation ("earthlights", tectonic stress induced plasma, etc) and we find instead that the objects exhibit intelligence. What are they to do? Not report these observations because they do not fall into the accepted paradigm? No, they report them and thus are looked at by most folk as odd or maybe loony! Sure, if a UFO enthusiast had a UFO react to his flashlight, chanting, waving, singing, talking, thinking, we can say, "yeah,sure" and wonder if he is off his medicine. But when credentialed folk such as Rutledge of Project Identification say it, can we really just ignore it as we would a Schmoe making the claim? If the phenomenon is going to interact in this way it seems to invalidate the whole research project! Showing that UFOs "exist" seems a pretty lame result compared to the interaction! So, since these "respectible" folk are experiencing this interaction, we find ourselves on a slippery slope that the "regular" folk's UFO reports of interactions must be true (within some error bar). Intelligent interactions and apparent highly advanced technology to perform the apparent manuevers/behaviors almost demands that the phenomena be alien or supernatural, but definitely outside a respectible paradigm. Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. I mean at least when we go fishing, the fish can't read our minds and avoid the hook. >So, for us, the idea that the ProjectHessdalen was seemingly >scrutinized in a way that prevented the participants from going >further, doesn't ring false necessarily. Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:04:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>I was all impressed with ProjectHessdalen until I read THEIR >>report on how they thought the phenomena was monitoring them and >>not appearing when they were ready with their cameras, but >>appearing when they weren't. >What you wrote above strikes a chord with us (rrrgoup)... >For many years we worked on a project I'll call "predictivity." >We noticed that events (some catastrophic, some mundane) were >happening in a series: mine disasters, tornados, fires, bus- >nappings [sic], et cetera. <snip> >From what I understand about PEAR's EGG is that they think somehow the consciousness of everyone affects randomly occuring events. I have seen the technical research reports for this on an individual basis and it seems to have merit, at least for veyr short time spans, but not for a collective test for much longer time spans . PEAR has tried to show correlations of unrandomness in their EGGS due to World events. I am unconvinced. I cannot judge your predictive observations either unless I see suitable data, but I will keep an open mind about it until I do. We have not explained everything in the Universe yet so there may be unknown factors to cause these things. But what is baffling me is the oddity that UFOs may actually be harder to research than I thought. I naively thought I could bring to bear some nice research instruments and gather some data to not only confirm the existence of them (to the skeptics, and mainstream world) but help figure out how they operate. Then I read Project Hessdalen's reports of intelligent interaction and Project Indentification's amazing reports of the same and I begin to grow concerned. Here we have guys who have invested their reputations and careers in investigating a phenomena in the grand science way of wanting to show a reasonable explanation ("earthlights", tectonic stress induced plasma, etc) and we find instead that the objects exhibit intelligence. What are they to do? Not report these observations because they do not fall into the accepted paradigm? No, they report them and thus are looked at by most folk as odd or maybe loony! Sure, if a UFO enthusiast had a UFO react to his flashlight, chanting, waving, singing, talking, thinking, we can say, "yeah,sure" and wonder if he is off his medicine. But when credentialed folk such as Rutledge of Project Identification say it, can we really just ignore it as we would a Schmoe making the claim? If the phenomenon is going to interact in this way it seems to invalidate the whole research project! Showing that UFOs "exist" seems a pretty lame result compared to the interaction! So, since these "respectible" folk are experiencing this interaction, we find ourselves on a slippery slope that the "regular" folk's UFO reports of interactions must be true (within some error bar). Intelligent interactions and apparent highly advanced technology to perform the apparent manuevers/behaviors almost demands that the phenomena be alien or supernatural, but definitely outside a respectible paradigm. Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. I mean at least when we go fishing, the fish can't read our minds and avoid the hook. >So, for us, the idea that the ProjectHessdalen was seemingly >scrutinized in a way that prevented the participants from going >further, doesn't ring false necessarily. Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:19:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:07:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 23:52:06 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >The more you begin to assume 'triangular' patterns or other >save-the-phenomenon alleged patterns, the less scientific you >are becoming. The same applies to Project Hessdalen, if indeed >that is the sort of thing they are now claiming. >There are well-established statistical math methods for >determining the significance of events and the probability (or >otherwise) of them being random chance. Overt macroscopic events >are quite different from microscopic and subatomic events in >this regard. >Also, until you publish your 'predictive' methods and data for >peer review (and I am going to continue saying this until I am >blue in the face, or the list is), you are not practicing >science. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it needs to be said. >I don't have the impression that you are being dishonest in any >way, but I do have the impression that you and a lot of other >people on this list fail to understand science and scientific >method. Richard: You're right, of course. Our attempts weren't scientific in the strictest sense. What we did started out as a lark, and then became a kind of obsession when we got computers (way back when). The concept that intrigued us was that of Probability Theory and we approached our prediction patterns using that theory as a template. (Our guys involved were computer geeks and were experimenting with various computer models.) We never got to the point of real science because, and this was my point, the events became scattered once we tried to zero in on them. Our first approach can be said to have been an hypothesis; it never got to the theory stage because the "forces" that be - and we're into the metaphysical or paranormal here - did not allow the events to be predicted - once those forces knew we trying to do just that. I admit that the whoe thing smacks of pseudo-science (or worse) but it has been my contention here at UFO UpDates (and some agree with me I think) that we as curious beings shouldn't throw out anything, no matter how goofy, because inside the chaff might be some wheat. (Isn't that how Penicillin and Pasteurization, plus a lot of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Esoterica Site From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 09:24:44 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:07:40 -0500 Subject: Esoterica Site For those of you who might not be aware of this site may find it of interest..... Esoterica http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:07:47 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >To: PROJECT-1947.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >to> know of it. >..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >> >of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >more topics released than anyone else I know. >Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the >same. I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: ufo unidentified flying object flying saucer unidentified unconventional Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection of Korean War sightings. Also in history_01 at row 10544 mention of a UFO at Hanford Research plant sometime in the time frame April-June 1949 Also in history_01 I at row 19790 got a hit on flying saucer: a poem, "the flying saucer" Amusing: "The Flying Saucer" poem document is listed as "privileged information" ad associated with "Falcon." (Some other documents are also listed with "Falcon" I noted in this same history_01 that there were numerous references, many recent (90's) to Aviano AFB in Italy. I recall there have been UFO sightings in that area. Someone might want to check th dates of the sightings and then search the file for "Aviano". There might be a US report of UFO activity. In this file there were two Top Secret documents related to U-2 and SR71 flights. Many TS that had been downgraded to S and numerous Secret documents. Nothing under the above search names in AF_history_02 In AF_history_03 got one hit: UFOs over Alaska , Sept. 8, 1948 No hits in AF_history_04 or 05. Of course, no hits doesn't mean there is nothing in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:08:04 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >To: PROJECT-1947.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >to know of it. >..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >more topics released than anyone else I know. >Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the >same. I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: ufo unidentified flying object flying saucer unidentified unconventional Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection of Korean War sightings. Also in history_01 at row 10544 mention of a UFO at Hanford Research plant sometime in the time frame April-June 1949 Also in history_01 I at row 19790 got a hit on flying saucer: a poem, "the flying saucer" Amusing: "The Flying Saucer" poem document is listed as "privileged information" ad associated with "Falcon." (Some other documents are also listed with "Falcon" I noted in this same history_01 that there were numerous references, many recent (90's) to Aviano AFB in Italy. I recall there have been UFO sightings in that area. Someone might want to check th dates of the sightings and then search the file for "Aviano". There might be a US report of UFO activity. In this file there were two Top Secret documents related to U-2 and SR71 flights. Many TS that had been downgraded to S and numerous Secret documents. Nothing under the above search names in AF_history_02 In AF_history_03 got one hit: UFOs over Alaska , Sept. 8, 1948 No hits in AF_history_04 or 05. Of course, no hits doesn't mean there is nothing in the documents. Someone may have other ideas for searching.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:36 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 20:08:12 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Maccabee >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:28:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 01:29:06 -0500 >>Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >>However, you are correct in that the Nimslo stereo camera >>produced 10 images of a structured set of lights... no 'body' of >>a craft was detectable in the photos. >>However, when two Polaroid Model 600 cameras (which eject the >>film to immediately after the photo; images develop >>automatically outside the camera) were combined to make a stereo >>pair, then pictures did show light structures similar to earlier >>pictures ("power light" on the bottom and small light on the >>top). >Would the quality of a Polaroid image surpass the Nimslo even >with the Nimslo using 35 mm film and half of a stereo image per >film frame? I always had a problem with stereo photos because >they always wanted to use HALF the film frame for right and half >for left, at obvious reduced quality. Two cameras seem likely to >provide the best images as you suggest. The Nimslo camera uses 4 lenses to create 4 pictures. It was not intended to be a "stereo " camera but rather a camera that gives four points of view to provide images for the type of picture that changes when you rotate (out of plane) the picture. I don't know what it is called. However the furthest apart lenses are about 2.5 inches apart,similar to eyes and so one gets a stereo view. The quality
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:32:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:42:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:28:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >Speaking of tin foil hats: http://www.stopabductions.com/ Yes, its all good to have a good laugh. But the thing is that this is not happening to you. If it were, then I am sure you would try every scientific and technical method you can to stop it, resorting to medication and when that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:41:47 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:44:43 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Smith >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 19:45:05 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >I would certainly like to add libraries and archives to the list >of important research tools. >Don't forget a notebook and maybe a tape recorder for use in >archives as well. Often they require that you use their paper. You are of course right. I guess I was somewhat unclear as to the tool area I was interested in but have learned alot of interesting stuff in addition. My interest was the field study, stake out, research tool set, rather than the UFO report investigation aspect. However, given the implication of some of field studies that the UFO phenomena is aware and interacting, then I must wonder if it is worth playing their game. I had hoped the phenomena was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 #70 In The Beeb's List Of 2004 Factoids From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:54:46 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:52:17 -0500 Subject: #70 In The Beeb's List Of 2004 Factoids It may come as no surprise that the BBC has expounded the fallacy that UFO sightings are on the decline. In their year-end list of the "100 things we didn't know this time last year" - at: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/mag azine/4134329.stm), #70 is: "Reports of UFOs have dwindled since the late 1990s. In the UK, sightings have gone from about 30 a week to almost zero; it's a trend echoed in the US and Norway." This is completely opposite to what Canada has recorded during the 90s, and the claim that this is occurring in the USA can also be shown to be inaccurate, simply by looking at the numbers of entries in Peter Davenport's NUFORC files. Davenport even lists a dozen UK cases for November and December alone.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 13:56:08 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:56:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Warren >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 05:17:11 EST >Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:43:30 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:06:21 EST >>>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:16:25 -0800 >>>>Subject: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>>Having always been annoyed by the apparent hypocrisy that >>>>Astronomers exibit (specically SETI folk)in regards to >>>>evidence/data towards Ufology, I posed the following question to >>>>Frank Drake: <snip> >>Brad, >>Thanks for 'chiming-in' - your opinion is very much respected: Happy New Year Brad, Et Al, >Thank you. Your post got lost in the pre-holiday avalanche. I can relate . . .. >>Drake says best done by more than one observer, but not a rigid >>rule, so it does not always have to be the case. >>>Drake should have been reminded of the various phenomena in >>>astronomy and astrophysics which are validly accepted one-shot >>>brief observations, not repeatable, and not repeated except in the >>>sense that something similar happens again at unpredictable >>>random times - such as meteor fireballs, gamma-ray bursts, >>>and supernovas. These are like UFO incidents in that respect. >>I made the point when I said, "it is a "transient uncontrollable >>unpredictable event" in reference to UFO sightings, opposed to >>observing a "fixed celestial body." >Not clear enough. He needed to be reminded that there are valid >sciences studying "transient uncontrollable unpredictable >events" and given specific examples - as I listed meteor >fireballs, gamma-ray bursts and supernovas. I'm trying to be >helpful. I'll concede on this point; in retrospect, it would have been better to give "specific examples" in order to give Drake "familiar association" in regards to "transient uncontrollable unpredictable events." I take no offense to your criticism Brad. >>First let me say that I don't think my correspondence with Drake >>confirmed anything for him - his mind is/was made-up, and he >>doesn't want to be bothered with the evidence. Very much like >>Carl Sagan. >You gave him nothing but hypothetical arguments about >methodology, thus confirming to him that UFO advocates have >nothing but skirting around the edges of an argument, instead of >giving him some solid unexplaianble UFO data - in a form that >he can digest. Like a long paragraph on a scientifically >challenging UFO incident that might shake him up. Maybe he is >too hardened in his "mind made up" position, but we'll never >know. In regard to my arguments about "extra-solar planets" and the position that many astronomers take about them - I specifically gave "hypothetical arguments" in rebuttal to their "hypothetical" position - that's was the point - the hypocrisy of it all. In regard to Ufology, specifically "unknown airborne craft" that exhibit characteristics beyond man-made technologies I gave "10 evidentiary examples" that fall under the criterion suggested by Drake. Certainly he can digest evidence relating to, "thermal effects, light emission and absorption, electric, magnetic and gravitational disorders," etc. If a "scientist" is in a "mind made-up posture" and hasn't looked at the evidence/data of a phenomenon, then this certainly gives new meaning to the word! >>I posed the questions about "extra-solar planets," in >>particular, because I feel that is what we get from them - >>nitpickism, if you will. When the subject of "evidence" was >>brought up in the debate between Stan and Seth, Seth nitpicked >>what Stan brought to the table, he clearly didn't want to hear >>what Stan had to say, and there was nothing "scientific" about >>his criticism. >Stan has gotten into the habit of referring to papers instead of >pounding away at details of solid UFO cases, so that they can't >get away with broad-brush misinterpretations. "Nitpickism" is a >lot easier if all you have are abstract concepts to nitpick. Two references that Stan mentioned "off the cuff" in the debate with Shostak were Ted Phillips 35 year investigation of over "5000 physical trace landing cases," as well as McDonald's investigations with "multiple witness radar/visual cases." Although in that particular instance, much to your chagrin, he didn't mention any "specific case," what he offered was certainly not abstract! This by the way was initiated from discussion of the declarations in Seth's book, Cosmic Company" in where he argues, if aliens are here, how come they don't land and can't be tracked by radar?" <snip> >I know you didn't cite any specific cases and my point was that >you needed more than even "mention" cases but put forth >something like a long paragraph like I wrote above (with the >dates, locations, names, etc.) for each case. >And I said forget the controversial UFO cases or incidents >because the UFO community should have thousands of great cases >that are not fraught with controversy. Why invoke a case with >interminable unresolvable controversy if you can use cases >without it? The fact this has to be argued at all shows the bad >judgment that is prevalent in the UFO community - I'm not >singling you out on this but making a general comment. Brad, as I stated before, I certainly respect your opinion; however, I don't agree with it; you take issue with the fact that I didn't offer "up front" specific case histories - I feel that I made my point without doing so; however, for argument's sake, this was done consciously, as I expected further correspondence from Drake. Quite frankly, I was hoping to get from him, what I'm getting from you - wanting more! I was anticipating questions or statements like, "give me an example, show me the evidence, how was the evidence obtained," etc. Sadly, this has yet to happen, and not much can be evaluated from his silence.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Washington Times Article Of Interest From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:09:33 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:01:46 -0500 Subject: Washington Times Article Of Interest Washington Times article of interest to Listers: http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring.htm 12-31-04 Inside the Ring By Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough THE WASHINGTON TIMES Loose lips After The Washington Times disclosed internal Army briefings that detailed new plans to put women in combat, Lt. Gen. James Campbell put out a memo ordering officials to better safeguard materials. Here are his four measures: "All staff and secretariat offices will keep strict accountability of the number of copies produced." "Staff members... will not list the subject of specific meetings and briefings on their routinely distributed personal calendars. Either indicate pre-decisional briefing or the names of the people attending the briefing." "Within your office, ensure paper-based products with words, regardless of classification, are discarded in strike bags." [A strike bag means it is set aside for destruction.] "Finally, strictly enforce e-mail discipline. Think what you say and who might read it. Take it to the extreme =E2=80=94 imagine what you are putting in an e-mail will be on the front page of the paper tomorrow. When in doubt, use classified e-mail." [End of excerpt] Several comments are in order. This Generals ideas are nothing new and incredible as government officials have practiced these concepts in years gone by. Of real interest is the comment about "will not list the subject of specific meetings and brierfings on their routinely distributed personal calendars. Either indicate pre-decisional briefing or the names of the people attending the briefing." In the past I have heard some people in UFOs state that documents at the archives should be very specific and detailed as to the subject matter of a meeting or briefing. For example: "Top Secret UFO ET material blah blah" In fact it is rather common to not list subject matter of meetings or whatever. I have seen at the archives (as I am sure Stan Friedman has) documents which go something like: Meeting with President, and X, Y and Z 4:30 PM. So the meeting could be about some routine matter, it could be a high level matter, or an even higher level matter. Point being is that the subject matter of the meeting/briefing may not be on the document. Also, even though a document may not be perfect (as to the styles and format that classified
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Tonnies From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:17:03 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:03:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Tonnies >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:30:01 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review >>Were the creatures in this (the AA) dissection ET >or could they >>be evolved monotremes (echidna, platypus)? This >line of mammal >>diverged from marsupials about 186 million years >ago. Monotremes or not, I'm fascinated by the possibility that some humanoid sightings (including the AA, if it's authentic) are due to "cryptohominids." I've been following the discovery of the Flores "hobbits" with great interest. Is it possible that a similar human offshoot managed to develop a technological culture in virtual secrecy? ===== Mac Tonnies (macbot.nul) Explore MTVI @ http://www.mactonnies.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 6 Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:17:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:17:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Shell >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:30:01 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review <snip> >The creature in the AA footage has one hole, no teeth, no >umbilical cord and no secondary sexual features such as nipples, >just as we might find in an evolved monotreme. I disagree, Ed. The creature has what looks like prepubescent human female sex organs. Monotremes have simple cloacal openings like birds. We don't know if the creature has more than one hole, because it is never shown from an angle that would reveal an anal opening. Because the bellies on both creatures that we have dissection films of are distended, possibly from decomposition, whether there is an umbilicus is not clear. Yes there appear to be no nipples. I think these things resemble something cloned from human DNA with some genetic engineering applied. If we had a tissue sample in good enough condition for modern DNA analysis, I would expect to find it more than 99% human. As for whether it has teeth or not, I can't tell and I have looked at that film probably more times than any other living human, both in a VHS dub, in BETA format at a TV station on a professional monitor, and frame by frame on my computer.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Black's Polygraph Test? - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:18:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:14:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Black's Polygraph Test? - LeClair >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:55:30 -0500 >Subject: Black's Polygraph Test? >Many months ago, Kenny Young and Jerry Black were wanting you >to take a polygraph test. >Since then I haven't read anything by Young or Black. Was >wondering if you ever went through with the polygraph or not? >I tried looking through the UFO UpDates archive, but didn't find >any results. >Thanks for any info.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Project Blue Book NARA Microfilm From: Larry W.Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 22:03:05 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:17:23 -0500 Subject: Project Blue Book NARA Microfilm From: "William Wise" <archivist.nul> To: overtci.nul Date: Wed, January 5, 2005 4:38 pm Subject: Project Blue Book NARA microfilm Dear Mr. Bryant, The purpose of this email is to introduce you to the Blue Book Archive. In brief, we have created a web-site which provides free online access to the National Archives Blue Book microfilm collection. Moreover, these documents have been rendered searchable so as to increase the utility of this material to researchers. So far we have scanned and posted approximately 10% of the NARA Blue Book microfilm collection and more content is on the way. To see the results of our efforts thus far please visit our web- site at: http://www.bluebookarchive.org I hope you find it interesting and useful! In addition to this online resource we are also making the original high-resolution (400dpi) microfilm scans available on CD-ROM. As a first step toward raising awareness about our project we are conducting a targeted mailing to introduce researchers and historians to the project and its goals. This mailing includes the first CD-ROM in the NARA series. This CD contains the scanned contents of NARA Blue Book microfilm roll 1 (NARA microfilm publication number T1206-1) in PDF format. If you would like to receive a copy of this CD-ROM along with a brief missive explaining the project's goals and project roadmap, please send me your physical mailing address and I'll be happy to send you a copy. Blue Book Archive project members include myself, Jan Aldrich, Brad Sparks, and Tom Tulien. In addition, we've had a great deal of help from many others including members of Project 1947, the Sign Historical Group, the Archives for UFO Research, News and Information Service, and CISU in Italy. Again, I sincerely hope you will find this resource useful to you in your research. If you would like to be informed whenever new microfilm or other documents are added to the archive please register with us at http://www.bluebookarchive.org/register.aspx or just respond to this email stating your desire to be added to our mailing list. If you have any other questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me by replying to this email. Yours Sincerely, William M. Wise
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 'Cryptohominids' And The 'Alien Autopsy' From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 22:30:25 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:34:54 -0500 Subject: 'Cryptohominids' And The 'Alien Autopsy' Dear List, For a linked version of this post, please see: http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2005_01_01_posthumanblues_archive.html#110498 946868873869 There's been some arrestingly offbeat speculation by Ed Gehrman on UFO UpDates proposing the "alien" in the "alien autopsy" footage - if an authentic cadaver and not FX trickery - is a terrestrially evolved humanoid. This idea converges nicely with my own musings on earthly hominids developing a technological culture in relative seclusion. For example, I've theorized that ancestors of the Flores "hobbits" (or a similar race) may have been forced to take up hidden residence in homo sapiens society. Moreover, the oral mythology surrounding the Flores beings has the general flavor of contemporary UFO occupant reports - human abduction, etc. Even the physical appearance of "ufonauts" and the "hobbits" share interesting similarities; both are usually described as short, with large eyes and long arms. There are notable anomalies in the "autopsy" film; the being is polydactyl with an out-sized head (rather than the comparably microcephalic head possessed by the Flores specimens) and lacks secondary sexual characteristics. These traits argue against a normal mammalian origin, prompting theories of genetic engineering (presumably at the hands of competent extrasolar aliens using human stock). The "autopsy" footage has always intrigued me because the supposed alien looks far too human to be anything other than a close human relative. This could be explained if the being is a.) a fake, b.) a terrestrial genetic/surgical experiment, or c.) a "cryptohominid" that fell into government hands after a hardware malfunction - possibly but by no means necessarily the famed "Roswell crash." The national security implications of the latter would be at least as dramatic as the US government learning that its airspace was being penetrated by extraterrestrials - and on an anthropological note, far more disturbing. If the cryptohominid theory is accurate, then it provides a plausible motive for nonhuman craft to visit our nuclear installations and military bases, as UFOs have done for 50 years; fellow terrestrials may wish to determine the risk posed by emerging destructive technology or even attempt to thwart it. Coincidentally (?), the modern UFO phenomenon began shortly after the development of radar, reliable aircraft and atomic power - three factors that may have justly aroused the concern of any secretive "aliens" in our midst. It's even possible the global conflict of the second World War forced cryptohominids to subtly intervene - perhaps, as I wondered in a previous post, encouraging the popular conception of UFOs as spaceships from some other planet. One can hardly think of a better "cover- story." Lastly, but by no means unimportantly, there is a vast overlooked literature of "little people" in our midst that extends from ancient legend to contemporary times. I'm aware of one first-hand narrative - which I tend to accept as factual - involving members of a race of diminutive nomadic humanoids that can successfully pass themselves off as members of "normal" society. They claim to predate known North American cultures and appear to have an abiding interest in at least some members of "visible" society. Could these strangers have achieved more, technologically, than they choose to let on in face-to-face contacts? I think it's perfectly conceivable that at least one race of human-like beings could be sharing the planet with us. If they belong to an ancient, enduring civilization - however seemingly disenfranchised - it's probable they're smarter than us; contact, if desired, would be on their terms. In the meantime, it's near-impossible to guess how deeply their culture infringes on our own, or if our own intelligence agencies have been quietly scrambling, for the last half-century, to determine whether they represent friend, foe - or something else entirely. ===== Mac Tonnies (macbot.nul) Explore MTVI @ http://www.mactonnies.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Sawers From: William Sawers <ufsyntax.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 17:52:31 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:38:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Sawers >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:30:01 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review <snip> >>Were the creatures in this (the AA) dissection ET or could they >>be evolved monotremes (echidna, platypus)? This line of mammal >>diverged from marsupials about 186 million years ago. <snip> >To conclude: >"[the monotremes] represent a branch of mammals that is quite >ancient. They are more closely related to marsupial and >placental mammals than to any group of reptiles, yet they have >retained a surprising number of ancestral reptilian traits over >the course of evolution and posses an interesting mosaic of >mammalian and reptilian characteristics". <snip> Ed, List For your interest I saw, for the first time, the full documentary on the "StarChild"..... It started off as an unbiased report, then seemed to drift off into some "skull- moulding" tangent. When it came to the latest DNA analysis all was well again. The female chromosone was established as human then they completely bi-passed the fact the male chromosone could not be found on two or three different tests. The only way the male side could be distinguished was by quite extreme amplification of the bars and our expert told us that with each amplification the results become much less reliable. After 4-5 such amplifications it was determined the DNA had what was considered male chromosone denoting male and female origin. Not professing to understand the intracacies of DNA analysis, I can only assume that the "unreliable male" aspect, was put into the "too hard" basket and it was convienient to solve(?) the mystery using the basis of skull manipulation or wrapping.. The makers of the doco seemed more intent on solving(?) the mystery of the Star Child, rather than exploring any other hypothesis such as why the head has grown normally, why there are no sinus holes, no disease or even where the Indians got their ideas for this type of skull manipulation in the first place. I hope this leads to closer discussion about people of the Nazca Plains and their unusual desert lines and the possibility of Alien/Hybrids The link is the DNA report and the 2nd one is the site that is doing the research. http://www.starchildproject.com/SCSreport.PDF http://www.starchildproject.com/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Argentina: The Wildest Excuse From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 07:56:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:46:22 -0500 Subject: Argentina: The Wildest Excuse INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 5, 2005 Source: Planeta UFO and INFOBAE.org Date: 01.05.05 Argentina: The Wildest Excuse A cab driver from the city of La Plata told his wife that he was abducted by a "Flying Saucer". His wife filed a report and the Justice Department and Police intervened The excuse offered by a taxi driver from La Plata may soon go into the Guinness Book of Records as the wildest in the world. It all started yesterday morning, when a desperate woman appeared at the 6th Sheriff's Office of the provincial capital to report that her husband had been abducted by aliens travelin aboard a UFO. This prompted the intervention of a judge, a district prosecutor and the Police. After several searches and hours of anguish, the wife appeared before the authorities and claimed to have solved the case: "He phoned me from Quilmes and told me had been taken by a flying saucer." In this way theft or kidnapping by "Earthlings" was discarded as a possibility. According to the woman, this is not the first time that her husband has experienced these intergalactic abductions: the cabbie has vanished on several occasions and when he appears, he claims to have been abducted by flying saucers. Strangest of all is that when he returns home from his space odysseys, his breath smells of wine. This eventually led the wife to suspect that the aliens have their base of operations in some wine cellar in the province of Mendoza.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 India 1st To Explain E.T. And UFO Contact From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 07:46:19 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:47:42 -0500 Subject: India 1st To Explain E.T. And UFO Contact Source: India Daily http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-06a_1-05.asp India may be the first country to explain to the world about extra-terrestrial and UFO contacts - the secret debate is on New Delhi is in the middle of a big secret internal debate. On one side the largest democracy of the world is eager to explain to its citizens and to the world about the ongoing contacts with the UFOs and extra-terrestrials. On the other hand there are invisible untold international protocols that prohibit doing anything that may cause worldwide fear and panic. It is well accepted between the UFO and extra-terrestrial experts that all the five nuclear powers are in contact with the beings from other stars for quite some time. Recently India has seen enormous news on UFO contacts and secret UFO bases in Himalayas near the Chinese bases. In Ladak, for example the locals clearly point out the everyday phenomenon of large triangular spacecrafts coming out below the ground and Indian security forces protecting them. Military officials and politicians have confessed the fact that India has been contacted. India has been told the rules of the Universe. The current debate is on whether to keep it secret like other countries are doing or in tradition of a total transparent society come out and tell the truth. India is so open and democratic; it is very difficult to keep a secret for long. The biggest concern of the Government today is that unlike in other countries, it will be very difficult to keep it secret for long. If the information comes out through unofficial channels first and then the authorities are pressed against the wall to confess, two bad things can happen. First, it can really cause a panic in the country as well as the world. Second, the way the Indian politics is run, the ruling party will be thrown out of power in no time i it is ever found that the Government withheld such information from the public. The recent rush of world leaders to India is remarkable. Starting from Russian President Putin to major Senators from America have visited or are planning to visit India. European Union is in deep discussion with India on cooperation. All sanctions against India 's nuclear programs and Indian Space Research Organization are in the process of being lifted. India is cooperating with Europeans and the Americans in space explorations and technology research program. India is also part of World Trade Organization. India is receiving major outsourcing contracts in IT and call-center service work from America and Europe. India's Forex reserve is at a level never imagined before because of international direct investments from Western nations, Japan, Korea and others. Interestingly, China the arc rival of India changed its posture in the last few years to make India's friendship and trade a priority. India is slowly getting to the point when it is accepted as a permanent member of the Security Council. All the five Security Council members China, America, Russia, France and UK support India's inclusion. When all these factors are added together and analyzed, it seems like India is being told by the world to abide by the hidden protocols and in exchange be recognized as a major emerging superpower. The debate the country is facing internally is whether to abide by the laws of the world and the Universe to be recognized as a superpower or be truthful to its citizens and the world. According to sources close to the Government, the UFO contacts is known by quite a few politicians in the opposition and of course by those who are in power. The military has legitimate concern of not letting the secrets out either. Recently, India's foreign affairs minister Mr. Natwar Singh came out and said that for India it was not necessary to become a nuclear power. He is a strong supporter of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, India's former Prime Minister who initiated the nuclear program in the mid sixties. India first exploded a nuclear device in Pokhran in early seventies. The whole country including people from his own party questioned Mr. Singh for such an irresponsible statement. But on analyzing his statements, it is evident, that based on what he knows now, being a nuclear power really does not matter much because the technologies controlled
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Argentine Cabbie's Wild Ride From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 11:11:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:52:26 -0500 Subject: Argentine Cabbie's Wild Ride INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 6, 2005 Source: "El DIA" (La Plata, Argentina) http://www.eldia.com.ar Date: 01.06.05 ARGENTINA: The Incredible Story of the Taxi Driver Allegedly Taken by a Flying Saucer One or more space aliens traveling aboard a UFO were accused yesterday of being responsible for the disappearance of a La Plata cabbie. This was the statement made by the bewildered cab driver's spouse after the police spent nearly an entire day on a desperate search, fearing the driver might have been kidnapped by delinquents from this world and not another. "He phoned me from Quilmes and told me had been taken by a flying saucer," said the relieved wife, putting an end to the search which had at that point already been made known to the Buenos Aires ministry of Security. The event, in which prosecutor Marcelo Romero and judge Marcela Ines Garamendia were involved, was kicked off by an urgent notice received at the 6th Sheriff's office of this locality, reporting the disappearance of the driver aboard a Duna-make taxi whose registration and medallion number are being kept confidential. Immediately, police forces launched a search that included inquiries to various hospitals and prompted an urgent notice to the Buenos Aires Ministry of Security, which is involved in kidnapping cases. Amid the considerable tension arising from the possibility that the cab driver could have been abducted by criminals, police officers from the 6th Sheriff's office, headed by Sheriff Oscar Desiderio, found the Duna taxi cab the man had been driving at 6:45 hrs. The vehicle was in Zone 1, between 519 and 520, with the driver's side door open. This heightened fears that the cabbie could have been the victim of a serious crime. The desperate search for the alleged kidnap victim was halted around 15:45 hrs. yesterday when the vanished taxi driver's wife returned to the 6th Sheriff's office, announcing that moments earlier her husband had phoned her from the city of Quilmes where -- said the wife -- he driver had been taken by "extraterrestrials" The woman stated that her husband assured her that the previous evening, while driving along Zone 1 between 519 and 520, he was "sucked up" by a blinding light and taken to a "flying saucer". The cabbie's wife did not offer any details of what befell her husband during his stay aboard the spacecraft nor the treatment he received from the space aliens. She said that this was not the first time that an episode of this nature had befallen her spouse, according to other stories he had already told her to justify other sudden "disappearances" When questioned about this, the woman replied that -- according to her husband's stories -- the aliens would sometimes abduct him for "three or four days" and that "upon being released" the driver had "a strong smell of wine" about him. According to police and court sources, after ending her statement, the wife asked that the record show that "she no longer believes her husband much" in view of the repeat abductions he claims to have suffered at the hands of extraterrestrials.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:23:23 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:58:15 -0500 Subject: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:21:10 -0800 From: T. Peter Park <tpeterpark.nul> To: fort.nul Subj: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies For years, I have been puzzled by a childhood fear I had of flower fairies in a Swedish children's book. I sometimes almost half-suspect I might have had some sort of "Close Encounter III"! I lived in Sweden from ages 3 to 7, in 1944-1948, after my parents and I fled from Estonia during World War II, and before coming to the United States in August, 1948. In 1946 or 1947, before deciding to move with us to America, my father bought me a classic Swedish children's reading book, Vill Du L=E4sa? ("Do You Want to Read?") by Elsa Beskow and Herman Siegvald, first published by the Swedish scholarly and educational publishing firm Bonnier in 1935 and re-issued many times since then in successive editions. Richly and often beautifully illustrated, Vill Du L=E4sa included alphabet jingles, poems, and stories on roughly a first and second grade level. At ages 6-7, I just LOVED to pore over the book, which I still have and sometimes look at--except for one section! One story in Vill Du L=E4sa? dealt with flower-fairies with names like Tussilago, Bl=E5sippan, Vitsippan, Krokrot, and V=E5rl=F5k-- typical Swedish flowers' names. It was richly decorated with colorful drawings of those flower-fairies, in a style reminiscent of Kate Greenaway and Arthur Rackham, showing cute diminutive hop-on-my-thumb humanoids. The story and its illustrations were meant to be sweet, innocent, and endearing. However, for some unaccountable reason, I instead found them very scary at ages 6-7. I usually just skipped over that section of the book--though at times I also stared at the pictures with a frightened fascination. My odd reaction to the flower-fairies has often puzzled me in later years. WHY should they have been so frightening to me at that age? At times, I have almost wondered if I might perhaps had a "Close Encounter" with something the flower-fairies reminded me of, and a "Missing Time" episode that nobody around me ever noticed? However, many other stories in the book and their illustrations also depict elves, gnomes, and dwarfs--which never scared me and which on the contrary I actually enjoyed! For instance, one picture in Vill Du L=E4sa? shows a small boy picking berries in the woods who encounters a little gnome about 6 inches tall holding a long staff and wearing a long pointed stocking cap on his head. Looking at it again today, I found the drawing VERY reminiscent of the 6-inch-tall "petit bonhomme" encountered in April 1945 by a French priest gathering mushrooms in the countryside near Ren=E8ve in C=F4te-d'Or, Burgundy. THAT picture never bothered me--though it is in fact a very realistic rendition of the sort of 6- to 12-inch-tall "Mini-Men" amply recorded in the Fortean literature--e.g., the 1945 Ren=E8ve "petit bonhomme," the little man less than 12 inches tall seen walking across a neighbor's yard by a Canby, Oregon woman in April 1950, the 8-inch-tall white-clad entities seen by four schoolboys and a policeman under a bridge over a dry riverbed near Ibagu=E9, Colombia in 1973, and the little man the size of a Coke bottle seen two weeks apart in October 1976 by a little boy and a young woman in Dunn, NC--diminutive humanoids that I discussed in my talk at the November 6-7 Bordentown, NJ UFO Congress. Yet, the Vill Du L=E4sa? flower-fairies DID scare me! I sometimes wonder how many seemingly inexplicable or arbitrary childhood fears and phobias might be due to repressed and consciously forgotten "Close Encounters" with--SOMETHING? Did I myself, perhaps, by any chance, encounter BOTH "nice" and "nasty" SOMETHINGS in unrecognized, unnoticed "Missing Time" episodes, leading to very different emotional responses to different "wee folks" drawings? Some people, by the way, I understand, have experienced similar childhood fears of clowns, a phenomenon noted in some discussions of "Phantom Clowns" in vans trying to abduct children. A few years later, by the way, as an 8 or 9-year-old in America in 1949-1950, I remember being "spooked" by two sets of inexplicably scary pictures in some National Geographic Magazine back issues. I found something scary in frescoes of saints with haloes and big staring eyes in an article on the early Christian shrines and monastic hermitages in rocky outcroppings in Cappadocia in Asia Minor (now Turkey). I was similarly "spooked" by the long wavy snake-like hair and similarly big staring eyes of Minoan women in wall paintings of the palace of Knossos in an article on the ancient Minoan civilization of Crete. The Cappadocian saints and Minoan women, I think, came closer to what some people these days might call a "Gray" archetype or
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:00:46 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:01:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:13:33 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 21:12:28 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' Hello, Stan, Dick, and All, I don't want to add any fuel to the fire, but I think, Stan, that you deserve public thanks for this well documented answer on the medical qualification of Dr Roger Leir. Good research job! Now, let's keep calling him "Dr Leir", and not "sub-Doctor" or "small Doctor", or I don't know what. Another personal critic has been made about the announcement on his web site of a rather expensive tour in Egypt, in which he is to be one of the speakers. I asked him about that, and his answer is simple and clear to me: "I have been asked to speak at a conference in Egypt which has now been postponed until September. They are only taking 40 people on this all inclusive tour of the pyramids and other spots in Egypt. The entire package is around, $3500. This includes everything from transportation, meals and hotels. The group that is putting on the conference asked if I could let them put a link on my site. The answer was yes. I don't get anything out of this. They were paying all my expenses prior to any link on my site. There have been numerous people who have already signed up and now there is a fight for the remaining space. To criticize me for letting them have this on my site is really SICK." The good thing to do would habe been to ask him first. I wish to discuss a bit more the question raised by Dick Hall, of "peer reviewed" publications. I already made the remark that it must be hard to obtain such a publication on any Ufo matter. Except, of course, for psycho-sociological "explanations" of Ufos : of that, we are not in short supply ! I ask around : does anyone know of a peer reviewed article, positive on the reality of Ufos, in an important scientific publication ? I don't think we should count here the "Journal of Scientific Exploration", which is not, I suppose, an important, mainstream publication. I am ready to bet that there is none. The reason for that, we all know it very well. Ufo's, for the time being, are still unacceptable for mainstream science. I came across an interesting article in the "New York Review of Books", which seems relevant to this discussion : "Dishonesty in Science", by Richard Lewontin (Nov 18, 2004). In it, he presents two publications : A report by the Union of Concerned Scientists (Febr 2004) called "Scientific Integrity in Policymaking : An investigation into the Bush Administration's Misuse of Science" ; and a book by Horace Freeland Judson, called : "The Great Betrayal : Fraud in Science". The report denounces "Manipulation, distorsion, and suppression of scientific findings in the interest of industries" which "have affected results on climate change, on mercury emissions and other pollutants, on airborne bacteria, on endangered species and forest management". And Judson's book discusses fraud of three sorts : fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. The article of Lewontin gives several exemples of that kind of problems, in spite of denials, such as the one made by a former editor of "Science", the "Journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science", that "we must recognize that 99.9999 percent of reports are accurate and truthful". Not an accurate statement, says Lewontin ! Yes, there is a lot of manipulation, even in the field of science. The relevant point is, I think, that ufology is confronted with a vast structure of scientific research and publishing, with very tough competition. For a scientist, it is vital to be published for his career, and who wants to burn his hands with a hot potatoe like Ufos ? The very few people who dared ran into trouble. John Mack nearly lost his post at Harvard. And I can safely say that is even worse in France, with its pyramidal science structure. So what about a study on alien implants ? Not a chance to be published ! Roger Leir tells in his books that John Alexander and Robert Bigelow, in their initial NIDS agreement, promised to have an article published in a peer rewied publication, but of course this did not happened. They could do that, and probably did not even tried. Even more, may be they did not want to. An indication of that is in the wording the NIDS report. They dont even mention the name Los Alamos National Laboratory, just "a national laboratory". By the way, it is not correct to say that they found nothing. In the LANL report received and published by Leir in his book, it says that, yes, they did not find unusual properties, but that more studies had to be done. So, NIDS and Colonel Alexander had another study made, at New Mexico Tech. Again, it is not correct to say that nothing of interest was found there. See Leir's book. Other laboratory studies should be mentioned, but let's stop
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO From: j smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:41:53 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:24:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:21:17 -0500 >Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO Report >I know that there are gas flames in the direction the FLIR was >looking and I know that each platform can have several flares. >However,I also know that it isn't sufficient to say that there >were gas flames in the direction they were looking and that >proves all the light were gas flames. What would be sufficient >would be to match up exactly more than half of the FLIR lights >with specific flames. Yes, but to try to do this requires good locational data on the gas flares. Also, while matching >50% of the lights is good, it is best to match the various qualities of the light patterns as well. My showing how the lights "split" between 17:06:36 to 17:07:18 is due to one oil flare "moving" from behind another (due to aircraft movement) is a significant correlating test result. That there are general matches of flare lights patterns with the FLIR images is very significant. Of course, given what I have read about UFOs exhibiting intelligent interaction, maybe they are just pretending to be the oil flare lights to spook the airplane crew and the oil flare lights are really to the left and behind a cloud (I hope it doesn't get so complicated to analyze UFO data, good grief!). >As I pointed out in the appendix there is some agreement... and >some disagreement. After I spent hours trying to locate a >"perfect" match I essentially "threw up my hands in despair" >because I knew I shouldn't have to be doing this. Yes it is difficult. But you must start with good oil flare location data which I took great pains to get, and then using a 3 D model then becomes feasible. >I knew, also, that the answer would be "simple" to determine if >the Mexican DOD would do the flight experiment I requested or >re-fly the 5 March flight. That is why I wrote in the paper that >it is essentially incomplete until an experiment is done. >Franz tried to do something like it, but I guess he was not able to. Although he did not match the exact distance and direction, he gathered good matching imagery. >Franz's photos do confirm that there is a reflection in the >water below a fire which might explain the dim images below the >"twins". Significant. >I, of course, am well aware of your work. What you have done >makes the oil field hypothesis for many of not all the lights >plausible. This helps in "horizontal correlation" between the >fires and the FLIR lights. It would be even better if we had >fire height information for all the platforms so that we could >get "vertical correlation" as well. But the best would be a FLIR >picture of the oil field from a point 100 miles southeast of the >oil field and from an altitude of 2miles. Yes, it would be nice to have this data. But it can be obtained from other sources if you have credentials. Contact Villasenor R. who wrote in 2003. =E2=80=9CAn air quality emission inventory of offshore operations for the exploration and production of petroleum by the Mexican oil industry,=E2=80=9D (Atmospheric Environment, August, vol. 37, no. 26 , pp. 3713-3729(17)) and describes a database he has of all oil flare locations and heights. I would think your credentials should be enough to get this data. You may contact him at: Av. Platanales 252-5 Col. Nueva Santa Maria, 02800, Mexico, DF, Mexico. Tel.: +52-5333-6909 email: rvillase.nul >If you can identify specific FLIR light images with specific gas >burnoff flames, then please let me know and I'll test your >suggestion against the FLIR images. As I wrote in my web page, the "Twins" were not easy to match (pick any Twins light image, e.g. 17:03:46). They may be two single flare oil platform flares at 92 deg, 3 min, 5.2 sec and 19 deg, 26 min, 36.5 sec and 92 deg, 1 min, 56. sec and 19 deg, 25 min, 50.6 sec. OR they may be some new oil platform that did not show up on the old Landsat image I had. For the string of lights best shown at 17:06:53, the best oil platform flare candidates are AKAL-J 92 deg, 4 min, 44.06 sec and 19 deg, 25 min, 27.3 sec 92 deg, 4 min, 42.4 sec and 19 deg, 25 min, 44.9 sec 92 deg, 4 min, 44.51 sec and 19 deg, 25 min, 34.2 sec 92 deg, 4 min, 44.2 sec and 19 deg, 25 min, 31.26 sec AKAL-C 92 deg, 2 min, 34.68 sec and 19 deg, 23 min, 46.29 sec 92 deg, 2 min, 34.41 sec and 19 deg, 23 min, 50.22 sec 92 deg, 2 min, 34.15 sec and 19 deg, 23 min, 53.2 sec
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Secrecy News -- 01/06/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:02:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:46:31 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/06/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 2 January 6, 2005 ** GONZALES CONFIRMATION HEARING BEGINS ** BIBLIOGRAPHY OF EGYPTIAN NUCLEAR RESEARCH ** TABLES OF OPERATIONAL MILITARY SATELLITES ** A CATALOG OF AIR FORCE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS ** SOME MORE NEW CRS REPORTS ** NEW DOE ORDER ON COUNTERINTELLIGENCE ** NEW ARMY REGULATION ON SPELLING GONZALES CONFIRMATION HEARING BEGINS The confirmation hearing of Alberto R. Gonzales, nominated to be the next Attorney General, began today before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), a leading critic of the nomination, noted his concerns about Gonzales in an opening statement: "As White House Counsel, Judge Gonzales was at the center of discussions on the applicability of the Geneva Conventions to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the legality of detention and interrogation methods that have been seen as tantamount to torture. He oversaw the formulation of this Administration's extreme views of unfettered executive power and unprecedented government secrecy." "I hope things will be different if you are confirmed, Judge Gonzales," Leahy added wistfully. For now, things are the same. The White House told Senator Leahy that it would not provide various documents he had requested related to Gonzales' activities as White House Counsel, nor would it claim executive privilege to justify their withholding. "As you know," wrote Deputy White House Counsel David G. Leitch, "it is generally not the practice of this or prior Administrations to provide all documents requested by a Member of Congress where those documents contain highly deliberative or Presidential communications. By longstanding practice, no claim of executive privilege is necessary to decline to produce such documents in response to such a request." Many of the documents related to Mr. Gonzales' role in developing policy on prisoner interrogation, obtained by the Washington Post and other publications, have been compiled by the National Security Archive and posted here: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB127/ The liberal Center for American Progress proposed ten questions that should be asked of Mr. Gonzales as part of his confirmation, including "Are there any circumstances under which you believe the President of the United States could legally authorize torture?": http://tinyurl.com/3mrtx BIBLIOGRAPHY OF EGYPTIAN NUCLEAR RESEARCH The International Atomic Energy Agency is investigating previously undisclosed nuclear experiments performed in past decades by Egyptian scientists, it was reported this week. Egypt is not expected to become a nuclear weapons state in the foreseeable future, according to a 1995 report of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). "At the same time, however, serious work on developing nuclear potential designated for use in power engineering, agriculture, medicine, biotechnology, and genetics is being done...," the SVR stated. Interestingly, the current IAEA investigation was reportedly triggered by a series of publications by Egyptian scientists. A listing of many such publications is available in "Egyptian Nuclear Bibliography: Open Literature Citations Through 2001," prepared by independent analyst Mark Gorwitz: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/egypt/nuke/biblio.pdf TABLES OF OPERATIONAL MILITARY SATELLITES A tabulation of U.S., Russian and other military satellites now in orbit, including several that are not officially acknowledged, has been published by GlobalSecurity.org. The Tables of Operational Military Satellites, prepared by John Pike and Ted Molczan based on published data and personal observation, are posted here: http://tinyurl.com/4pbgp The recent flap over a classified stealth satellite program is probed by Leonard David in "Spy satellite debate comes out in the open," MSNBC (Space.com), January 3, 2005: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6782264/ A CATALOG OF AIR FORCE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS A massive listing of classified or otherwise restricted historical documents held by the Air Force Historical Research Agency is in the process of being made publicly available online, courtesy of TheMemoryHole.org. The listing, which includes more than half a million individual records dating from the 1920s to the 1980s, was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. The document titles and metadata, compiled in large Excel files, are typically not very revealing. But the list as a whole is a potentially important new resource for students of military history. See the introduction to "Listing of Classified and Restricted Documents at the Air Force Historical Research Agency" here: http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/afhra/ SOME MORE NEW CRS REPORTS New or newly updated reports of the Congressional Research Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following: "Special Operations Forces (SOF) and CIA Paramilitary Operations: Issues for Congress," January 4, 2005: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RS22017.pdf "Data Mining: An Overview," updated December 16, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31798.pdf "Saudi Arabia: Terrorist Financing Issues," updated December 8, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32499.pdf "Interstate Travel: Constitutional Challenges to the Identification Requirement and Other Transportation Security Regulations," updated December 21, 2004: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32664.pdf "Afghanistan: Post-War Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy," updated December 28, 2004: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL30588.pdf "Radiological Dispersal Devices: Select Issues in Consequence Management," updated December 7, 2004: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/RS21766.pdf NEW DOE ORDER ON COUNTERINTELLIGENCE The Department of Energy has issued a new Order governing the conduct of its counterintelligence activities. See DOE Order 475.1, "Counterintelligence Program," approved December 10, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/doe/o475_1.pdf NEW ARMY REGULATION ON SPELLING The U.S. Army is moving to get its orthographic house in order, with a newly updated regulation that provides instruction on the proper way to abbreviate, capitalize and spell Army terms. See Army Regulation 25-52, "Authorized Abbreviations, Brevity Codes, and Acronyms," updated January 4, 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ar25-52.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Before The Beginning - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:16:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:50:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Before The Beginning - Maccabee >Source: Astrobiology Magazine >http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid= 1373&mode=threadℴ=0&thold=0 >.01-05-05 >Before the Beginning Stellar Evolution Summary : > >Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin Rees discusses the limits to our >knowledge of what might have preceded the big bang. Everyong >asks the question, what was there the instant before everything >came to be, but the question may not go as deep as the answers >it spawns. >Before The Beginning >Interview with Sir Martin Rees, Part 2 >Helen Matsos >Britain's Astronomer Royal, Martin Rees, took time from his >busy schedule to talk with Astrobiology Magazine's Chief Editor >and Executive Producer, Helen Matsos. His three-part interview >considers a broad range of alternative planetary futures, while >highlighting today's changes in one of the oldest sciences, >astronomy. <snip> >HM: So here it comes Professor Rees, my favorite slumber party >question: What happened before the big bang? >MR: (laughs) People always ask, "What happened before the big >bang?" We certainly can't answer that question, because we have >to worry about what the question might actually mean. One of the >most popular ideas by physicists is that when you extrapolate >back to the very beginning, we have to jettison many of our >common sense ideas about space and time. Maybe it's no longer >the case that space has just three important dimensions and time >just ticks away. >That makes the early universe more complicated to analyze. If >you don't have a clear idea of clocks ticking away, the idea of > >a direction of time - a "before" and "after" - doesn't have any >clear meaning. Some form of memory must exist in order to recall what was to compare with the present and realize that things changed and "time passed." If nothing ever changed... would there be time? Maybe, but nothing and no being would be aware of it. But it is not sufficient to have things change if there is no memory because without memory nothing or no "being" would realize things changed. Of course, there must be a means for detecting change if it occurs. Inertia is a form of "stupid memory"... an object traveling
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 10:26:06 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 08:55:14 -0500 Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings Release Date: January 4, 2005 Humarock, Massachusetts Large Bright Pink Sphere Date: January (possibly February) of l997 Time: 11:30 p.m. As to the other sighting, it happened in January (possibly February) of l997. It was the first UFO sighting I have had. (The second was the one I just described.) Nothing since then as I don't get out much at night (!) (I have a feeling if I did, I would have seen a few more by this time.) This one was interesting to me because I have read (on either links from the Rense site or maybe in the monthly information on your site posted to Jeff's) of the same sighting from two different sources. Two different women, unknown to each other and probably still unaware of each other's sighting saw what sounds like the same UFO I saw. (Unfortunately, I wouldn't begin to know where I came across either sighting but I'm quite sure I read them in two different places and they weren't the same sighting.) This UFO seemed very close (maybe 100 feet away is my guess.) I was driving across a small bridge at 11:30 p.m. as I always did, after a long day's work and was about five minutes from the house. Just as I was almost across the bridge, a large bright pink sphere (of what looked like glowing gases - the way the sun might look close up, like a circle filled with helium) caught my attention out the driver's window. I remember hearing myself exclaim out loud, "What's that?" while I put my foot on the brake and rolled down the window simultaneously for a closer look. As I did so, the ball of pink gases shot straight up into the clouds ( I noticed the pink reflection on them) and disappeared. I'm guessing the entire sighting lasted about eight seconds. The same pink sphere is what I think the other two women I mentioned may have seen. I remember it vividly. There was no haze around it and it had a solid circumference. It was about the size of my fist at arm's length and was stationary about 30 degrees above the water before it took off rapidly straight up after I noticed it. The night was pitch black save for the cloud layer higher up which the glowing sphere passed though as it disappeared.) I think it was a few weeks (shortly before or after) that that the island had lost electricity one night but it could easily have been due to a winter storm (high winds) as the area is a bit remote, especially in the winter. (It's actually pretty much one large sand spit with a couple hundred summer cottages.) Thank you to the witness for the report. ----------------------- Bloomington Indiana Morphing Object Date: Early 2004 Time: Approx. 3:00 a.m. Hello Brian, I was reading your yahoo post and this article http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2192 and the report caught my attention, I'm including a few images I caught on film in early 2004, over our house in Bloomington Indiana. It was approx. 3:00 am, the images you will see the two eye looking, one Morphed into the final picture and shot off into the sky at a high rate of speed, if you want to use them or fwd them to the person in the above article feel free, I would be interested if this is what he seen. Have a great day. Thank you to the witness for sending along the photos. Photos are c. 2005 Mark Evans, AAARC Photos can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2219 -------------------- Western Australia Orbs ? Brian this photo I have attached I took last after my wife called me out to witness the weirdest cloud formation. I took about 7 photo=92s on my Canon S40 digital camera so if you want to look at more I have them. The picture although it=92s a weird formation also has some interesting Orb=92s although they are probably lighting anomalies they showed up in most of the photo=92s and had moved relative to the center of lens. Thank you to the person for the report and images. Photos can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D22 23 ---------------------- Ahland, New Hampshire Two Object Playing Leap Frog Date: November 6, 2004 Time: 5:30 p.m. Number of witnesses: 1 Number of objects: 5 Shape of objects: Possibly ovoid. Full Description of event/sighting: Just as I was exiting Rte. 93 North at the Ashland exit, two objects caught my attention in the now dark sky. They seemed to take turns blinking on and on so that when one blinked off, the other would blink on and they appeared to "leap frog" each other from left to right as they moved from about a 45 degree angle down to a thirty degree angle within a ten second time frame. There also seemed to be a black component to the shiny white flashes as well. My conscious mind wants to say "two helicopters" flying into the night but the subconscious isn't convinced. After the two (?) objects abruptly disappeared into the (possibly some thin clouds) after about three blinks off and on each. something else caught my attention in the upper right hand corner of my windshield: One by one in quick succession appeared what looked like three mid-sized stars, in a string reminiscent of Orion's belt. They were approximately 60 degrees above the horizon and not so far apart that one couldn't identify a pattern. After the third "star" blinked on, all three blinked out simultaneously. There were no other "stars" of any kind or clouds that far up. I'm assuming that both sightings were related as the second took place just after the first disappeared and all within what seemed about a twelve second time frame. This was my second sighting. (the first was in another state and in January or February, 1997. I'm writing you about the more recent one now as it compares to the one I just read on the Rense site which had taken place also at 5:30 p.m. in British Columbia. (The objects were black and white also.) Additional Information: Hello Brian, In answer to your email as of an hour or so ago, the sightng (see Subject above) that caught my attention was the one just recently posted to the rense site. The description of the objects seemed to resemble what I saw (shiny white with a deep black.) I'm not a phsycist, but the intensity of the white versus black with the absence of any other colors makes me think that there is a very scienific explanation for these particular "colors" as though the objects were moving in a "non- appplication" mode (ie "turned off") The sighting took place above a rather long plain and there were no mountians around (just a few low-lying hills.) There are no airports nearby either. Not much of anything, really. The only interesting feature of the area is (Ashland) is exactly in the geographical middle of New Hampshire (and anyone living there is well aware of the fact.) This is the only reason I can come up with for the sighting at this location. The subsequent appearance of the three "stars" became even more interesting when I noticed mention of the same (but in Maine) just this evening on an intro on your website. (Unfortunately, I currently have Internet access only via WebTV which could not access that particular item.) Do you know the one I mean? That's the first time I ever saw (or read) of a three "star" display. If they are meant to be a "sign", again all I can think of is the Pyramids of Giza (or Orion's belt or sword.) I'm amazed that someone else saw this same display earlier in Maine (that's where I'm from.) Do you know where in Maine they saw it? Thank you to the witness for the report. -------------------------- South Webster, Ohio Antifreeze Green Maybe Blue Green Object Date: December 24th, 2004 Time: 700 p.m. On the evening of December 24th, 2004 at 7 p.m., eastern standard time, I walked out of my house to bring in my cat for the night. As I was walking out heading southeast in the yard, I noticed in the direct southeast what looked like at first sight to be a star falling 90=B0 down to the earth. It fell in one to three seconds. It was antifreeze green maybe blue green. I distinctly noticed and mentally noted at that moment that there was no trail. I have seen large meteors and small ones; they had trails. I always look up because I am an amateur astronomer and photographer. This object was about the size of a -1 magnitude star; about the size of Venus on a good night, but it was blue green. The other thing I noticed that was interesting was that the moon was nearly full and the sky was cloudless. The night sky was very bright because the moon was high in the sky. This object that I observed was about 40=B0 high in the sky when I first noticed it. I am in southern Ohio and it would put this object over Africa or maybe the Indian Ocean or somewhere abouts in this region based on what I know about where the moon is when it rises in the east. It can be directly over Africa and be hanging in the lower eastern sky in Ohio. The moon was about 60=B0 high to the east of this object in the east. I also remembered hearing on the a.m. radio of an asteroid scheduled to hit the earth but later discovered it was for the year 2029. I also heard something about this asteroid being so large that if it hit the ocean, it would cause a tsunami. So, I thought, if I hear of a tsunami on Christmas Day then it was an asteroid perhaps. I obviously got the 2029 asteroid and tsunami confused with what I thought was a prediction for an asteroid this week. Anyway, this is what I saw and my thoughts at the time and I believe it is my duty to report this sighting. Thank you to the witness for the report. ----------------------- NSW Australia, Coffs Harbour Deep Orange Pulsating Lights Date: December 31, 2004 Time: 9:20 p.m. - 9: 55 p.m. Number of witnesses: 4 Number of objects: 8-10 Shape of objects: Glowing lights, Deep Orange Pulsating Lights. Dear Brian. My family and I witnessed a strange light in the sky tonight. We were attending the annual new years eve fireworks display as we do every year and as per usual could not find a suitable vantage point to sit back and enjoy the display. After an hour of searching we eventually found a reasonably secluded road behind a large sporting field, parked and waited for the 9:30 show to begin. After the fireworks began I noticed a bright, deep orange light to the right of car about 45 degrees in the sky. It was slightly larger than a normal star. After a few minutes I noticed that it was rising very slowly, I could see this using telephone wires as a point of reference. As it got higher in the sky it began pulsing on and off in time with each fireworks explosion. That's when we all got out of the car to watch it. Every time a firework lit up the sky the light would dim right out...then slowly brighten back up. All this time it was moving across the sky and getting closer to the fireworks area. That's when we could see a faint shape attached to the light. It was too far away to see but we could all make it out. The shape was about three times the size of the light. It seemed to pass directly over the fireworks area and head out towards the sea. By this time the fireworks display sent up it's last few starburst rockets. As they went off we saw multiple orange lights maybe 8-10 all flash together. This was not part of the fireworks explosion as these lights went on and off multiple times in exactly the same position of the sky where the first object was headed. My whole family can't stop talking about whatever it was....I think they enjoyed the UFO more than the Fireworks. Additional Information: Hi Brian. First up I'll try to answer your questions. Q. - How long you were able to observe the light for A. - The whole event lasted 15 minutes. Q. - Also can you tell me what the weather conditions were that evening? A. - No wind, clear sky, no clouds. Q. - In what part of the sky was the UFO located? North, South, East, West? On the horizon or straight overhead or somewhere in between? Which direction did it head off to ? A. - The object first appeared stationary about 2 o'clock above the horizon in the West. It then moved upwards to about 12 o'clock and began moving East in a straight line out to sea. Q. - Were you able to see any aircraft in the area when this was taking place ? A. - No other aircraft were in the area. We phoned the airport/coast guard/paper to confirm this the next day. Q. - Are you aware of anyone else seeing this ? A. - No one else reported sighting the object other than the four of us. Q. - Can you please tell me what shape you saw ? A. - It was hard to make out but my daughter and I both thought it was triangular. (see pic) Q. - If there is anything else that comes to mind, please write it in. A. - Only that we are amazed at the amount of people that were there on the night that no-one else saw it. This could be due to the fact that we chose a different vantage point to watch the fireworks than anyone else. Where we were parked there were no other cars or people watching. I also got the feeling that these objects were observing the display. Especially at the end when they all flashed in sync...it looked like they were putting in there own light show for us. Seeing I have a background in animation I have re-created EXACTLY what we witnessed on the night. The behavior of the object it EXACT. I have included some animation and some pictures. Amazing Animations can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D22 32 "fig01" - Is an exact 3D recreation of the playing field area where we were parked. "fig02" - Object flight path and area detail. "fig03" - Reconstructed view from my window looking to the west where the object first appeared. This is EXACTLY what I first saw. Just under the power lines and it remained stationary for about 5 minutes. "fig04" - This is what the fuzzy shape looked like that appeared above the light. This was only visible as it approached the carnival area. Maybe it was lower in the sky at this stage and picking up some ambient lighting. "multiple objects flash.avi" - This is an animation of how the multiple objects flashed after the singular object disappeared over the horizon in their direction. "re-creation.avi" - This is a 3D animation of exactly what we saw on the night. I re-built the entire area in 3D. Took me all day to do it but I had to get the experience out of my head. All Graphics =A9 2005 David Knight (Please respect this copyright) ! Thank you very much to the witness for the report. ---------------------- San Carlos, California One Light Changing Into A Pyramid Shape Date: January 1, 2005 Time: 3:30 a.m. to 4:30 a.m. Number of witnesses: 1 Number of objects: 1-3 Shape of objects: Round lights. Full Description of event/sighting: I was staying at a house in San Carlos, California doing an overnight pet sit for this cute little dog named Bear, and the family room where I was sleeping has double sliding glass doors which go out onto a deck, and beyond the deck is a canyon that is very dark at night. However, I never see any stars in the sky, probably because the area in general has street lights and is somewhat in the vicinity of the San Francisco airport. Anyway, this dog I take care of has never barked. So it definitely was strange when at about 3:30 a.m. I woke up abruptly to her yelping in fear and running up the stairs. I got up and looked out onto the deck. Nothing was there and there was nothing in the sky either, so I called Bear several times. She wouldn't come downstairs at first, which was odd to me. Finally she came down and I opened up the sliding glass door in case she needed to go to the bathroom, but she didn't seem to need to do that. So I went back onto the couch where I had been sleeping. About 10 minutes later I looked out the window to see a white light in the sky. It was the only light in the sky. It looked like a bright star or a satellite low in the sky, but it was a little brighter than that. I thought it might be a plane, but planes never come in from that angle, and this light was stationary. I stared at it for about 5 minutes and then it disappeared all of a sudden. That caught my attention so I got up and went up to the sliding glass doors. I could see a faint line of fog coming in over the hills behind the canyon, and I figured it must have covered up the light. Then I looked over to the right and there was the light! Same brightness, same intensity, in the same altitude of the sky that the other light had been. So I sat down at the sliding door and stared at it, trying to figure out what it was. Then it changed from one light to three lights, in a pyramid shape. I was wondering if my eyes were playing tricks on me or something. I looked next to me and Bear was looking up at that light too, completely transfixed. I gazed at this light for about 10 minutes, and it kept morphing from one light to three lights every so often, back and forth. Then the fog overtook it and so I went back to bed. I have no idea what it could be that would morph back and forth from one to three lights like that, completely stationary, so I thought I would contact you to see if you shed some light on this for me. Do you have any ideas of what this could have been? Thank you to the witness for this report. --------------------- Ucluelet On Vancouver Island Glowing Green Disk Shaped UFO Date: January 2, 2005 Happy New Year and Greetings, Hi, Brian Vike this is a second time I notice UFO on webcam. This is a long sighting and I have all the pictures and exact location of the webcam with map and reference objects in separate pictures. This sighting happened during morning hours of January 2, 2005, at time of the sunrise with ceiling unlimited and temperature around 3 degrees Celsius. The location of this sighting is at 48=B0 55' N 125=B0 32' W, Amphitrite Point lighthouse near the town of Ucluelet in Vancouver Island, near the Port Albion. Number of witnesses is not known but I expect anybody in that area would have seen it. The webcam is directed towards the South East. There is no need for any enhancement because the UFO is completely viewable and seems to be coming down towards the ground because it is getting bigger and bigger as next 30 minutes of photos show. There is a huge green glow to the UFO. The Glow around the UFO gets bigger as approaches the webcam. I am not able to pinpoint its exact size, but I have a reference picture which might help you calculate it. The duration of this sighting from when it was first noticed until its glow was last distinguishable was 3 hours later. Therefore, I believe it was hovering in that area. No trails of smoke were seen. The object seems to be using magnetic propulsion system because of its amazing glow, its hovering mode and no smoke trail. The UFO started from flying above Barkley Sound and came closer to Amphitrite Point and somehow changed direction and started going towards Spring Cove and fish processing plant nearby, very slowly. This a sequence of photos taken every 30 minutes starting at 16:30 UTC or 08:30 PST each of files are name starting with UTC clock underscore PST clock. These pictures were downloaded from Environment Canada=92s website which is WeatherOffice.ec.gc.ca official online-presence for meteorological information and public forecasts. There are 3 maps and one reference photo of this area. The last file is the file of all the sightings saved from Environment Canada=92s website to show that these pictures are credible, and the duration sighting was 3 hours. Thank you, and Have Great New Year. Thank you to the person for the report and images. ------------------ Surrey B.C. Triangular Star Formation Date: January 03, 2005 Time: Approx: 8:00 and 10:00 p.m. Last night was really clear and cold so I was looking around at approx. 20:00 and noticed a triangular star formation near where I saw those lights flash on and off the other night. One of the stars was really bright so I aimed my camera at the formation and just left it running as usual. 40 X with the night vision on. When I played it back I noticed the bright star seemed to be rotating, so I used the built in zoom to magnify it to about 200 X. or 5 times the optical zoom of the lens. Anyway when I freeze framed the image I saw a white ball of light with 4 greyish oval objects grouped around it ( It looked very similar to what I attempted to draw ) 3 grouped close together and the other offset. The white light was reflected off the oval objects. Going one frame at a time showed the oval grey objects to be rotating around the light. Giving the impression at normal speed that the whole object was rotating. I meant to copy it to VHS but forgot and recorded over the entire tape. Around 22:00 I was just panning around the sky looking for anything unusual and found either the same star or one very similar but when I zoomed in and froze the frame found it to have only two of those oval grey objects, directly opposed to each other and rotating around the central light. Also found several of those flashing multi coloured stars or what ever they are. Very pretty when viewed one frame at a time but they are old hat now. Those lights with the oval objects are something new for me. Thank you to the witness for the report. Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 2189 email: hbccufo.nul Website: http://www.hbccufo.org HBCC UFO RESEARCH Newsletter At: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HBCC_UFO_Newsletter/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 18:26:50 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:42:48 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 >Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >>To: PROJECT-1947.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >>Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >>to know of it. >>..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >>of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >>advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >>more topics released than anyone else I know. >>Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the >>same. >I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped >by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. >These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on >each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary >for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: >ufo >unidentified flying object >flying saucer >unidentified >unconventional >Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row >numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there >is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the >documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection >of Korean War sightings. <snip> >I noticed a lot of amusing stuff,like Lindbergh getting a kill >in Korea and teaching pilots how to increase their flight range >by conserving gas. Lots of pictures or unidentified people and >locations, lots of unidentified aircraft (incoming) and so on. Just for the record, Lindbergh flew F4U and P-38 fighters on missions with Marine and Air Corps pilots in the South Pacific during World War II, not in Korea. On one mission he had a dogfight witha Japanese fighter while flying a P-38 and scored a kill. Imagine the change in technology from the Spirit of St. Louis in 1927 to the P-38 in 1944-45. It is true that he taught fighter pilots to use leaner gas mixtures and attain far longer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 UFO Dropped In On Mills 35 Years Ago From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:52:12 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:47:01 -0500 Subject: UFO Dropped In On Mills 35 Years Ago Source: The New York Mills Herald - New York Mills, Minnesota http://newyorkmills.com/account/index.cfm?user=login&return_page=/article.cfm?Ar ticle%5FID%3D1196 01-06-05 UFO Dropped In On Mills 35 Years Ago Kevin Cederstrom Editor An interesting email showed up in the Herald mailbox over the weekend. The message was somewhat mysterious in that it referred to a UFO sighting around New York Mills a long time ago, and the guy that sent the short story wants to remain anonymous. The emailer grew up in New York Mills and now lives in Seattle, but does not want his name attached to the UFO account because he still has family here and doesn't want them to be labeled as "odd". The brief description that follows is a first-hand account of a night 35 years ago and the author swears on a stack of Bibles the story is true. In 1969, my family lived on a farm in rural Minnesota a few miles from New York Mills (population 750 at the time). My family, including my father, mother, older brother, myself , and my younger brother, was driving home on a rural dirt road to our farm house near dusk (i.e. some time around 8:30 at night in July). We were heading down the dirt road that passes by our house when we saw a strange light emanating from behind our nearest neighbors' house. The light was brilliant. As we drove nearer we asked each other, "when did our neighbor install a spot light in their yard?" We approached our neighbors' house for about a mile and kept looking at the light, but did not understand why they had installed such a bright light in their yard. The road turns directly in front of their house. As we headed down the road, my brother, mother, and I kept our eyes focused on the light and we determined the light was not coming from their yard, but instead was coming from a craft/UFO hovering behind their house. After traveling for 200 yards, we turned again and all of us including my father could now see the saucer shaped craft hovering about 100 feet off the ground 100 yards behind the neighbors' house. The craft was a brilliant orange, metallic color and was 30-40 feet tall and 100-150 feet wide, and it was the classical saucer shaped craft. We then turned into our driveway and parked the car about 100 yards from the main road which left the craft hovering about 300 yards south from where we were parked. We all got out of the car and focused our attention on the craft. It continued to hover there 100 feet above the hill in the neighbor's farm field. There was absolutely no sound coming from the craft. The color was a brilliant fiery orange and it looked like there were windows on the upper half of the craft. The light from the craft appeared to have similar characteristics to heat rising from a hot road. We watched the craft from outside our house for about a minute and then went in the house because I believe our parents were worried for our safety. We went in the house and watched the craft hover above that hill for 15 minutes. After 15 minutes it descended and landed behind that hill. We could no longer see the craft, but there was a brilliant halo of light coming up from behind the hill. We watched the area for another 5 minutes and the craft ascended to about 100 feet above the hill again. It continued to hover there (300 yards south of our house) for another 15 minutes, but then flew away to the south and disappeared in the forest in a swampy area south of our farm. The encounter lasted for over 30 minutes and I still remember it vividly. After the craft left, my parents put us to bed and went to sleep themselves. My dad slept with a loaded hunting rifle on their bed. My parents never reported the incident because they thought people would think they were nuts. There were other sightings in the area around that time and the people that made reports were labeled as "odd". My parents never even talked with the neighbors about the encounter to see if they saw the craft which landed about 100 yards in back of their house. The witness to this sighting assures us what he saw was not swamp gas. If anyone else recalls this Close Encounter of the Mills Kind in 1969 I'd love to hear your story. Stories of Unidentified Flying Objects have captivated man's imagination and curiousity for centuries. What if we aren't the only liefeforms in this universe capable of building space traveling rocket ships and flying saucers? The mystery around Roswell, New Mexico has never really been cleared up and some swear the government is hiding alien bodies in pressure controlled canisters deep in the mountains. Maybe aliens did pay a visit to New York Mills back in 1969. Maybe they were on their way to The Cities and stopped off for a bathroom break, or to grab some fresh flatbread. If stored properly flatbread keeps for light years at a time - perfect for those long family trips in space. If that's the case I would think those same aliens (or direct descendents of that pioneering crew) would pay us another visit very soon. According to my calculations, New York Mills has to be coming up on the alien travel rotation in the next few years. Personally, I don't think I've ever seen a U.F.O. I may have somewhere down the line and never realized it at the time. I took a couple pulls on some White Lightning once and saw some pretty funky things flying through the air... maybe those bright blinking lights were from a flying saucer. Maybe I'm an alien, dropped on this planet millions of years ago to study the strange habits of Earthlings. Not likely. I think if aliens are smart enough to build space ships they're smart enough to send someone more qualified than me to collect data throughout the universe.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:51:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:50:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hebert >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. What it really boils down to is what those behind the phenomena want us to SEE and believe. We play right in to their hands by taking much of what is seen (intended for us to see) at face value and attempt to analyze accordingly. When we measure phenomena as 'phenomena', we get exactly what we look for. As long as this is the standard, nothing will or can change. As long as we perceive what we and others want us to see, we remain focused on a screen with only one channel.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:28:54 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:52:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>I was all impressed with ProjectHessdalen until I read THEIR >>>report on how they thought the phenomena was monitoring them and >>>not appearing when they were ready with their cameras, but >>>appearing when they weren't. <snip> >Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and >behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. <snip> What does it take to see whether the project had its cameras ready or not?? Just high-resolution stealth monitoring, just like the Russians do to avoid our satellite cameras. The Russians optically and radar track our intelligence satellites so that they can hide military developments so that the satellite cameras are not "ready." >Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. If this >is the case, then I have a real problem wondering why we bother >at all playing such a game. Do we have to jump through a little >hoop, balance a cracker on our nose or what to get a good >picture or data? Intelligence agencies already have an answer for that: Ever hear of "walk-ins"? These are defectors who "walk in" to our embassies abroad or wherever and offer up their services as spies, either to stay where they are and spy for us, or to flee their country and seek asylum. The problem is that the walk-in defector might be a double-agent sent to spy on us or to deceive us with carefully rigged disinformation (the true definition). US intelligence for a while had a long internal debate about whether to just blanket refuse all walk-ins (like your
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 18:26:50 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:55:38 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 >Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >>To: PROJECT-1947.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >>Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >>to know of it. >>..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >>of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >>advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >>more topics released than anyone else I know. >>Mike has asked me to pass this on and I ask that you all do the >>same. >I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped >by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. <snip> >I noticed a lot of amusing stuff, like Lindbergh getting a kill >in Korea and teaching pilots how to increase their flight range >by conserving gas. Lots of pictures or unidentified people and >locations, lots of unidentified aircraft (incoming) and so on. Just for the record, Lindbergh flew F4U and P-38 fighters on missions with Marine and Air Corps pilots in the South Pacific during World War II, not in Korea. On one mission he had a dogfight with a Japanese fighter while flying a P-38 and scored a kill. Imagine the change in technology from the Spirit of St. Louis in 1927 to the P-38 in 1944-45. It is true that he taught fighter pilots to use leaner gas mixtures and attain far longer
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: UFO Research Tools - Allan From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:37:34 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:48:56 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools - Allan >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 19:45:05 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO Research Tools >I would certainly like to add libraries and archives to the list >of important research tools.Old newspaper clippings about >Roswell have been very helpful; for example, proving that the >story wasn't just in the Roswell paper as claimed on that silly >Belzer program but was in PM papers from Chicago west. They also >proved that the contemporary comment about when the wreckage was >found ("Sometime last week"as noted on July 8 1947) was not June >14 as falsely claimed by the USAF to bolster that Mogul >nonsense. They also showed that there was a great deal of UFO >activity on Sept.12, 1952, the date of the Flatwoods Monster >case even though Dick Hall knows "Psychically, I presume" that >there wasn't any. Certainly libraries and archives are useful. Particularly if you want to show that the Roswell 'thing' was nothing but a light instrument that landed in the desert. No mention of any "crash", was there, Stan Friedman, in the newspapers of 1947? None at all! The press refer only to a light object of a few pounds weight . Also Stan, the date of its first discovery, is stated to be June 14. True, some of the accounts are vague on this and talk about "3 weeks previously", "sometime last week" or "a few days ago". Probably these are confusing the initial discovery date with the recovery date, which was obviously later. But I concede there is room for doubt. The UP teletypes also give conflicting discovery dates. The FBI teletype talks about the recovery date (July 8) but this also is wrong since civilians had recovered portions of it a few days earlier. However, press accounts which give a precise date for the discovery all give the same date, namely June 14. If you don't accept this, it is up to you to produce an account that gives a different precise date. I have seen a good many newspapers, and none do. And no, the AF did not plant that date in Brazel's head either. So please try and present both sides of the archival evidence in future. You seem to trust those press reports that quote 'facts' that fit your conclusions and distrust those that don't. A case of selective evidence, which flies in the face of your ten commandments.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 What Was In The Sky? From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:04:33 -0500 Subject: What Was In The Sky? Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html 01-05-05 What Was In The Sky? Hundreds of People Report Lights, Fireball, in Sky We've been taking calls from dozens of viewers all across the area, from Rib Falls, Plover, Marshfield, Merrill, Mole Lake, Antigo and everywhere in between, all describing the same thing: They tell us about 6:15 Tuesday night, the sky lit up followed by a loud rumble. Some describe a fast moving object that looked like a huge 4th of July firework or a ball of flames. Others say they felt their entire houses rumble. We've spent Tuesday evening trying to track down some answers, and the bottom line is we just don't know for sure exactly what it was. However, the Federal Aviation Administration tells us it wasn't any kind of a plane or aircraft. The FAA in Minneapolis is reporting the light in the sky was probably from a meteor. That's also what some area law enforcement agencies tell us. One thing everyone agrees on: it was a sight to behold. "It's probably the most incredible sight I've ever seen, a huge trail of light, ball of fire moving across the sky, I've seen a lot of things this was just an incredible sight," says Anne Hanzel. "Here I see this light it looks like a spotlight shining on me and I just started running �cause I was scared," says Dustin Genrich.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Suffolk Police Logs On Redlesham Incident From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 20:33:03 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:02:10 -0500 Subject: Suffolk Police Logs On Redlesham Incident The following URL has been passed on to me by Ian Ridpath. It may be of interest to UpDates readers with an interest in the Rendlesham case: http://www.suffolk.police.uk/Response/In+Touch/Library/Unusual+Lights+Incident+A t+Rendlesham.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Gehrman From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:08:44 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:08:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review - Gehrman >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 1:17 PM >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy Film Review >>The creature in the AA footage has one hole, no teeth, no >>umbilical cord and no secondary sexual features such as nipples, >>just as we might find in an evolved monotreme. >I disagree, Ed. The creature has what looks like prepubescent >human female sex organs. Monotremes have simple cloacal >openings like birds. Hi Bob, Yes, the creatures hole does look similar to the human female sex organ but not exactly. >We don't know if the creature has more than >one hole, because it is never shown from an angle that would >reveal an anal opening. The surgeons would have noted the other hole if there had been more than one opening. There's a microphone in the room and a stenographer behind the observation window and I'm sure this important detail would have been noticed and recorded. >Because the bellies on both creatures >that we have dissection films of are distended, possibly from >decomposition, whether there is an umbilicus is not clear. There are many good close-ups of the belly region and I've zoomed in on all of these and haven't found any evidence of an umbilicus. I think there would be some indication if it were present. >Yes there appear to be no nipples. Don't you think this is an important fact? >I think these things resemble >something cloned from human DNA with some genetic >engineering applied. I don't agree. The interior of the creature doesn't resemble anything human like. I haven't been able to find what it does resemble but if you know of any comparative anatomists who'd be willing to look at the footage, I'd be willing to send them an AA CD set. >If we had a tissue sample in good enough >condition for modern DNA analysis, I would expect to find it more >than 99% human. I don't believe that's correct but we don't have a tissue sample so there doesn't seem to be much sense arguing. The creature isn't put together like a human or any primate that I'm aware of. The brain isn't human and none of the organs are in the correct position, and there is that disc-shaped organ below the rib cage that certainly doesn't resemble any human organ. >As for whether it has teeth or not, I can't tell I think we would see teeth if they were there and again I think the surgons would have pointed them out. The mouth also has a toothless quality, like a person looks when they're not wearing their false teeth. >and I have looked at that film probably more times than any other >living human, both in a VHS dub, in BETA format at a TV station >on a professional monitor, and frame by frame on my computer. Good. If more folks did the same, we might have a chance to unravel this mystery. >I think bringing monotremes into this discussion is just a very >big red herring which won't produce any constructive information >or analysis. A red herring is meant to deceive, to lead searchers astray. I've offered a working hypothesis: The creature in the AA footage is an evolved monotreme. I believe I have circumstantial evidence which points in that direction. I intend to collect more and hopefully enlist the aid of others who might find my thesis plausible. You offered the hypothesis that the creature is a cloned human but you don't have any evience that I can see. So at this point in our discussion aren't you ddence that I can see. So at this
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:36:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:14:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:59:36 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:13:33 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>I spoke with a solid researcher who was favorably impressed, but >>would not let his name or affiliation be used. Unfortunately he >>is dead. >>>Apologize about the Flatwoods baloney? >>I gather you are a skilled delicatessan operator?? >No, but I have worked in a market and can identify baloney. Dick, can you really identify baloney without opening a sealed package? More psychic powers... amazing. >>>For what? You show me >>>some evidence of vast aerial battles and widespread loss of >>>military aircraft, then I will apologiize. Meanwhile, my advice >>>to you is to take a hard look in the mirror and stop being so >>>apparently gullible. Gee, Dick, the book jacket says nothing about vast aerial battles and widespread loss of military aircraft. Dr. Robert M. Wood in his review said no such things and neither did John Schuessler.Neither does the sales form from the publisher. >>What you ought to apologize for is expressing opinions having no >>basis in fact. Perhaps you are psychic and know what is in the >>book without reading it? You know what was in the Blue Book >>files files for Sept. 12, 1952, without reviewing them or >>spending the huge effort Frank made to bring out the barely >>legible copies? >What you ought to apologize for is advocating wild tales and >then demanding that I buy a book which contains the evidence. I >have a book that proves dead aliens are buried in caverns >underneath Brentwood, Maryland. Send me $50 for the book which >contains all the evidence. Why can't you show me some evidence >in newspaper morgues (names and dates of papers for example). ><snip> >>>>You also haven't provided any basis for your claims about either >>>>Frank's incredible efforts or Roger's very extensive work. >>>See above. More to come if the 'believers' keep assualting us >>>with nonsense. >>How about the skeptics with psychic knowledge based on >>ignorance? >>>>Absence of knowledge on your part certainly can't be taken as >>>>evidence for absence of such information. Can it? >>>Absence of ignorance is ignorance of absence, or something like >>>that. >>Do you mean we shouldn't complain about your ignorance based on >>no knowledge? We should just accept your pronouncements and >>ignore the evidence? >Aw, shucks. I am adjudged so ignorant that I am not even >authorized to have an informed opinion. Apparebntly I have >commited the cardinal sin of disagreeing with and disputing >Stan Friedman. How can you claim an "informed opinion" about a book you haven't read, a case you haven't investigated, witnesses you haven't spoken to, newspaper articles you haven't read, Blue Book files you haven't read, an author with whom you have had no discussion. What you have is an uninformed opinion... that sounds much nicer than bias informed by ignorance and arrogance. >>And,yes, I have been to the site in >>Flatwoods and have met Mrs. May and her sons and other witnesses >>and did seek out more newspaper articles... and did write the >>foreword and epilog. >Why don't you send me a few copies of the newspapers that >coinfirm vast alien-human aeial battoles with widesp[read loss >of military aircraft? I'm quite eager to see them. Dick, where are you getting this garbage from? I would be happy to send you the bibliography from the book. You would have had a free copy of the book if you had asked for it before spouting- off about it. I was not impressed with the publishers blurb on "Missing Time" many years ago. But I kept my mouth shut until I had read it. It was an outstanding book. >>I think another tool UFO researchers need is some humility and a >>large 'gray basket' and a willingness to recognize when they >>know-not of what they speak. >Your definition of 'gray basket' apparently includes every >nonsensical claim that can't be absoultely refuted (when it >should be up to the claimant to present the evidence). My 'gray >basket' certainly does not include wild and woolly, grossly >conspiratorial, extravagant claims for which not a shred of >evidence can be produced in public records. How is it you know what claims are made and that not a shred of evidence has been produced? More psychic insight? >No, I must buy >another book. And if I refuse to do that on general principles, >I am a know-it-all and ignorant. My, my! Who exactly is >pontificating here, and who is asking for some reasonable >evidence? Dick, you have certainly demonstrated your knowledge of pontification. >As for Leir's medical credentials, I read (I think on his own >web site) that he is by the laws of California authorized to >perform surgery "from the anke down." Any general practitioner >has more authorization than that. My whole point is that his >credentials are not very impressive, not that podiatry is >worthless. Some people get help from chiropractors, who also >undergo rather extensive training, but I (having experienced >them and others) would prefer a physiotherapist or a trained >M.D. specialist. But what do I know, ignorant clod that I am. Obviously not much about what Roger has claimed... or about podiatry. Eye doctors don't do surgery on feet and ankles. Podiatrists don't do eye surgery. That doesn't make them less of a medical specialist >- Dick Hall >Who thinks he knows the difference between science and >engineering (technology development); the latter can be done in >secret, as has been demonstrated in aviation, but science is >badly crippled by secrecy. So is technology development >sometimes. >Secret science is an oxymoron. Why not try this out on the ghosts of Ed Teller, and Enrico Fermi, and all those other fine scientists who did outstanding science in secrecy... and those who worked on radar, and sonar, and the proximity-fuse, etc., etc., etc.? As I recall you have a degree in philosophy, and did a lot of writing for the Navy, and DOE, and NASA and other organizations. Do you have secret degrees in science? Did you have a TOP SECRET clearance and need to know for all the classified scientific projects and sufficient knowledge to say
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-06-05 From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:42:55 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:19:22 -0500 Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-06-05 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings Release Date: January 6 , 2005 Urania, S.A. Australia Disc Shaped Craft And Burns On Body Date: April 1975 Time: 9:15 p.m. Number of witnesses: 4 Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Typical disc shaped. One night in April 1975 a friend of mine called me and asked if I wanted to go spotlighting for foxes, I said yes and traveled to his farm 10 miles south of Maitland and arrived there about 21:00 after going inside and chatting for a while to my friend Brad, his Mum Pam and another friend Michael I said that I was going outside to get things ready to go spotlighting. As I walked out the back door (facing east) I noticed what I initially thought was a large shooting star coming down from the east and to the south east but, the shooting star stopped dead at about 20 degrees above the horizon and began traveling across the sky towards the east and flashing blue red and white lights. I yelled to the others to "Come Out Here NOW! Look At This" they came running out and we all stood in the back yard watching as the UFO traversed the horizon. I got my rifle out of my car and began watching it through the telescopic sight and was amazed to see that it was at a guess 40 meters across and about 20 meters high disc shaped with windows around the edge of the disc and a flashing dome on top made out of what looked like polished aluminum, it looked so close that I had to move the scope to see all of it. Brad went to the car shed to get his binoculars which was further down the yard to the east while Pam, Michael and I took turns watching through the rifle scope. After about 5 minutes Brad came back, he had been watching it through the binoculars and I could see from the porch light that he was as white as a ghost. The UFO was at this stage around 1000 meters away and traveling towards us. I got scared and was going to have a shot at it but was told off by Pam so I lowered the rifle, as I did the UFO started to retreat and slowly move off to the North towards Maitland, we kept watching as it became just a red flashing light until it was over the eastern side of Maitland where it hovered, 4 other little red lights seemed to enter the (Mother ship) UFO and then the UFO took of in a slight arc to the east into the sky and disappeared in less that a second. I have since seen many other lights in the sky but none more convincing than the above. Additional Information: There is a bit more to that sighting that I did not mention because of space. I will briefly explain. After the sighting mentioned, I said to Pam (Brad's Mum or Mom as you say over there) that "why weren't you scared ? " she said "Oh I've seen them before they'll be back " I asked her when she had seen them before she said "When we used to live on the other farm" (which incidentally was situated about a kilometer east south east of where we all saw the UFO starting to move towards us) apparently she had gotten up through the night to go to the outside toilet and saw a UFO sitting in the paddock next to the toilet, she really didn't go into much detail about it but did say that the next day she went to the doctor complaining of burns on her face and arms, the doctor told her it was just sun burn. I suspect that the UFO was looking for her and that I scared them of when I foolishly aimed my loaded .243 at them (which I kind of regret doing) I had even calculated that I should have hit it if I had aimed about 20 feet over the top :>) After the UFO that the 4 of us say had gone ? I said "well let's go spotlighting guys" to which Michael said "No Way ! " I said "look we won't see it again let's go " so off we went we had shot a few foxes and were on the northern side of Maitland heading north and to our right about 800 meters, and over the tops of the trees we saw it again, I wanted to go and have a good look at it but the other's said "That's it let's go home" which we did I was out voted :>) The craft was actually 800 meters to our right and just over on the other side of the tops of the tree line of the main bitumen road. We were on a dirt road parrallel to the bitumen road So the craft would have only been about maybe 50 feet off the ground and pacing us, we were doing about 30 Mph. Thank you to the witness, who is an investigator with AUFORN (Australian UFO Network) --------------------- Bloomington, Indiana Flashing UFO Date: January, 2004 Time: 2:00 - 4:00 a.m. Hello Brian Here is one for you, you asked about this shot before, here's the history, date, January, 2004. Time 2-4 am. Number of witness's 4 location Bloomington, Indiana conditions clear names are ok in this report. John Tosti, Ted Roberts, Alice Evans and I, were coming home from a sky watch at a location that had a huge sighting a couple days before, John and I noticed this to the North of our location over a wildlife reserve. We told Ted to stop the van, and we went to turn on our cameras and the object winked out. We waited and nothing, we turned the cameras off, started the van and it came back on in the same spot. This occurred a few times. John broke out a spotlight and flashed it with the light 3 times. the object flashed back 3 times then stopped, John repeated this in different numbers of flashes.. the object repeated the same number back each time all the while hovering and moving around slowly side to side and up and down. I began taping when the object started flashing back. this was all interesting, but the most interesting thing that tweaked my love for this sighting was that john decided to flash the light in a sequence, Morris code if you like.. short bursts and then long bursts of flashes, the object answered by repeating the exact same sequence of flashes. this lasted for about 10-15 minutes. Our thoughts were that this object wanted us to follow it, and from previous exp. we thought better of the idea. Thank you to the witness for the report. Photo can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2241 ------------------------ Kaufman County, Texas Disk ? Date: November 7, 2004 Time: Approx: 3:00 p.m. Hi Brian, On November 7, 2004, I was admiring this unusual green cloud formation, when this object flew by. It's position was about 10 o'clock high and was banking toward the west, (looks like it's going up instead of away, what do you think)?. I thought at the time (which was about 3:00 p.m.) that it was an airplane or a white colored bird of some sort. After I downloaded it, I saw that it was not a bird and probably not an airplane either. I went frame by frame through the whole clip and I never saw an indication of a tail or an airplane type construction. Thank you to the witness for the report, photos and clip. Video clip Kaufman County, Texas Disk ? - Footage 160 kb. To view clip: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=22 42 ---------------------- Creola, Alabama Strange Object Caught On Film Date: December 27, 2004 Time: Approx: 6:00 p.m. Brian I was coming home from work on the afternoon of December 27, 2004 down I-65 at around 6:00 p.m. when an object in the sky caught my eye. I quickly grabbed my camera from the back seat and managed to get one shot of it before it disappeared. The sky that day was clear without a single cloud. I can't say what it is but appears to be disk shaped. Its forward speed was slow if any. One second it was there....the next it was gone. Below is the photo in question. Additional Information: The location of the sighting took place on interstate I-65 just on the outskirts of Creola, Alabama. My wife and I were headed south on I-65 bridge when I decided to stop and take a photo of the span.I've included the photo below. I have a 3.2 mp digital camera with a 10x optical zoom.Photo sizes are 2048x1536. I've resized this photo to 512x384 for the sake of e-mail. After taking this photo I returned to my car and proceeded down the bridge. It was at this point that I spotted the object. It was WNW of my position at some miles out at a height between 15000 to 25000 feet at best guess.The object did not appear as normal air traffic as it did not move much if any. I really could not define the shape of the object with the naked eye .I pointed the object out to my wife....what is that? I don't know she replied. Hold the wheel I said as I reached in the back seat for the camera. It was at that point that I zoomed in, acquired focus and snapped a shot off. After lowering the camera and looking back to where it was.... it was no more...gone...vanished. Total sighting time was no more than 30 seconds...... if that. Here is a map showing the sighting location. The red X in the above picture is my location. The green X is the location of the object. The mobile airport is 25 miles SW of my location. Now here is the full photo of the object again resized to 512x384. Now below is a 512x384 crop from the full size 2048x1536 photo. I've also included a negative of the crop below. That's it. As far as size goes....looked to be smaller than a commercial jet. Thank you to the witness for the report and photos. Photos can be found at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2233 --------------------- HBCC UFO Research Note: There has been a large number of witnesses reporting this similar event taking place over parts of California on the same date and roughly the same time. The reports are being investigated. Seeing there have been so many witnesses to this even I am hoping anyone else who has seen this, or other sightings around the state of California please contact me. Paramount, California Bright Reddish Orange Lights Date: January 1, 2005 Time: Approx: 12:00 a.m. Dear Brian, Tonight, my boyfriend and I were talking tonight and since we both had access to a computer as we spoke, we were curious if there were any witness accounts of what we both had seen around midnight, new years day. The report we had found, the only report we found in fact, said it had 20 witness, well, there's at least 20 more to add to it's credit. My boyfriend told me that night over the phone to look to the north eastern sky because there were 6 bright reddish orange lights in the sky all aligned. He and his family were looking at it. My little brother and I were on the other side of town viewing this as well. I thought it was especially strange because on the 29th of December, I had already seen a UFO on my way to work. it was shinny and metallic. It was moving around really weird; up, down, side to side; within and out of the clouds. My dad and I saw it. Anyways, back to the new years sighting, I didn't see it, but my bf saw that one was dropping lights down, like little letting go of little pods. On Sunday, my older brother saw it along with his best friend, his best friend's girlfriend, and the girlfriend's family which totaled ten. For the time after that, my boyfriend and I have been trying to find out what that was that we saw. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you. Thank you to the witness and the photos. Photos can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=artic le&sid=2244 --------------------------- Montreal, Quebec Triangular Shaped Object Date: January 2, 2005 Time: 2:30 a.m. Number of witnesses: 2 Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Triangular Full Description of event/sighting: It was quite early in the morning of Sunday, January 2nd 2005 at about 2:30, when my girlfriend and I were looking out our window and noticed an extremely bright flickering light in the sky which immediately caught our attention. It seemed quite odd because we don't normally see many stars in the sky due to the fact we live in downtown Montreal, and what's even weirder was that there wasn't any other stars in the sky that night because it was slightly overcast. The object was lighting up the clouds that were surrounding it as it appeared to inch closer to us, which is when I got my binoculars to get a better look at it. After focusing my binoculars (not the best binoculars mind you), the object looked as though it was triangular shaped with red lights surrounding it on the bottom. After remaining relatively stationary for some time, it began to move horizontally and vertically so quickly that I couldn't keep it in focus with my binoculars, which was also due to the fact that I couldn't keep the binoculars steady because I started shaking. It appeared to emit a beam for the bottom of it in a triangular shape, and at that point it was the closest it came to us that night because I got a clear view of the object and the colors it was emitting. I immediately put on the radio and checked the news but didn't hear anything, but there is no way we\'re the only ones who saw this, as it was extremely noticeable to anyone looking out their window in a south-eastern direction. It stayed in the sky for about and hour or so, then eventually traveled north beyond our view. I have always been somewhat of a skeptic when it comes to stories of UFO sightings, but after witnessing what I did last weekend, I am no longer. Thank you to the witness for the report. ------------------------ Portland, Oregon Flashing Blue & Yellow Lights Date: January 03, 2005 Time: 9:30 p.m. Brian, I saw the flashing blue & yellow lights tonight at 9:30 in the ESE sky over Portland, Oregon. I do not have a telescope but it is definitely moving very slowly which makes me think it is not an airplane and it looks to be too high to be a helicopter. If you ever identify what this is please send me the info. I got your email address from this link that seems to be describing the same thing. http://www.rense.com/general52/strob.htm Thanks Thank you to the witness for the report. ---------------------- Grouse Mountain, Vancouver Lights Date: January 03, 2005 Time: Evening Last night was again cold and clear so as soon as the sun went down I aimed my camera north again to see if I could see those strange objects. But alack alas, I could not find them, did see a few of the multi colored flashing lights and several of those bright blips but nothing really interesting. I started thinking about that report you had re. the lights over Grouse Mountain. so I aimed my camera at that section of sky just over Grouse. The tape runs for approx:. 113 minutes. Right of the bat, something large and leaving a white streak passed through the view finder heading East to West. I have no idea what it was but it was fast. It only took up about two frames and appeared to be right over the mountain. I say it must have been large as the width of the streak would have covered the entire ski run. About the only thing I've seen that fast is a bolt of lighting and that is not what that was. Anyway when the tape was played back I counted approx:. 25 of those flashes of light, which really surprised me as I've never noticed them in that part of the sky before usually they are over towards Burke Mountain. and rarely ever more than one or two during the length of a tape. Most appeared to be really far away and quite dim but one appeared about the size of Venus during the summer, it lasted several seconds and appeared to be flickering. I zoomed in and looked at it one frame at a time and found the object was an oval shaped white thing in one frame and the next frame there would be two of them side by side and then back to one on so on. This would make it appear really bright on every second frame, which made it appear to flicker when speeded up. Kind of interesting to watch. Also saw on the same tape two apparent satellites pass through my field of vision. One was just the normal single light and the other appeared to be two lights connected by a tube. Sort of like those strings of lights I was seeing during the summer but they were usually just looking like a string of beads joined together not separated by what looked like a tube. Also saw one commercial jet fly across the screen and must admit it really startled me for a second as all the passenger windows were lit up and just the wing tip lights showed and with the night vision on they really look strange. Thank you to the witness for the report. -------------------- Vancouver, B.C. Jellyfish Cloud But Triangular And Rectangular Date: January 5, 2005 Time: 12:00 -2:00 p.m. Location of Sighting: NE Number of witnesses: 1 Number of objects: 2 Shape of objects: One triangular, one rectangle/w strip. Full Description of event/sighting: January 5, 2005 at 12:00 p.m. I was headed out for the bus and noticed the triangular cloud that was slowly moving "against" the wind, it was coming from the NE, headed slowly SE and maintained it's original shape. At first I saw it from within my home facing due E, but when I got outside it was still there, same shape continuing on SE course. I live close to the Ocean so most of our winds are from the West, especially where I am situated. While riding the bus I also begin to notice a rectangle shaped cloud (sq shape visible inside it) with a long, long white line loosely attached to it while it moved slowly as well in the SE direction. These two clouds could have been just that, but within them you could definitely see the sharp line of something that was within the white mist. Over the two hour span I watch these items move slowly, without changing direction or shape for 2 hours. I have never seen a cloud or clouds period, move against the wind, in this direction it would have taken quite a bit of power to do so, but then they were moving almost slow enough to fall. I'm certain somebody else within the city has noticed this, but on a clear crisp day such as this, there's no doubt someone had to see these. Clear day, cool, little to no clouds other than what I witnessed. I have been observing quite a few aerial anomalies from where I am situated. I live in the Southern part of Vancouver city, up high, 10 minutes from the airport, and fully know the fly times and routes. These were not planes, they were for all intents and purpose cloud covers for something that did not want to be seen on a clear day. These two sightings remind me of the big "jellyfish" cloud but triangular and rectangular. I am just puzzled at it. This is my first report, it won't be my last I guess. Additional Information: Now Brian...my first spotting this was due east at 11:59 a.m today, 01-05-05. and I was preparing to go out. I ended up watching this triangular sighting for about 35 minutes in awe, and finally got up and left. Walked two blocks to 41st and Victoria, the entire sight was still above and highly visible, although I knew it was lingering far longer than it should have, every other whisp of clouds had long since disappeared, but both sightings began in the same place and moved equally slow to the SE. My estimate for total length of time for both sightings is approximately 1 hour and ...say 43 minutes, now then.....not bad for two different shapes, with tails, going same direction no other clouds around in a clear blue sky.....when was the last time you saw a triangular cloud or rectangle shaped one? This was the hook for me, = reporting. Thank you to the witness for the report. ---------------------- Houston, B.C. Shrinking Bright Light Over Farmers Field Date: January 6, 2005 Time: 5:45 a.m. I talked to a witness who is located just south of the town of Houston, B.C., the person lives just off of Buck Flats Road and at 5:45 a.m. on January 6, 2005 she went out to start their truck early due to the cold weather and her husband heading off to his work place. As the lady walked towards the truck she looked towards the north and saw an extremely bright light, stationary low over the tree-line. The weather conditions at the time was cloudy and snowing. She jumped into the truck and started it up, then got back out to watch the light in the sky which she knew looked out of place due to the location of it. It was sitting over top of a local neighbors fields and just above the tree tops. At one point the light did seem to shrink in size, or brightness and disappeared. It wasn't seconds later that it reappeared looking brighter than before. Eventually the object started to move towards the west where the witness finally lost sight of it. There was no sound reported coming from the object, matter of fact if it had of been an airplane or helicopter she would have certainly heard the sound it was making. The total amount of time the lady was able to view the object was for approx: 10:00 minutes. Thank you to the witness for this report.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Additional Ad For Publication In Skywrighter From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:46:51 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:28:38 -0500 Subject: Additional Ad For Publication In Skywrighter From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> To: steve.wolfe.nul Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:46:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Additional Ad For Publication In Skywrighter MR. WOLFE: if your lack of a reply to my latest ad-review submission signifies your command's rejection of the below- drafted ad, please identify for me the next-higher level of authority to whom I may appeal your decision. Please note that any further, prolonged silence from you on this request will be construed as a violation of my First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of the press. -- Larry W. Bryant ----- Subject: [Fwd: Submission of an Additional Ad for Publication in the "Skywrighter"] From: overtci.nul Date: Tue, December 21, 2004 6:25 pm To: steve.wolfe.nul SINCE I'VE yet to receive a reply from your command as to the status of your review of the below-submitted advertisement, does your silence signify your command's clearance of the ad's text? If so, please so advise -- so that I may proceed with further action. -- Larry W. Bryant ----- Subject: Submission of an Additional Ad for Publication in the "Skywrighter" From: overtci.nul Date: Fri, December 10, 2004 12:53 pm To: steve.wolfe.nul TO: Mr. Steve Wolfe Chief, Internal Information (Public Affairs Office) Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH 45433-5547 FROM: Larry W. Bryant 3518 Martha Custis Drive Alexandria, VA 22302 FROM: Larry W. Bryant 3518 Martha Custis Drive Alexandria, VA 22302 DATE: December 10, 2004 Now that your command has applied (on Oct. 25, 2004) the anti- "political"-ads provision of Air Force Instruction 35-101 toward rejecting my series of five whistleblower-solicitation ads submitted to you on Oct. 12, 2004, for your prepublication review, I now submit for your additional review the following classified advertisement -- in hopes that your command will agree with me that its content in no way can be construed as a "political ad." Please let me know promptly the results of your review. Thank your for attending to this submission. -- Larry W. Bryant Blow the Whistle on the UFO Cover-up! In early 2005, a 2-hour TV documentary produced by ABC news anchor Peter Jennings will air nationwide. It will examine the prospects for extraterrestrial intelligent life, and the implications thereof to Earth's civilization. A substantial portion of the show will focus on the "UFO problem." If you (or someone you know) wish to add your voice to the impact of this ground-breaking event, now's the time to share your hard-core evidence of the government's 58-year cover-up of the UFO experience -- said evidence to include deathbed confessions from
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 NWSURC Recently Reported Sightings - 01-06-05 From: Barb Campbell <nwsurc.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:12:44 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:38:34 -0500 Subject: NWSURC Recently Reported Sightings - 01-06-05 NWSURC Recently Reported Sightings - Jan.6, 2005 Updates: There are two - NWSURC File# SSR-04-10 - NWSURC File# SSR -04-15 Strobing Light In Silver Park Follows Melfort Couple Witness mailed in four photographs of where this sighting took place. View photos at http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-10.htm Star-Like Light Near Moon Suddenly Takes Off Witness mailed in a drawing of how this sighting appeared. View drawing at http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-15.htm Horn of Plenty and God's Smoke Rings Seen In Bay of Fundy Date: August 1983 Time: 11:00 pm Duration: 1 hour Location: Parker's Cove, Nova Scotia Description of sighting: In my early teenage years I had a childhood friend who had moved away to NY state and came back for summer vacations. During the summer of 1983, I had been sleeping over at this friend's house on the Bay of Fundy side of Nova Scotia's west coast. Since the weather was warm that night we decided to have a campfire down on the beach and sleep under the stars away from his parents, giving us a chance to catch up on what life in NY state was like. We had an uneventful evening until we were getting ready for bed. We noticed in the sky what appeared to be a bank of lit up clouds and thought there might be a far-off thunderstorm in New Brunswick so we sat back and watched the night sky looking forward to a show from Mother Nature. As we watched however, we noticed that there was something wierd about theses clouds, they actually weren't storm clouds, but some kind of clouds that kept approaching and changing shapes, first it looked like a bank of cloud, then it changed to look like a "Horn of plenty" shape and eventually it rotated on one end so we were looking up at we called "God's smoke rings". These circles of clouds were right over top of us. Being on the shore of the Bay of Fundy there were no other people around to point this anomaly out and after about a half an hour we wondered what was next. Suddenly we were startled to see flying directly above us a fiery meteor so close we could see the flames shooting off it. Mysteriously, we both remember nothing after this. We know we fell asleep because the waters from the Bay's high tides were lapping at the feet of our sleeping bags and this is what woke us up. After we relocated to safer ground for the rest of the night we discussed what we saw and went home the next morning to draw pictures of it for his parents. Needless to say we both had no idea what this was and it was years prior to my experimenting with any types of distilled spirits so I know it was a bonafide sighting of something. Further information: I realize this may not be a juicy UFO story but it definitely proves that something is afoot in the atmosphere and it must be highly unlikely to have such unusual cloud patterns followed by such an intense, single meteor sighting. Possibly EMP testing in remote regions of Canada's offshore? Thank you to the witness. Barb's note: Witness will be supplying a copy of the drawing within the next couple of days. Stay tuned. Report can be viewed at: http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-25.htm Round Black UFO Seen Near Vestby & Drobak, Norway Date: January 5, 2005 Time: 15:00 Duration: 5 minutes Location: Vestby, Akershus Norway Description of sighting: I was sitting in a car near Vestby in Norway, when we was driving to a shopping mall when I look up at the sky . There I saw a round black UFO I think who was flying from on side to another in a slow forward speed . I also have seen a UFO I think in Drobak, Norway in September in 2004. I thought it was a satelite, but it flew up in clouds high. It was also black and it flew up and down in a slow forward speed and suddenly it disappeared behind a cloud and when the cloud moved it was gone. Christer (Permission to release name) Thank you Christer. Barb's note: I would be interested to hear from anyone who may have witnessed a round black UFO. Copy of report was forwarded to Ole Jonny Br=E6nne, Chairman of UFO-Norge Report can be viewed at: http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-24.htm .. Close Encounters & Missing Time 'Genetic' for Albertan I have many experiences related to UFO and abduction phenomenon. It started on October 7, 1979, in a northern alberta community. In my years of research and trying to find out the truth about my own experiences, I have come to the conclusion that it is 'genetic' in my family. I say that as this has been going from one generation to another - me included, and I fear for my children. The last 'contact' or 'experience' I had was in 2001. I was 7 years old when it all started. I recall alot of memory and at first I use to call them 'wake dreams'. I use to also think that time sped up. Yet after years of researching I have come to many different conclusions and alot more questions. I am 32 now and I have tried to work on many areas of my life to recall some missing memory - I have not tried regression hypnosis YET, but I now work for (withheld to protect identity of witness) - so I hope maybe one day I can recall this missing information. In 2001, I contacted RCMP in (withheld to protect witness) in regards to the mass sightings of UFO's during the time of our Close Encounter and they had not responded. I contacted the hospital in (withheld to protect witness), to where my baby brother (age 9 months) was admitted for having a major convultion (almost causing his death), on the same night of our close encounter. I asked the nurse if there was anything unusual with his file - but they would not discuss anything with me. So I must get my brother who is now 25 to request his file. I was working on a docu-drama - where I was going to interview UFO experts, para researchers, abductee's and other witnesses - as well as recreating my event and others. However the night I want to recall is the night of chopped memory. I was working on my docu-drama - I had alot of work done, alot of ground work, typed out interviews - contact info..everything. I also had the pre-approval for funding and support from the Space channel, A-channel and APTN. As this occured on (withheld to protect witness) I would have accessed funding for a translation grant. I had the camera crew, the production staff already chosen - we were only waiting for the community to accept my proposal to hold an information session - and request approval for my film project to be filmed on location....they did not respond. And then a series of events occured that forced me to stop everything. These series of events nearly gave me a nervous breakdown of fear and paranoia. Part of it was the shared panther dreams. Lets just say 'someone or something' didn't want me to do this project. I was hacked, and at the very moment that my screen turned red/black/red/black and then shut down, my phone rang. The number on the call display showed 0123456789. When I answered it, there was no one there. When I tried to redial it, it was not a registered number. I called the Operator to trace the call and the call did not register with the phone company. That night was our first shared dream. Within a couple days I started noticing other strange things...and when other people around me started noticing it, I began to feel fearful. I prayed hard and cried out for help and guidence - I promised to quit everything if they would leave my family alone. Everything stopped, and I haven't gotten back to my project due to that unknown. However, I have started to write a book about my life experiences. Thank you to the witness. Report can be viewed at: http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-23.htm . NWSURC in the news Seeking answers to the unexplained By Danica Lorer Article can be viewed at http://www.nwsurc.com/media05-1.htm And at http://www.rense.com/general61/exn.htm . Site News NWSURC brought in the New Year with a totally new look. The site is loaded with new features which includes translation in eight different languages. The Chamber UFO material up for review: 'The Krill Papers' Recommended material or trash? Comments received at: http://www.nwsurc.com/the-chamber.htm UFO Hall of Fame (New) Calling on nominations for February 1, 2005 inductions. Details can be found at http://www.nwsurc.com/uhof.htm UFO Memorial (New) A special place of remembrance. http://www.nwsurc.com/ufo-memorial.htm NWSURC Awards To Go (New) Website Excellence Award and Ufologist Award. Details and form can be found at http://www.nwsurc.com/awards_to_go.htm Become A Sponsor (New) Help support NWSURC by becoming a sponsor. Details on becoming an NWSURC sponsor can be found at http://www.nwsurc.com/sponsor.htm 2005 UFO Conference Further details revealed. I still have to meet with the venue in Saskatoon (as soon as the weather warms up a bit). But it will definitely be taking place at the Sheraton Cavalier Hotel. I haven't put up that information yet. I am waiting for the final details before I do that. I will issue a press release when that information becomes available. Accepting conference bookings now. Conference information can be accessed at: http://www.nwsurc.com/2005-event.htm Abductees Support Group I have received an overwhelming amount of requests over the past couple of months and so I have decided to form a support group for abductees. Further details will be announced within the next couple of weeks. Paranom (New) A new section to NWSURC's website. Paranormal Research & Investigations. Area is still under construction and can be viewed at http://www.nwsurc.com/paranom/main.htm All the best to everyone in 2005! Barb Campbell, NWSURC Box 263 Maidstone SK S0M 1M0 Ph:(306)893-4009
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:45:52 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:21:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies - Sparks >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 13:56:08 -0800 >Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 05:17:11 EST >>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:43:30 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies >>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:06:21 EST >>>>Subject: Re: Astronomy Evidence/Data Methodologies <snip> >>>>>Having always been annoyed by the apparent hypocrisy that >>>>>Astronomers exibit (specically SETI folk)in regards to >>>>>evidence/data towards Ufology, I posed the following question to >>>>>Frank Drake: <snip> >>>Drake says best done by more than one observer, but not a rigid >>>rule, so it does not always have to be the case. >>>>Drake should have been reminded of the various phenomena in >>>>astronomy and astrophysics which are validly accepted one-shot >>>>brief observations, not repeatable, and not repeated except in the >>>>sense that something similar happens again at unpredictable >>>>random times - such as meteor fireballs, gamma-ray bursts, >>>>and supernovas. These are like UFO incidents in that respect. >>>I made the point when I said, "it is a "transient uncontrollable >>>unpredictable event" in reference to UFO sightings, opposed to >>>observing a "fixed celestial body." >>Not clear enough. He needed to be reminded that there are valid >>sciences studying "transient uncontrollable unpredictable >>events" and given specific examples - as I listed meteor >>fireballs, gamma-ray bursts and supernovas. I'm trying to be >>helpful. >I'll concede on this point; in retrospect, it would have been >better to give "specific examples" in order to give Drake >"familiar association" in regards to "transient uncontrollable >unpredictable events." I take no offense to your criticism Brad. >>>First let me say that I don't think my correspondence with Drake >>>confirmed anything for him - his mind is/was made-up, and he >>>doesn't want to be bothered with the evidence. Very much like >>>Carl Sagan. >>You gave him nothing but hypothetical arguments about >>methodology, thus confirming to him that UFO advocates have >>nothing but skirting around the edges of an argument, instead of >>giving him some solid unexplaianble UFO data - in a form that >>he can digest. Like a long paragraph on a scientifically >>challenging UFO incident that might shake him up. Maybe he is >>too hardened in his "mind made up" position, but we'll never >>know. <snip> Let me take a different tack here: When McDonald was active in promoting scientific interest in the UFO phenomenon one of his key tools was to distribute copies of his scientific papers summarizing (or in a few cases detailing) actual UFO cases he had investigated. These case abstract papers were distributed free of charge and were in tremendous demand at his many talks at scientific societies and engineering groups. He made many contacts with interested scientists as a result. I think his approach is the best approach. When he died he was in the process of compiling his mass case book of best UFO cases. This
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 UFOs At Qwest Field? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:28:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:28:55 -0500 Subject: UFOs At Qwest Field? Source: Seahawks.Net - Seattle, Washington http://seahawks.scout.com/2/338683.html 01-07-05 Breda Report: "UFOs at Qwest Field?" By Todd Breda Seahawks.NET Although local station KJR bought 1,000 playoff tickets to auction off for Tsunami Relief (and major kudos to them for doing so!), .NET's Todd Breda looks at the lack of a sellout for a home playoff game as symptomatic of a far larger ailment - the apathy of a city. Last night, I couldn=92t sleep, so I stayed up late watching an old X-Files episode. Boy, do I miss that show. UFOs, aliens and government conspiracies=85right up my alley. At any rate, all good things =96 as they say =96 must come to an end, so like the X-Files series, it was time to put myself to bed. The stars around my home have been phenomenal lately thanks to a total absence of clouds these past several days. The constellations of Orion and Pleiades, two of my favorite winter formations, hang motionless on a black canvas which possesses an enormity that is impossible to grasp. As I let my dog Bella out for her final bathroom adventure in our back yard, I spotted a very bright looking object to the Northeast. Unlike other stars, this one had multiple colors that seemed to swirl around it. Fascinated, I grabbed my recently acquired telescope I received for Christmas ("Thanks Ma!"), positioned it upon this strange reddish-orange object and attempted a much closer view. What I saw astonished me. In the telescope, it appeared to be this swirling energy with points about it, like a diamond spinning on its own axis with a brilliant light source giving off all the colors of the rainbow. It was so incredible looking, it was truly difficult to stop looking at it. But I had to. There was no way I was going to be the only one to see this "UFO" so I ran upstairs and asked my wife (who had been sleeping for the past three hours) to come take a look at this thing. She shuffled downstairs, cursing under her breath no doubt, took a look, said something about how she thought she saw something weird in the sky on her way home from work too that she forgot to tell me about, and shuffled back off to bed. I watched this amazing energy-thing for another 20 minutes or so, jotted down some triangulation to see if this was indeed a well-known celestial object my Starry Night software (charts the stars, planets and other objects in the night sky year-round) could recognize, and soon made it upstairs to see what I could find. I opened up the program, turned the positioning to the Northeast, found my triangulated star formations, and right where this UFO should be =96 was the star Arcturus. It was "only" a star. Alas, this particular UFO sighting had a conventional and rational explanation. Unlike others in my life that have clearly defied conventional and rational explanation, it was the perfect underscore to the notion that a true UFO sighting is indeed the rarest of affairs. A truly special event that generally happens years apart from each other. You know, like a Seahawks playoff game at home. This is why I=92m completely speechless that this game - as I write these words - is in danger of an NFL-mandated blackout.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Esoterica Site - Lehmbrg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 04:41:38 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:30:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Esoterica Site - Lehmbrg >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 09:24:44 -0700 >Subject: Esoterica Site >For those of you who might not be aware of this site may find it >of interest..... >Esoterica >http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/ >"... A peer-reviewed academic journal devoted to the >transdisciplinary study of Western esotericism: Western esoteric >traditions including alchemy, astrology, Gnosticism, gnosis, >magic, mysticism, Rosicrucianism, and secret societies, and >their ramifications in art history, history, literature, and >politics." Hey-zooz man, that site was _larded_ with data miners.Had to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:32:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:35:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies - Shell >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:23:23 -0700 >Subject: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies >Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:21:10 -0800 >From: T. Peter Park <tpeterpark.nul> >To: fort.nul >Subj: [fort] Fearing Flower-Fairies >For years, I have been puzzled by a childhood fear I had of >flower fairies in a Swedish children's book. I sometimes almost >half-suspect I might have had some sort of "Close Encounter >III"! Up the airy mountain Down the rushy glen. We daren't go a-hunting, For fear of little men. -- Nursery rhyme. Fascinating post, Terry. There is a lot in fairy tales (in their original, often horrifying form, not the watered-down PC nonsense in most books today) that would support that many of these stories are based on actual encounters with something "other". Little men (and women) have been seen all over the world in settings having nothing obvious to do with any sort of UFO or similar phenomenon. They are just there, someone chances to see them, and then they are gone. People intuitively know that getting too close to them is dangerous. People often lose the memory of the encounter, but have troubling dreams or symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. In line with other posts about the creatures in the AA film, the so-called Starchild skull (genetically human), and so on, I think we humans have co-existed with a race of diminutive hominids that evolved from the same genetic stock. Their different evolutionary direction from us has given them abilities which we find terrifying. They are so like us in so many ways, and so different in major ways, that we have a genetically imprinted terror of them, and repress any memory of contact with them. I don't think they blank out our memories of them. I think we do. I think there is a built-in protective mechanism in the human mind which blanks out things which are just too terrifying
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Holman From: Brett Holman <b.holman.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 01:11:22 +1100 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:39:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Holman >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:13:06 +0000 >Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News >Can't spare your feelings any more Brett, When did I ever ask you to spare my feelings? I don't care what you think of me, I care about the truth. So you have my permission to be as rude as neccesary. >(I'll pass over the >quibbles and slurs again). Here's a thought: if you actually responded to those quibbles and slurs, you might just shut me up. Why not give it a try? >You obviously need a list of >mainstream science's present incompetence (and censorship). I want evidence, not assertion. You claim that "All physics is expressible in short words"; does "evidence" have too many syllables? >Here's a sample: >Astro-phys - ongoing misidentification of galaxies, Such as? >misreading >universe's structure (new galaxies forming), How does new galaxy formation imply a "misreading" of the Universe's structure? >failure of "black- >hole" theory (now being quietly abandoned by the bandwagon >riders). Quietly? So quietly, nobody else seems to have heard of it. Yes, I've read the "climb-downs" you link to, and once again you are don't seem to understand what you have read. Which is quite a feat, since one even includes the statement that "Black holes are everywhere, for one thing. Millions of the stellar sort could litter our galaxy alone, based on early discoveries of a few." Doesn't sound like an abandonment to me. Rather, the article merely describes new thinking about the role black holes may have played in the evolution of galaxies. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/blackhole_history_030128-3.html The other link, about Hawking's recent modification of his views on the possibility of information escaping a black hole. There is nothing there denying the existence of black holes. >Black holes and Seyferts are dealt with (deservedly harshly) at: >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/nblckhls.html#data >and all page. "[H]arshly"? All I see are a series of mostly meaningless statements with no supporting evidence, such as "A singularity can only happen when all of space-time is entirely and absolutely symmetrical." Er, if you say so. And you think scientists are arrogant. You seem to be implying that a "huge core" is part of the definition of a Seyfert, which it is not. Once again you are being misled by your reliance on pop science rather than the real thing. The "egg-yolk" mentioned in the caption is merely the core of the galaxy in the image, and it's a feature common to spiral galaxies. But that's got nothing to do with the Seyfert per se: it's not the Seyfert's nucleus (the part of the galaxy which is emitting intense radiation). The size of a Seyfert's nucleus can be estimated by observing the period over which it varies, and it's very small: a few light years only. >Previously deemed 'impossible' planets and galaxies are at: >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/blinded.html item #1 I was aware of this page, which is why I specifically said a popular science book is not evidence for your assertion that science claimed that these planets were impossible. I was hoping you had something more concrete, but clearly this is all you have, so let's have a look at it. Firstly, the section about Carl Sagan. There are no planets around Vega in Contact (science fiction, not science fact), only a black hole and a ring of debris. The black hole was a plot device, but evidence for a ring was discovered in 1983, ie two years before Contact was published. I can see no evidence in Keay Davidson's excellent biography "Carl Sagan: A Life" that Sagan was embittered over some disagreement over the frequency of planets in the galaxy. (He _was_ embittered by his failure to be elected to the National Academy of Sciences, but that was because of his celebrity status, not because he thought there were many extrasolar planets.) Now, the Cohen and Stewart quote (which, as is your wont, is only partial, and this time constructed from two different paragraphs). They do not say that they are impossible according to our understanding of physics - they do say, however, that "for our Newtonian view of astrophysical laws, right now these planets look spectacularly wrong". By "Newtonian", they are clearing referring to a "clockwork", deterministic Universe, which they discuss two pages earlier. This is to be contrasted with a contingent, evolutionary, chaotic Universe (unsurprisingly, since Stewart researches chaos theory while Cohen is a biologist). This is in no way a claim that the laws of physics are wrong (that could hardly be the case, because you need to assume they are true to work out the masses and orbits of newly discovered planets), only that we can't always be sure how they will play out, in this case in the evolution of a solar system. The new solar systems do NOT violate the laws of physics, hence they were not "impossible". Strange, bizarre, unusual, unlikely, unpredicted - yes. They require us to dramatically revise our understanding of solar system formation and evolution. But this is not going to turn physics, or even astrophysics on its head. I'll keep repeating this quibble until you answer it: why should any scientists be ashamed of having been wrong, and revising their theories in the light of new evidence? Another quibble to keep repeating: please back up your statement that "astrophysics has been wrong on almost every call made till now". >Atomics/particle phys - those bandwagon riders are now afraid >to get off, see: >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/parts.txt & 1. Not sure why this is a problem. Are physicists only supposed to be interested in particles that the human body is composed of? 2. They don't "believe" it's true, they trust that experiment will verify whether it is true or not. 3. What ultimate power do particle physicists promise politicians? What on Earth are you talking about? >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/blinded.html I can't see anything here about particle physics. >item #19 >Evolution - dogmatic insistence on a theory that never worked. >Considered at: >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/equal2.txt (scroll down to Gould) It's amazing how many eminent scientists you manage to find who with a single statement deny the rest of their life's work. Or maybe - just maybe - you don't understand what they are saying. I'll reproduce the relevent section of your webpage here: >Recent findings show that in human populations there is >too much variation for `natural selection' or Darwinian >"survival-of-the-fittest" to have been responsible for >their evolution >From Stephen Jay Gould's essay: "Chance Riches" >[in his column `This View of Life' in Natural History Magazine] >"Techniques for measuring the amount of genetic variation >in natural populations have been available only for the past >fifteen years. Their first and primary result came as a >surpise to many geneticists: most populations maintain too much >variation to support the ususal claim that all genes are >scutinized by natural selection" >That is, Darwinian "natural selection" was _not_ the >arbiter of humanity's past and future evolution >So what is? I'm no biologist, but it seems to me that you reading more into this statement than is actually there. Gould claims that _not all_ genes are "scrutinized by natural selection". This is NOT the same thing as saying that _no_ genes are scrutinized by natural selection. It's not even the same thing as saying that _few_ genes are scrutinized by natural selection. To correct your summary, Gould is saying that natural selection is not the _sole_ arbiter of evolution. There are other arbiters, in particular genetic drift. Gould is talking about _genes_, not _species_. His point is that there are many genes which confer neither advantage nor disadvantage in terms of evolutionary fitness (eg junk DNA): therefore they are invisible to natural selection. But precisely because they do not change evolutionary fitness, they can hardly play a role in adaptation. As Gould himself says on the previous page, "Randomness is making its bid as an agent of evolutionary change, but it is not threatening natural selection in the realm of adaptation. The beauty and aerodynamic efficiency of a bird's wing, the grace and good design of a fish's fins are not lucky accidents." >Some of the math is at: >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/magic2.html#3 Oh, I was excited for a moment, but unfortunately this is not what I would call "the math"; it's merely somebody else's summary of a probibalistic argument, without showing the underlying calculations. >New external comment at: >http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary%5C15530.html (seems to be offline now, but has been posted to UFO Updates: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/dec/m18-006.shtml Are you serious? Are you a creationist? Regardless, a newspaper op-ed piece falls short of even your usual standards of evidence. By the way, the article's claim that Anthony Flew now believes that "[a] super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature" is false, and he has himself refuted it: http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=98 >Your 'professionals' have been riding cash-driven bandwagons of >hype & waffle, accompanied by attempted censorship of us folk who >speak out. "[C]ash-driven bandwagons" - oh yes, every research scientist I know has made a fortune by the time they were 30. Silly of me not to have stuck with it, really. And what censorship? Who has prevented you from disseminating your ideas? You have a website where you are free to publish them, and you do. >And that censorship is now being applied _within_ the fraternity. >See: >http://www.archivefreedom.org/ >and >http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/archivefreedom/main.html >What's the science bandwagon (and its paymasters) afraid of? >Embarrassed by incompetence? Embarrassed by cranks, more likely - it used to be far too easy for pseudoscientists get papers listed on arXiv.org. But actually, I do think this is a worrisome trend; they seem to be going too far in the opposite direction. If genuine scientists have oddball ideas, I think they should be debated. Most will be discredited, of course, but some just may have merit. >Maybe - but more likely the lid's being held down for other >reasons. Why so coy? Why don't you stop hinting darkly and just us tell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:41:35 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:40:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:19:12 -0500 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 23:52:06 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:19:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>The more you begin to assume 'triangular' patterns or other >>save-the-phenomenon alleged patterns, the less scientific you >>are becoming. The same applies to Project Hessdalen, if indeed >>that is the sort of thing they are now claiming. >>There are well-established statistical math methods for >>determining the significance of events and the probability (or >>otherwise) of them being random chance. Overt macroscopic events >>are quite different from microscopic and subatomic events in >>this regard. >>Also, until you publish your 'predictive' methods and data for >>peer review (and I am going to continue saying this until I am >>blue in the face, or the list is), you are not practicing >>science. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it needs to be said. >>I don't have the impression that you are being dishonest in any >>way, but I do have the impression that you and a lot of other >>people on this list fail to understand science and scientific >>method. >Richard: >You're right, of course. Our attempts weren't scientific in the >strictest sense. >What we did started out as a lark, and then became a kind of >obsession when we got computers (way back when). >The concept that intrigued us was that of Probability Theory and >we approached our prediction patterns using that theory as a >template. (Our guys involved were computer geeks and were >experimenting with various computer models.) >We never got to the point of real science because, and this was >my point, the events became scattered once we tried to zero in >on them. Rich, No problem so far. >Our first approach can be said to have been an hypothesis; it >never got to the theory stage because the "forces" that be - and >we're into the metaphysical or paranormal here - did not allow >the events to be predicted - once those forces knew we trying to >do just that. How can you possibly conclude this? Attributing 'awareness' to hypothesized 'mysterious forces' only introduces gobbledegook andis a rather strange and non-Occam interpretation, or wild- ass guess. >I admit that the whoe thing smacks of pseudo-science (or worse) >but it has been my contention here at UFO UpDates (and some >agree with me I think) that we as curious beings shouldn't throw >out anything, no matter how goofy, because inside the chaff >might be some wheat. This gets back to Stan Friedman's so-called gray basket. Apparently his and your gray baskets are a lot bigger than mine. You have to make triage-like decisions in life all of the time, and certainly in any scientific work, about what is far mor or less probable or likely or meaningful. If you give anything like 'equal time' to far-fetched notions, yoiu end up muddying the waters and creating confusion. Try the scientific method approach which always refers back to evidence, and you (and Stan) will at least understand where I am coming from. Demonstrate or cite some evidence that Silly- sounding Notion X deserves scientific or critical attention, and I will pay attention. Tell me that all assertions or claims should be treated equally until proven otherwise and I will scoff and rebel. The scientific method that I learned says that you always should be willing to change your mind **on the basis of new evidence**. Evidence rules. >(Isn't that how Penicillin and Pasteurization, plus a lot of >other things, were "discovered'?) I think you are referring to serendipity or more or less accidental discovery, which is fine. But that's not the same as telling me that the moon is made of green cheese, or aliens live on the back side of the moon, or vast aerial combat has occurred between humans and aliens with great loss of human life, or that Roger Leir's 'alien implants' have been shown to be anything unusual. >He who has been chastened, >Rich Reynolds
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 The Further Adventures Of Argentine Cabbie From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:37:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:44:21 -0500 Subject: The Further Adventures Of Argentine Cabbie INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 7, 2005 Source: Infobae Date: 01.07.05 Argentina: Cabbie Didn't Return Home On Account of UFO Abduction Taxi driver's wife told police her husband hadn't returned because "he had been taken by aliens" A housewife desperate because her husband returned home late reported that he had been abducted by aliens who spirited him away aboard a UFO. The stunning claim took place at the 6th Sheriff's Office of La Plata and involved a judge, the Prosecutor's Office and the Police. The cab driver phoned his wife during early morning hours to inform her that he had been abducted by aliens who "sucked him" toward their UFO and was later released in the vicinity of Quilmes. Up to now, police are only certain that the aliens are from the southern region. Surprisingly, the wife appealed to the authorities, convinced of this event, although the fact is that the abducted man had spent a night of adventures with another woman. However, this is not the first time that the man has been taken by E.T.s: the earthling had been chosen as a research specimen by Martians several times before. The wife detected that the tests to which her husband is subjected involve administering special liquids that leave him with an odd breath very similar to the smell of wine. For this reason, "researchers" have not discarded the possibility that the ET base could be somewhere in the province of Mendoza.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:00:18 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:45:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:51:26 -0600 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >>down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. >What it really boils down to is what those behind the phenomena >want us to SEE and believe. We play right in to their hands by >taking much of what is seen (intended for us to see) at face >value and attempt to analyze accordingly. When we measure >phenomena as 'phenomena', we get exactly what we look for. >As long as this is the standard, nothing will or can change. As >long as we perceive what we and others want us to see, we remain >focused on a screen with only one channel. >O, let us get cable. ;> >A. Hebert Welcome back, Amy. Lex Mebane of CSI of New York, who died in December, came to much the same conclusion. We see (and think) exactly what `they' want us to see (and think), It is a very interesting hypothesis, and when it comes from Lex, and now you, I definitely think about it. I know many people think of me as being a rigid advocate of the ETH, but I have come to seriously question the straightforward visitor from another planet interpretation. Question, not totally discard. Some of the alternative possibilities (other dimensions, parallel universes, time travel, or Lex's daemonic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:18:04 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:49:46 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 >Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>From: Jim Klotz <fadedgiant.nul> >>To: PROJECT-1947.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:16:29 -0800 >>Subject: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>Hey Folks! If you haven't heard about this so far, then you need >>to know of it. >>..Mike has helped me personally several times in the past, and all >>of us directly or indirectly. He is a tireless and effective >>advocate for openness in government. He's gotten more stuff on >>more topics released than anyone else I know. <snip> >I downloaded 13 mb of zip file that was automatically unzipped >by Windows XP and converted to 5 excel files. >These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on >each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary >for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: >ufo >unidentified flying object >flying saucer >unidentified >unconventional >Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row >numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there >is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the >documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection >of Korean War sightings. <snip> Bruce, Et Al, I got some hits using the keys words, "Flying Disc" in history_01: in row 1690: INVITATION TO SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD (SAB) MEETING. CORRESPONDENCE WITH VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION ON REGIONAL AVIATION MEETING. INVITATIONS TO VARIOUS FUNCTIONS, ACCEPTANCES AND REGRETS. LETTERS OF APPRECIATION. CORRESPONDENCE WITH FRED REED JR OF NEWS MEDIA ON F-16 AIRCRAFT FLIGHT. LETTER REQUESTING INFORMATION ON EXISTENCE OF STEALTH FIGHTER (F-19) CONSTRUCTED FROM REPRODUCTION OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL MATERIAL DISCOVERED IN CRASH REMAINS OF FLYING DISC FOUND IN DESERT OF NEW MEXICO IN 1947. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF GEN RUSS. REPRODUCTION OF MATERIAL IN JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC DEFENSE, DEC 85. For Official Use Only, Home Addresses RUSS, ROBERT D. (COLL) PERSONAL PAPERS COLLECTION OF GEN ROBERT D. RUSS. CORRESPONDENCE WHILE GEN RUSS WAS COMMANDER, TACTICAL AIR COMMAND (TAC). in row 10544: UNIDENTIFIED "FLYING DISC" SIGHTED OVER HANFORD WORKS, RICHLAND WA.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Re: India 1st To Explain E.T. And UFO Contact - From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 11:41:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:55:19 -0500 Subject: Re: India 1st To Explain E.T. And UFO Contact - >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 07:46:19 -0600 >Subject: India 1st To Explain E.T. And UFO Contacts >Source: India Daily >http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-06a_1-05.asp >India may be the first country to explain to the world about >extra-terrestrial and UFO contacts - the secret debate is on >New Delhi is in the middle of a big secret internal debate. On >one side the largest democracy of the world is eager to explain >to its citizens and to the world about the ongoing contacts with >the UFOs and extra-terrestrials. <snip> I don't know what India Daily is. Their website reads like a more or less serious but also very racy newspaper, with lots of news about sex, Bollywood (the explosive Indian movie industry), and paranormal things. But if you go to indiaserver.com, and follow their links to the Indian press, you'll find a page with links to Indian papers that publish in English. (There are papers in many other languages, too.) India Daily (whose website is in English) isn't on this page. I'd guess, then, that it isn't a real newspaper, or at least that it only exists on the web.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 7 Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 17:55:51 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 17:55:51 -0500 Subject: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper at Drexal University http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Explained.Despit e.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml 01-07-05 Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths The Iron Skeptic By Aaron Sakulich At first glance, there is no phenomenon creepier than crop circles - huge geometric designs that appear in fields overnight without explanation, cause, or reason. According to UFO enthusiasts, hundreds of thousands of these things have appeared all over the world, and some go so far as to claim that similar designs can be found in the sand at the bottom of the ocean. Generally speaking, these circles appear when the stalks of the crop are bent down to the ground but not broken. The plants are not harmed, just sort of flattened out, which has led UFO enthusiasts, or Croppies in this case, to claim that they're made with some sort of alien force beam. Indeed, the most common explanation that Croppies can come up with is that these designs are symbolic representations of alien DNA, writing in the language of Atlantis or some other ridiculous method of communication. This phenomenon is at the center of the movie Signs, simultaneously the best and worst movie I've ever seen. Best because it scared the hell out of me at first, worst because it committed the unforgivable crime of actually showing what the monster you're supposed to be afraid of looks like. Personal gripes against Mr. Shyamalan aside, there are two simple explanations for the crop circle phenomenon. Before you start stockpiling shotgun shells and tin-foil helmets, you should know that the vast majority of crop circles appear in English wheat fields. This is significant because, apparently, British people have a lot of free time. Doug Bower and David Chorley admitted in 1991 that they had made over 250 crop circles by hand over the course of a number of years. How did they do it? By typing ropes to a board, placing the board against the crops, and then stepping on it. That flattens out the plant, and then it's only necessary to move on to more plants. And how did they keep their orientation to create such incredible, perfect geometric patterns? More ropes! Apparently, England has a surplus of rope and young men with too great a knowledge of geometry, too little with which to keep themselves occupied, and a powerful lust for laying intricate plans. At first, I didn't believe that mere agricultural hooligans could be to blame for crop circles. However, a bit of research revealed that they've made not only creepy alien doodles, but also designs that can be explained only as earthly in origin. For Hello Kitty's 30th anniversary, Sanrio (the company that owns the "cute" little kittens' likeness) commissioned an enormous crop circle shaped like the cat's head. They've also done the outline of a Mitsubishi mini-van and geometric designs commissioned by various businesses. They've even branched out and started making crop circles in sand. That is to say, a rake was used to disturb the sand, making it darker than the untouched stuff, and with the help of some blueprints, the outline of three famous British comedians was created. Those of you with a keen eye for detail will note that I said there are two explanations for crop circles. The first is that young men from England have too much free time on their hands; the second is that UFO enthusiasts have exaggerated. Looking in books and on the internet, one can find claims that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of these circles have been created over the years. In 1964 at Manor Farm in Wiltshire, a worker entered the boundary between a potato field and barley crop and discovered what Croppies would be quick to claim was a crop circle. It was, in fact, some sort of crater, about 9 inches deep and 9 or 10 feet in diameter. After thinking about it, the farm workers recalled they'd heard an explosion at about 6 in the morning, but thought nothing of it. You'll notice that although this story has none of the attributes of a traditional crop circle (bent crops, huge geometric designs, occurring overnight), yet the occult enthusiasts rush to claim it as a crop circle. The most likely explanation, for those of you that are curious about such things, is that a dud German bomb from World War II finally deteriorated from aging to the point that it went off. In the 1960s, England was still more or less awash in dud German bombs. In a similar example, in the early 1990s, Russian construction workers uncovered the skeletons of a German and a Soviet, bayonets firmly fixed in each others' ribs, as they were clearing land to build an apartment complex. Anyway, the UFO enthusiast community inflates the number of crop circles beyond all reasonable proportion. It's safe to say that if you've got a field and something happens in it, someone is going to claim paranormal involvement, whether or not you can prove otherwise. Found a hole in your field? It's a crop circle. Disease kill off some of your crops but not others? Well, that's a pattern, so it's a crop circle. High winds touch up your field a bit? Well, you get the idea. It's interesting to note that exaggeration is a hallmark of the UFO community. In this same case a man named Robert Randall appeared, claiming to be a rocket scientist. He later set up a "cancer research laboratory" that bilked suckers out of money as well as a company called Ce-Fu-X, which claimed to know the radio frequency UFOs used to communicate with their home base on Uranus. There is absolutely nothing to suggest he was anything other than a flim-flam man, a con artist, a jive turkey looking to make some cash, but many believe he was actually a Man In Black. They discard the theory that he was just a guy looking to make some fame and fortune for the theory that he was an alien robot, sent here to derail investigations, or perhaps a government commando attempting to silence the truth. I feel like I'm taking a standardized test, but trust me when I say that Randall is to man as the crater is to hyped-up baloney. There was no Man In Black. There was no crop circle. End of story. So there you have it. Crop circles are not, as so many claim, attempts at communication by aliens. They are certainly not the work of God himself warning us of our sinful ways. Atlantis has nothing to do with this. Bigfoot isn't even in the picture. What they are is a statistical aberration: Most young men fill their free hours with beer and women; a small portion of the population prefers to go out and scare the crap out of farmers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 11:49:54 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:50:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Smith >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:28:54 EST >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and >>behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. >What does it take to see whether the project had its cameras >ready or not?? Just high-resolution stealth monitoring, just >like the Russians do to avoid our satellite cameras. The >Russians optically and radar track our intelligence satellites >so that they can hide military developments so that the >satellite cameras are not "ready." Yes, obviously we can make the assumption that optical means are used to monitor the observers. For UFOs, if military related, seems a waste of effort and illogical. They can just employ invisibility/ camaflouge methods, send out a EMP blast, have the guys arrested or simply go elsewhere. If UFOs are alien, the same holds true. Dr.Cornet's findings of apparent telepathy: http://www.abcfield.force9.co.uk/bcornet/bcornet7.html match Dr.Rutledge's findings. This has come up in alot of sightings by regular folk whom we can dismiss easily as being yokels, but do we just dismiss the "more reputable" folk too? >>Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >>down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. If this >>is the case, then I have a real problem wondering why we bother >>at all playing such a game. Do we have to jump through a little >>hoop, balance a cracker on our nose or what to get a good >>picture or data? >Intelligence agencies already have an answer for that: Ever hear >of "walk-ins"? These are defectors who "walk in" to our >embassies abroad or wherever and offer up their services as >spies, either to stay where they are and spy for us, or to flee >their country and seek asylum. The problem is that the walk-in >defector might be a double-agent sent to spy on us or to deceive >us with carefully rigged disinformation (the true definition). >US intelligence for a while had a long internal debate about >whether to just blanket refuse all walk-ins (like your >suggestion we "don't play the game") because so many turned out >to be double agents, or whether to accept walk-ins but be >vigilant, because some may be legitimate. The final decision was >the latter, and the Angleton camp that wanted to just stop >accepting defectors was rejected. Interesting idea. The only difference is that we have no insight as to the right answer or norm or legitimacy so how can we be vigilant? If EVERY time we try to take optical spectra of a UFO, they monitor that we are doing it (via optical monitoring or telepathy) and change the spectra to some random thing or to match a jet afterburner or hot air balloon flame, then what progress is possible? Even with passive radar, they conceivably would not feel a bounced signal, but if they monitored our communications and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:51:42 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >Subject: What Was In The Sky? >Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >01-05-05 >What Was In The Sky? >Hundreds of People Report Lights, Fireball, in Sky >We've been taking calls from dozens of viewers all across the >area, from Rib Falls, Plover, Marshfield, Merrill, Mole Lake, >Antigo and everywhere in between, all describing the same thing: <snip> An absolutely classic bolide meteor, with a high probability of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 UFOs Physical Or Subtle From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 08:30:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 08:30:00 -0500 Subject: UFOs Physical Or Subtle Source: New Dawn Magazine http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/UFOs%20Physical%20or%20SubtleP1.html June 15, 2003 UFOs: Physical Or Subtle? By Richard L. Thompson In August, 1975, a 48-year-old man was undergoing open-heart surgery. A half hour after being taken off cardiopulmonary bypass, he suffered from cardiac arrest and had to be revived by an injection of epinephrine into the heart and two electric shock treatments. On awakening, he recalled the following experience: I was walking across this wooden bridge over this running beautiful stream of water and on the opposite side I was looking and there was Christ and he was standing with a very white robe. He had jet-black hair and a very black short beard. His teeth were extremely white and his eyes were blue, very blue.... He looked different from any pictures I had seen before.... My real focus was on the white robe and if I could prove it to myself that this was really Christ.... And during all this time the knowledge, the universal knowledge, opened up to me and I wanted to capture all of this so that when I was able, I could let people know what was really around them. Only trouble was that I was unable to bring any of it back. This is a typical example of an out-of-body experience, or OBE. In such an experience, a person has the impression of leaving his physical body while continuing to see, hear, and think as a conscious being. Out-of-body experiences often occur when a person is in a near-fatal physical condition, and so they are also called near-death experiences, or NDEs. With the recent development of techniques for reviving a person who is near death, there has been a great increase in reports of such experiences, and a number of books have been written about them by doctors, psychologists, and psychical researchers. Many OBEs are difficult for an external observer to distinguish from dreams, although persons experiencing them may regard them as real because of their great vividness and profound psychological impact. This is true of the OBE mentioned above, which took place entirely in some dreamlike otherworld. There are many instances, however, in which a person having an OBE sees his own unconscious body from a distance. In some of these cases, persons who were supposedly unconscious due to cardiac arrest were able to give accurate descriptions of medical procedures being used to revive them. Here is how cardiologist Michael Sabom summed up one man's description of his own resuscitation from a heart attack, as seen during an OBE: His description is extremely accurate in portraying the appearance of both the technique of CPR [cardiopulmonary resuscitation] and the proper sequence in which this technique is performed i.e., chest thump, external cardiac massage, airway insertion, administration of medications and defibrillation. Sabom said that he came to know this man quite well and that the man gave no indication that he possessed more than a layman's knowledge of medicine. The man also testified that he had not watched cardiac resuscitations on TV before his experience. In his OBE, the man had seen the resuscitation procedures in vivid detail, even though his heart was not functioning at the time and his brain was deprived of oxygen. If the experience was a dream, then how did the man acquire the accurate knowledge of detailed medical procedures that this dream contained? OBEs and UFOs There has been a great deal of controversy over how to interpret out-of-body experiences, with some favoring theories based on dreams or hallucinations and others advocating paranormal explanations. One topic that is generally not introduced into these discussions is the subject of UFOs. However, it has recently emerged that out-of-body experiences may take place in connection with UFO encounters. Many witnesses have reported experiencing out-of-body travel during UFO abductions, and some have also reported spontaneously experiencing OBEs in the aftermath of UFO encounters. This leads to a completely new controversy over out-of-body experiences - one that inevitably brings in the body of observation and theory that has built up around the UFO phenomenon. One theory is that UFO-related out-of-body experiences are actually misperceptions of physically real abduction experiences. Another is that UFO abductions are essentially illusory. According to this theory, OBEs are also hallucinatory experiences that are generated by the mind, perhaps due to the influence of some external agency. UFO abductions and OBEs go together because both are of a similar illusory nature. A third theory is that UFO abductions are real events that can take place on a gross or subtle level of material energy, and OBEs are real events involving the temporary separation of the subtle mind from the physical body. In a UFO abduction, the physical body may be taken onto a UFO, and during this experience an OBE may or may not take place. Also, some UFO abductions may take place within OBEs. In these cases, the subtle mind is taken on board a UFO and the gross body is left behind. I will discuss these theories after giving a few examples of out-of-body experiences associated with UFOs. First of all, there are reports indicating that OBEs are sometimes induced by humanoid entities of the kind associated with UFOs. One example of this is an experience reported by Betty Andreasson. She said that in July of 1986 she was lying on the couch of her trailer-home reading a Bible when she heard a whirring sound and saw a strange being appear next to the couch. At this point, she had the experience of seeing her own body from an external vantage point: I see myself standing and I see myself laying on the couch! The being had put a small box or something on the couch first and then I saw myself appear there. I see myself standing up.... And I see myself moving toward the being. And then I turn toward the couch and I reach down to touch myself and Ahhhh! when I do, my hand goes right through me! In this case, the being was of the standard "Gray� type. After entering the out-of-body state, Betty underwent a strange experience involving visions of crystal spheres, the passing shadow of a gigantic bird, and a hovering spherical craft. This is in some ways reminiscent of the otherworldly experiences that often occur in OBEs. However, the "Gray� aliens were present throughout the experience. Whitley Strieber recounted a very similar experience, in which he awoke at about 4:30 in the morning in his country cabin and tried to achieve an OBE using methods recommended by Robert Monroe, a well-known investigator of out-of-body states. He said that he saw an image of a long, bony, four-fingered hand of a "Gray� being pointing towards a two-foot-square box on a gray floor. He then experienced an inappropriate wave of sexual feeling, followed by an OBE. He found himself floating above his body. He saw his cat, which should have been in New York City, and he saw the face of a "Gray� visitor outside one window. He found that he could move about in his out-of-body state, and he described his adventures of passing out through a closed window and back. During all this he experienced himself as a "roughly spherical field.� There are also cases in which a person has an out-of-body experience with no obvious cause, enters a UFO in the out-of- body state, and has an encounter with UFO entities. For example, Betty Andreasson, after her remarriage to Bob Luca, reported a joint OBE in which they both entered a UFO occupied by typical "Gray� beings. There she encountered featureless human shapes glowing with light and found that she was also in this condition. She also saw the featureless light-forms changing into balls of light and then back into human light-forms. In another out-of-body UFO experience, a person named Emily Cronin had the experience of standing by her car and seeing her dormant body within the car. Here she recounts this experience under hypnosis: Emily: Not in the car. But I am in the car. It's silly. McCall: Don't worry about it. Just tell me what's going on. Emily: That's silly! You can't do that! McCall: You can't do what? Emily: You can't be in the car and out of the car, too. That's silly! But I am. After this, she saw a large, glowing "bubble� hovering over some trees by the roadside. She communicated telepathically with unseen intelligences associated with this object, and she had a realization that all life is one and that the intelligences were not actually alien. In the case of Judy Doraty discussed in Chapter 9 [see Alien Identities], the witness, Judy, experienced standing by her car and simultaneously entering a UFO and observing what was happening inside it. In this case, the UFO had been previously seen by Judy and other witnesses from a normal, physically embodied point of view. Within the UFO, Judy reportedly observed humanoid entities cutting up a living calf and then dropping its body to the ground using a shaft of light. This would suggest that the scene within the UFO was grossly physical and that Judy was viewing it just as persons having OBEs sometimes observe their own bodies. People in their normal bodily condition usually cannot perceive someone who is present near them in an out-of-body state. However, Judy reported that the entities she saw in the UFO were aware of her presence, and they communicated with her telepathically. The White-Robed Beings Betty Andreasson recalled under hypnosis that as a teenager she was taken into an alien craft, which entered a body of water and emerged in an underground complex. Up to this point, she seemed to be traveling in her physical body, since the trip involved what appeared to be great g-forces of the kind produced by ordinary acceleration. In the underground complex, she was told by "Gray� beings that she was going to be taken home to see the One. Here is the experience that unfolded next, as relived through hypnotic regression: Betty: We're coming up to this wall of glass and a big, big, big, big, big, door. It's made of glass. Fred Max: Does it have hinges? Betty: No. It is so big and there is - I can't explain it. It is door after door after door after door. He is stopping there and telling me to stop. I'm just stopping there." And I'm standing there and I'm coming out of myself! There's two of me! There's two of me there!... It's like a twin. After thus entering an out-of-body state, she went through the door: Betty: I went in the door and it's very bright. I can't take you any further. Fred Max: Why? Betty: Because... I can't take you past this door. Fred Max: Why are you so happy? Betty: It's just, ah, I just can't tell you about it.... Words cannot explain it. It's wonderful. It's for everybody. I just can't explain this. I understand that everything is one. Everything fits together. It's beautiful! This sounds like a typical description of the experience of Brahman realization, a state of consciousness that has been sought by yogis and mystics the world over. In the Vedic tradition, there are several schools of philosophical thought regarding the nature of Brahman realization... After leaving the door of the One, Betty reported encountering mysterious white-robed beings: "Okay, I'm outside the door and there's a tall person there. He's got white hair and he's got a white nightgown on and he's motioning me to come there with him. His nightgown is, is glowing and his hair is white and he's got bluish eyes.� This person looked like a normal human, in contrast to the small "Gray� beings she had encountered thus far. In his discussion of this case, Raymond Fowler pointed out that possibly similar beings were reported by Italian Navy personnel during a UFO sighting on the slopes of Mount Etna on July 4, 1978. Here a red, pulsating, domed disc landed, and the witnesses encountered "two tall golden-haired, white-robed beings accompanied by three or four shorter beings wearing helmets and spacesuits.� In this case the tall white-robed beings were seen by military personnel who were presumably in their physical bodies, in a more or less normal state of consciousness. In OBEs not connected with UFOs, there are frequent references to beings in white robes. An example would be the cardiac patient's OBE. It is significant that although this witness thought the white-robed being he saw was Christ, he remarked, "He looked different from any pictures I had seen before.� Evidently, he felt some doubts about this identification. It is also interesting that the man's encounter with this being was accompanied, as with Betty Andreasson, by a mystical experience involving intimations of universal knowledge. So here we have three cases in which white-robed beings are described. In one, a person had apparently been physically abducted by ufonauts, then had an OBE involving a mystical experience, and finally met a being of this type. In another, these beings were seen along with a UFO by military personnel who were walking about in an apparently normal state. In yet another, a being of this type was encountered in an OBE that occurred during a medical emergency and was not connected with UFOs. [British UFO investigator] Jenny Randles discussed a possibly related case, in which a medically instigated OBE led to a meeting with a tall white-haired being from a UFO. This experience was reported to her by Robert Harland, a professional magician and, alas, a self-confessed phony medium. Harland told Randles that he went to a dentist in 1964 for major oral surgery. An anesthetic gas was administered, and he had an OBE. From an out-of-body perspective, he saw that the dentist banged his knee, and the dentist later verified this. Thus far, this was a typical OBE of the kind associated with physical trauma. But then Harland saw a tall being with long white hair drift through the ceiling and explain telepathically that they must go together. They floated through the roof into a UFO. He was shown around. The UFO's operation was explained, and he was given a message to convey about a terrible holocaust in which the Earth's crust would split apart. He was then told he would have to fight his way back to his body. Indeed, small, ugly creatures tried to prevent his return, but he made it and awoke to see the dentist thumping him and looking very worried. He had nearly died in the chair. One can always hypothesize that the beings seen in these four cases were simply dreams or hallucinations, although this raises the question of why people would independently have such similar dreams. If we leave the dream hypothesis in the background and consider that the beings might actually exist, then the question is: Are these beings operating in gross physical bodies or bodies made of some kind of subtle energy? The observations of the Italian naval personnel would suggest the former, while the stories of the cardiac patient and Mr. Harland would suggest the latter. Physical Form or Subtle Form? One interpretation of this bewildering data is to interpret all UFO abductions as strictly physical and reject OBEs as a mistaken idea. This approach has been taken by David Jacobs, an associate professor of history at Temple University in Philadelphia and an active investigator of UFO abductions. Jacobs wrote the following about abductees' perceptions: Part of these anomalous memories and dreams might be the unaware abductees' knowledge that they have had Out of Body Experiences. It is common for abductees to feel that they in some way left their body, usually during the night in bed.... A few unaware abductees claim that they have not only had Out of Body Experiences but that they have experienced Astral Travel as well. They know that they have in some mysterious way experienced a strange displacement in location.... The only way that they can reconcile what has happened to them is through the only available explanation - astral travel, no matter how ill- defined that might be. Jacobs's idea was that abductions by UFO entities really happen but that out-of-body experiences are a "new age� misconception adopted by "unaware� abductees. He maintained that abductees will generally abandon their false ideas about OBEs when they become aware of what really happened to them. Thus, "knowledge of the abductions finally gives them the answers they were seeking and the majority of them let go of previously held belief structures that were never fully satisfactory.� This interpretation seems unsatisfactory because it blurs the distinction between (1) abduction experiences in the physical body during which an OBE takes place, and (2) abduction experiences occurring entirely in an out-of-body state and accompanied by memories of seeing the gross body as it is left behind. The same can be said of the interpretation of all abduction experiences as being entirely psychical or mental. For example, Jenny Randles has used accounts such as Robert Harland's to argue that UFO abductions are entirely mental experiences induced in psychically susceptible and visually creative persons by alien beings that "have harnessed the power of consciousness to cross the gulfs of space and seek out new life forms.� This interpretation also blurs the distinction between points (1) and (2). If all abduction experiences occur entirely in the mind, then why do some seem to the witnesses to occur on the bodily platform of experience, while others, such as Harland's or Emily Cronin's, occur in an out-of-body state? Physical After-effects of UFO Abductions Of course, a further objection to the all-mental theory is that scars and infectious diseases have been reported in connection with UFO abductions. Budd Hopkins is well known for his claim that abductees sometimes bear scars, which they associate directly or indirectly with UFO encounters. One example is Virginia Horton, whose illusory deer encounter is mentioned above [see Alien Identities, pages 249-50]. She also told of a deep, profusely bleeding but painless cut that she received as a six-year-old child. In her conscious recollections, the cut was memorable because at the time she was unable to explain to her elders how she had gotten it. Under hypnosis, she related an elaborate abduction scenario in which aliens of the typical "Gray� variety took her into a circular room illuminated by diffuse, pearly gray light and made the cut with some kind of machine. They explained to her that "we need a little, bitty piece of you for understanding.� The noted UFO researcher Raymond Fowler has also described under hypnosis a nightmarish, dreamlike experience in which he seemed to be manipulated by beings that he could not see. This would seem to be a good candidate for a purely mental experience but for the fact that it occurred on the night before a mysterious, unexplained scar appeared on his leg. This scar was said by a dermatologist to resemble the mark made by a punch biopsy. Fowler cited research into scars and other medical sequelae of UFO encounters that was carried out by Dr. Richard N. Neal, a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology at the Beach Medical Center in Lawndale, California. Neal maintained that scars tend to show up on the bodies of abductees in a consistent manner. Thus, "scars have been observed on the calf (including just over tibia or shin bone), thigh, hip, shoulder, knee, spinal column and on the right sides of the back and forehead.� These scars tend to be either thin, straight hairline cuts about 2-3 inches long or circular depressions about 1/8-inch to 3/4-inch in diameter and as much as 1/4-inch deep. Other kinds of bodily marks have also been noted, such as rashes on the upper chest or the legs that are often geometrical in shape. First or second degree burns have been noted, as well as infections and unusual growths. For example, there are two examples of women reporting severe vaginal infections after UFO abductions that involved gynecological examinations. The very fact that abduction witnesses report invasive physical examinations suggests that their experiences are not simply mental. Dr. Neal pointed out, "Aliens have taken blood, oocytes (ova) from females and spermatozoa from males, and tissue scrapings from their subjects' ears, eyes, noses, calfs, thighs and hips.� Sometimes tubes are inserted into women's navels - an operation that was described to Betty Hill as a pregnancy test by her captors. It has been pointed out that this operation is similar to a gynecological testing procedure called laparoscopy that was developed years after Betty and Barney Hill's abduction experience in September of 1961. Finally, we shouldn't overlook the controversial topic of probes that are inserted into the nose by alien entities. As Dr. Neal put it, "Many abductees have described a thin probe with a tiny ball on its end being inserted into the nostril - usually on the right side. They are able to hear a 'crushing' type sound as the bone in this area is apparently being penetrated. Many will have nosebleeds following these examinations.� Fowler and Hopkins give examples of this, and it seems to come up repeatedly in UFO accounts. From time to time, investigators have claimed that such probes have been recovered from people's bodies for examination. However, I have yet to see any reliable publication describing a systematic study of a recovered probe. One could postulate that people may imagine physical experiences, such as having probes inserted into their bodies. However, it is not clear what their inner motive would be for imagining such things. Many UFO abductees reporting these experiences have been tested psychologically and found to be quite normal. So their testimony cannot be attributed to abnormal mental processes. One could also postulate that beings acting on a subtle level might be able to invoke in people's minds traumatic experiences that would result in physical symptoms. There are cases in which people have developed bleeding wounds called stigmata, apparently under the influence of intense religious emotions. There are also reports that a particular pattern of reddened skin, such as a cross, can be produced by hypnotic suggestion. Could it be that the physical symptoms of UFO abductions are similarly produced by some form of psychical influence? One reply to this is that some abduction cases involve physical traces on objects or on the ground that suggest the presence of some physically real agent. Examples would be the ground traces reported by Budd Hopkins in the Kathie Davis case, or the strange shiny spots appearing on the car of Betty and Barney Hill after their UFO experience. Also, there are abduction cases, such as those of Travis Walton, William Herrmann, and Filiberto Cardenas, in which the abductee was dropped off by the UFO miles from his pickup point. There is certainly a great deal of evidence indicating that UFOs can become manifest as physically real vehicles, and there is also much evidence suggesting that people are sometimes physically taken on board these vehicles. However, since some UFO abductions do seem to involve out-of-body experiences, the idea that trauma on a subtle, mental level can bring about gross physical effects should be carefully considered. To illustrate what might happen, consider the following account of a near- death experience occurring in India: In the late 1940s, an Indian man named Durga Jatav suffered for several weeks from a disease diagnosed as typhoid. At a certain point his body became cold for a couple of hours, and his family thought he had died. But he revived and told his family that he had been taken to another place by ten people. After attempting to escape from them, they cut off his legs at the knees to prevent further attempts. Then they took him to a place where about forty or fifty people were sitting. They looked up his "papers,� declared that the wrong man had been fetched, and ordered his captors to take him back. When he pointed out that his legs had been cut off, he was shown several pairs of legs and recognized his own. These were somehow reattached, and he was warned not to "stretch� his knees until they had a chance to heal. After his revival, his sister and a neighbor both noticed that he had deep folds or fissures in the skin on the fronts of his knees, even though such marks had not been there previously. The marks were still visible in 1979, but X-rays taken in 1981 showed no abnormality beneath the surface of the skin. Could it be that the experience of having his legs cut off in a subtle realm caused these marks on his physical legs? Ian Stevenson has assembled a large amount of evidence indicating that young children who spontaneously remember previous lives sometimes bear birthmarks on their bodies corresponding to injuries received during those lives. He has about 200 cases of this type, and he says that in fifteen he has been able to match up birthmarks with postmortem reports describing the previous body. Regarding these birthmarks, he made the following observation: "Some marks are simply areas of increased pigmentation; in other cases, the birthmark is three- dimensional, the area being partly or wholly elevated, depressed, or puckered. I have examined at least two hundred of this kind, and many of them cannot be distinguished, at least by me, from the scars of healed wounds.� The point about scars is especially significant in connection with UFO abductions. In the case of Durga Jatav, one can imagine that some psychical influence injected into his brain the idea that his legs had been cut off, and this in turn resulted in the fissures in his knees. However, if a wound in one life can affect a body in another, then more must be involved than just the brain. An explanation can be devised if we introduce the idea that the soul, encased in a body made of subtle energy, is able to transmigrate from one gross physical body to another. In that case, one can suppose that the fatal injury in one life traumatized the subtle body, and this resulted in birthmarks in the developing embryo in the next life. One could likewise suppose that Durga Jatav's subtle body was traumatized in a subtle domain, and this resulted in the knee fissures when his subtle body was returned to his gross body. A wide variety of physical effects can apparently be produced by subtle action. Here is an example involving a man named Mangal Singh who experienced a [Near-Death Experience] NDE in about 1977 while in his early 70s. He described his experience as follows: I was lying down on a cot when two people came, lifted me up, and took me along. I heard a hissing sound, but I couldn't see anything. Then I came to a gate. There was grass, and the ground seemed to be sloping. A man was there, and he reprimanded the men who had brought me: "Why have you brought the wrong person? Why have you not brought the man you had been sent for?� The two men ran away, and the senior man said, "You go back.� Suddenly I saw two big pots of boiling water, although there was no fire, no firewood, and no fireplace. Then the man pushed me with his hand and said, "You had better hurry up and go back.� When he touched me, I suddenly became aware of how hot his hand was. Then I realized why the pots were boiling. The heat was coming from his hands. On returning to consciousness, Mangal felt a severe burning sensation in his left arm. This area developed the appearance of a boil and left a residual mark after healing. He was apparently unable to describe the appearance of the "men� he had met. The stories of Durga Jatav and Mangal Singh are part of a group of sixteen Indian near-death accounts collected by Satwant Pasricha and Ian Stevenson. They observed that in these cases messengers typically come to take the witness, in contrast to Western NDEs, in which the witness generally meets other beings only after being translated to "another world.� Pasricha and Stevenson noted that their Indian subjects naturally identify these messengers with the Yamadutas, the agents of Yamaraja, the lord of the dead in traditional Hinduism. They also pointed out that the evident cultural differences between Indian and Western NDEs do not necessarily demonstrate that these experiences are simply unreal mental concoctions. It is possible that persons near death are treated differently in different cultures by personalities on the subtle level. There could be different policies for groups of people with different karmic situations. According to Vedic literature, the transmigration of souls is regulated by the Yamadutas, or servants of Yamaraja. The Yamadutas serve as functionaries in the celestial hierarchy, and they are equipped with mystic powers, or siddhis, that enable them to carry out their duties. They are described as having a very negative, fearful disposition. Nonetheless, they are employed by higher authorities for the positive purpose of reforming the consciousness of souls entangled in material illusion. Generally, when the Yamadutas take a person, he doesn't return to tell the tale. But Vedic accounts do mention some cases where someone returns. There is the story from the Bhagavata Purana of Ajamila, a sinful man who uttered "Narayana,� a name of God, when seeing the Yamadutas at the time of death. As a result of this action, several effulgent servants of Narayana intervened and told the Yamadutas not to touch Ajamila. There followed a debate between the Yamadutas and the servants of Narayana on the laws regarding the treatment of departed souls. Finally, the Yamadutas accepted defeat in this debate and departed from the scene, and Ajamila was revived from apparent death. There are UFO encounter cases involving the capture-by-mistake theme of the Indian NDEs. In Chapter 9 [see Alien Identities], I presented the story of a woman and her son who were abducted by strange beings and taken on board a UFO while driving near Cimarron, New Mexico. In this case, the woman and boy were physically dragged away by strange "men.� The woman was subjected to a harrowing physical examination, after which a tall, authoritative "man� appeared on the scene and angrily declared that the woman should not have been taken and should be sent back. Not only that, but the tall man placed his hand on the woman's forehead, and she was burned by it. This is reminiscent of the Indian NDE cases, and of the case of Mangal Singh, in particular. However, the woman came down with a severe vaginal infection after the experience, apparently as a result of the examination she received on the UFO. Was this due to a subtle examination, or was it caused by a botched physical examination? Another example illustrating the theme of capture by mistake is an encounter story related by Emily Cronin. (This is a different encounter than the one mentioned previously.) On this occasion, Emily, her young son, and her friend Jan were resting by the side of a road called Ridge Route near Los Angeles. She consciously remembered seeing a bright yellow light, hearing a high-pitched whine that seemed to have a paralyzing effect, and feeling the car shaking. Under hypnosis, she said that a strange, tall figure in black was looking in the back window of the car and was shaking it. Two other similar beings were standing to one side, telepathically telling the first being that this was a mistake and they shouldn't be there. When Emily managed to move one finger by strongly focusing her will, the noise stopped, the light and figures vanished, and everything was back to normal. Here, the way the experience ended suggests that it occurred on a subtle level. UFOs and the Recycling of Souls Western [Out-of-Body Experiences] OBEs occurring during medical emergencies are naturally related with death, and the persons experiencing them often connect them with the fate of the soul in the next life. In India, of course, these experiences are associated with the process of transmigration, whereby the soul, riding in the subtle body, is transferred to a new situation at the time of death. Given all the parallels that exist between OBEs and UFO abductions, could it be that some UFO entities are involved with the transmigration of the soul? It turns out that ideas along these lines have been discussed in the UFO literature. For example, Whitley Strieber has said that his visitors told him, "We recycle souls.� Strieber's visitor experiences inspired him with the following general idea: "Could it be that the soul is not only real, but the flux of souls between life and death is a process directed by consciousness and supported by artistry and technology?� This idea is completely Vedic, and so is the corollary that our actions are watched and appraised by beings who control our destination after death. Appraising modern attitudes, Strieber noted, "Because we have deluded ourselves into ignoring the reality of the soul, we imagine everything we do to be some kind of secret,� and he asked, "Who watches us?� The following story gives some indication of how Strieber arrived at these ideas. He related that his visitors invisibly spoke to him, repeatedly warning him not to eat sweets. After several weeks of these warnings, he asked why he shouldn't eat sweets, and they said, "We will show you.� Six days later, he learned through an acquaintance about a woman in Australia who was dying from diabetes. During the previous evening, the woman had seen seven little men "like Chinese mushrooms� who appeared and descended from the ceiling. They lifted the sick lady to the ceiling, and as she protested they put her on the floor. Then she had a vision of sitting in a park, putting on a flowing blue robe, and watching the sun set as a desolate wind blew all symbols of death. After this experience, the woman declined quickly. Strieber was told that the woman was very conservative and probably had given no thought at all to such topics as UFOs and humanoid visitors. Strieber took this unexpected story from Australia as a graphic answer to his question as to why he shouldn't eat sweets. The story involved beings similar to his visitors; it involved diabetes, a disorder of the body's sugar metabolism; and it came from a bare acquaintance on the other side of the world shortly after he asked his question. Since the woman's encounter with the beings involved symbolic intimations of her death, it struck him that his visitors might have some connection with what happens to people after death. The relationship between Strieber's visitors and the Vedic Yamadutas is difficult to ascertain. There are differences between these two groups indicating that they play different roles, and there are also similarities suggesting that they may be closely related. For example, one difference is that the Yamadutas normally act only on the subtle level, whereas Strieber maintained that when he was abducted on one occasion, he was able to physically take his cat with him - an indication that his trip took place on the physical platform. Nonetheless, there are also similarities. For example, the Yamadutas look strange and frightening, they emanate a strongly negative mood, they can travel invisibly and pass through walls, and they can induce OBEs in human subjects. Similar remarks can be made about the beings who repeatedly abducted Betty Andreasson, but in her case there are additional complications. For example, during one UFO abduction she had a classical mystical experience, and then she saw white-robed beings similar to those connected with mystical insights in Western NDEs. To understand fully what is going on here, we will need much more information. I suspect that we are seeing a few traces of a complex universal control system involving many different types of intelligent beings. Soul Recycling and the Government It may come as no surprise that references to the soul, OBEs, and reincarnation come up in the lore on UFOs and the U.S. Government. In addition, some of this material shows connections with Whitley Strieber's testimony. Here is the story: Strieber described dreams or visions in which his visitors were found to live in a strange desert setting where ancient buildings were built into cliffs under a tan sky. Now according to Linda Howe, an Air Force intelligence officer named Richard Doty informed her in 1983 about EBEs - Extraterrestrial Biological Entities - that were allegedly in contact with the U.S. Government. Supposedly, these EBEs come from a desert planet where they live in buildings like those of the Pueblo Indians. One of them is said to have informed an Air Force Colonel that "our souls recycle, that reincarnation is real. It's the machinery of the universe.� This provides a link between the Strieber visitors, the highly physical aliens spoken of in connection with the U.S. Government, and reincarnation. The similarities are so close that we seem to be faced with two alternatives. Either Strieber wrote material from Government/EBE stories into his book, or he was independently reporting experiences that tend to corroborate some of those stories. There is another story connecting UFOs, OBEs, and the U.S. Government. This involves the thoroughly physical case occurring in October of 1973 in which a UFO was said to approach an Army Reserve helicopter flying from Columbus, Ohio, to Cleveland. At about 11:02 p.m. the crew members saw a red light on the eastern horizon that seemed to be on a collision course with the helicopter. The pilot, Capt. Lawrence J. Coyne, tried to radio a nearby airport, but after an initial response he couldn't get through. To avoid collision, he sent the helicopter into a dive. A cigar-shaped, metallic object took up a position directly over the helicopter and flooded the cockpit with green light. After a short interval, the object continued to the west, but Coyne found that the helicopter was at 3,500 feet and climbing at 1,000 feet per minute, even though they had initiated a dive from 2,500 feet to 1,700 feet. Once the object had departed the radio worked. There were ground witnesses. A family consisting of a mother and four adolescent children were driving on a rural road below. They saw the encounter between the object and the helicopter and noted the green light. Also, Jeanne Elias, who was in bed at home watching the TV news, heard the diving helicopter and hid her head under her pillow. Her 14-year-old son woke up and saw the green light, which lit up his whole bedroom. The object was explained as a meteor by the famous UFO debunker Philip Klass. In the aftermath of this case, Capt. Coyne reported receiving a call from the "Department of the Army, Surgeon General's office,� asking whether he had had any unusual dreams after the UFO incident. As it happened, he reported a vivid dream of an OBE. Sgt. John Healey, one of the helicopter crewmen, reported, "As time would go by, the Pentagon would call us up and ask us, well, has this incident happened to you since the occurrence? And in two of the instances that I recall, what they questioned me, was, number one, have I ever dreamed of body separation, and I have - I dreamed that I was dead in bed and that my spirit or whatever was floating, looking down at me lying dead in bed,... and the other thing was if I had ever dreamed of anything in spherical shape. Which definitely had not occurred to me.� He went on to say that the Pentagon would often call Coyne with such questions, asking about all the crew members, and the Pentagon people seemed to believe what they were told. One wonders who in the Pentagon might be interested in the UFO/OBE connection. The Physical, the Subtle, and Beyond In summary, the available evidence suggests that UFO abductions and close encounters may occur both in an ordinary bodily state and in an out-of-body state. In the former, the subtle senses of the witness operate through the medium of the gross sense organs (such as eyes and ears), and in the latter, perception occurs directly through the senses of the subtle body. Experiences involving a combination of in-body and out-of-body phases may also occur, and the Doraty case suggests that it is possible to perceive through gross bodily senses and through subtle senses at the same time. This has been called bilocation. The evidence also suggests that the UFO occupants themselves can operate both on a physical and on a subtle level. They can perceive the subtle form of a human being, and they can arrange things so that a human being can see them in the out-of-body state. They can make themselves physically manifest and visible to ordinary eyes, or they can become unmanifest and invisible. They can also make their vehicles and other paraphernalia visible on either a gross or subtle level. There is also evidence indicating that UFO entities can enter into a person's mind and control it in a manner reminiscent of traditional spirit possession. In her survey of UFO abductees, Karla Turner noted that "in some cases there seems to be a merging and the abductee then begins to feel or think what the ET is feeling or thinking.� She also observed that "We have ET takeover of a human's body.... The person is still there but they're not in control. Sometimes they're not even aware until somebody tells them afterwards... that they were doing or saying things that are not characteristic of the person.� In the Bhagavata Purana a mystic siddhi is described which enables a grossly embodied being to leave his gross body behind and enter in subtle form into another person's body. This is illustrated by the following story in the Mahabharata: A king named Kalmashapada once arrogantly insulted and struck the sage Shakti because the latter would not give way to the king on a narrow forest path. Shakti, a son of the famous sage Vasishtha, then cursed the king to become a man-eater. While the king and Shakti were quarreling, Vishvamitra, an enemy of Vasishtha and a powerful yogi, approached invisibly with the aim of gaining something for himself. After seeing what happened and evaluating the condition of the king's mind, Vishvamitra waited until the king returned to his capital city and then ordered a Rakshasa to approach him. By the sage's curse and the order of Vishvamitra, the Rakshasa was able to enter the king and possess him. The king was severely harassed by the Rakshasa within him, but he was able to protect himself with his own willpower. Later the king was asked by a brahmana for a meal with meat. The request slipped the king's mind, but late that night he remembered it and asked a cook to prepare the meal for the brahmana, who was waiting at a certain place. Unable to find any meat, the cook asked the king what to do. The Rakshasa then exerted his influence, and the king ordered the cook repeatedly to get human meat. The cook did this, using flesh from an executed prisoner. The brahmana, on seeing the resulting meal, realized that it was unfit to eat, and he also cursed the king to become a man-eater. As a result of this second curse, the Rakshasa was able to completely take over the king, and driven by madness and a desire for vengeance, the king began to kill and devour first Shakti and then the other sons of Vasishtha. The Rakshasas were mentioned in Chapter 6 [see Alien Identities] in connection with the illusory deer that Ravana used to abduct Sita, and in Chapter 8 in connection with Bhima and his Rakshasi wife, Hidimba. They were beings with powerfully structured gross bodies, and they were also known for their mastery of mystic powers. Before meeting Hidimba, Bhima engaged in an intense hand-to-hand struggle with her brother Hidimba and killed him by strangulation after exhausting him in the fight. This battle was thoroughly physical. But in the story of king Kalmashapada, the Rakshasa ordered by Vishvamitra was able to act on a subtle level and possess the king in the manner of a traditional evil spirit. This story illustrates the idea that beings of essentially inimical motivation may have the power to act both on the subtle and gross platforms of existence. The Vedic literature also describes a completely transcendental level of existence, and it is similarly possible for suitably qualified beings to function on both the transcendental and the physical planes. I will present three accounts illustrating this that date back roughly 500 years. As with the UFO stories that we have been considering, these stories display a bewildering combination of what appear to be physical phenomena and phenomena occurring on another plane of existence. All three accounts are religious in nature, which means that they have to do with spiritual worship and meditation. Although some would categorically reject such material as admissible evidence, I disagree. If so many strange phenomena mentioned could be true, it doesn't make sense to think that phenomena reported in religious contexts must all necessarily be false. In fact, I think that an imbalanced picture will be created if events of a positive spiritual nature are excluded, while those of a negative or at best neutral character are extensively presented. The first example involves the Vaishnava saint Narottama Dasa Thakura, who lived in India in the 16th century. Narottama would regularly meditate on living in the spiritual world in his siddha-deha, or perfected spiritual form. There he would perform the service of boiling milk for Krishna, and he would actually experience this as real in all respects. In Vaishnava philosophy, Krishna is the Supreme Lord, and He lives in the transcendental realm in an eternal personal form. In that realm, many simple acts of service serve as media for the exchange of intense love between Krishna and His devotees. On occasion, the milk would boil over, and in his meditation Narottama would burn his hands while trying to stop it. It turned out, however, that upon awakening from his reverie, he would find that his hands were actually burned. This story can be compared with the two near-death experiences mentioned above, in which physical effects resulted from subtle experiences. One might argue that in all these cases, the physical effects were somehow impressed on the body by the power of the mind, as a consequence of intense mental experiences. From the Vedic point of view, this idea is acceptable as long as we understand that the mind of the individual involved had actually been functioning in another realm of existence. But more is involved than some kind of psychosomatic influence of the mind on the body. To illustrate this point, consider the next story. The Vaishnava saint Shrinivasa Acarya was a contemporary of Narottama Dasa Thakura's. On one occasion, he was meditating on the pastimes of Lord Caitanya, who is an incarnation of Krishna. Shrinivasa was meditating on Krishna's form as Lord Caitanya by placing a garland of aromatic flowers around His neck and fanning Him with a camara whisk: As Shrinivasa served the Lord in this way, he could not keep his composure and, looking at the Lord's magnificent form, he began to exhibit ecstatic symptoms. This pleased Lord Caitanya, who then took the same garland of flowers that Shrinivasa had given Him and placed it around Shrinivasa's neck. After the Lord made this loving gesture, Shrinivasa's meditation broke; but the garland was still adorning his own chest. Its fragrance was unlike anything he had ever experienced. In this case, an object that was observed in trance in another world appeared in physical form in this world. This is certainly not a psychosomatic effect, but one might imagine that the mind of Shrinivasa, charged with intense spiritual emotion, might have paranormally manifested the garland as a physical object. Now, however, I turn to an example in which a human being in this world first meets someone from a higher realm and later visits that realm through meditative trance and again meets the same person. In this account, a Vaishnava saint named Duhkhi Krishnadasa was performing the daily service of sweeping a certain sacred area in the town of Vrindavana, a famous pilgrimage place in India. While doing this one day, he found a golden anklet that seemed to emanate a remarkable aura. Impressed by the influence that it had on his consciousness, he considered it to be very important, and he buried it in a secret place. Shortly thereafter an old lady came to him, asking for the anklet and saying that it belonged to her daughter-in-law. Because of its spiritual influence, Duhkhi Krishnadasa was convinced that the anklet must really belong to Radharani, the eternal consort of Krishna. After a long discussion, the old lady finally admitted that this was so, and revealed that her true identity was Lalita-sundari, one of Radharani's servants. At this point, Duhkhi Krishnadas wanted to see his visitor in her true form, but she said he would be unable to bear such a revelation. After being convinced of his sincere desire, however, she finally acquiesced to his request and revealed her true, incomparable beauty. After giving him several benedictions and receiving the anklet from him, she disappeared, and he was unable to find where she had gone. One of the benedictions given to Duhkhi Krishnadasa was a special tilaka mark on his forehead, and a new name, Shyamananda. Since Lalita had sworn him to secrecy about their meeting, it was difficult for Shyamananda to explain the tilaka and new name to his guru, who thought that he had simply concocted them. In the course of dealing with this difficult situation, Shyamananda again met Lalita-sundari. This time, however, he met her by entering into her transcendental realm in a state of meditation. In this case, Duhkhi Krishnadasa met Lalita-sundari in this world, in his physical body, and he also met her in another world that he entered in his spiritual form by meditation. Thus both Duhkhi Krishnadasa and Lalita-sundari were able to operate on different planes of existence. It is significant also that Lalita-sundari was able to assume a disguised form. Thus in both ancient and recent Vedic traditions there are accounts of beings who can operate on different planes of existence. These beings may be materialistic in orientation, like Vishvamitra Muni and the Rakshasa, or they may be spiritually advanced. The UFO literature likewise seems to contain examples of activity on both subtle and gross physical planes. ____________________________________________________________ The above is from Chapter 10 ('Gross & Subtle Energies') of Alien Identities: Ancient Insights into Modern UFO Phenomena (includes extensive footnotes) Reprinted with permission of Govardhan Hill Publishing, P.O. Box 1920, Alachua, FL 32615-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 08:34:55 -0500 Subject: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds The older UFO-study guys have a penchant for the historical UFO events. Why? Because when death is at the door, humans go back through their lives and experiences rather than set a path to the future, which for them is not going to happen. (I won't name those here at UFO Updates who are ensconced in the past for the above reason but we all know who they are.) But there are a few (Brad Sparks for instance) who see the value of exhuming past UFO events for study. And there may be some good reason to do that, but with caveats. When several here got long-winded about the radar episode(s) in the 1952 Washington D.C. sightings, they were remiss in their rehashing. It seems to me that one should look at the common factors in sightings, or radar episodes, anecdotes, et cetera. Separate out those things, as best as one can, which are mundane, and accumulate those things which are similar in each episode. The common threads may reveal something unique to UFOs. Unless one has an epiphany (such as Euclid had or Newton), or if one is not a genius (such as Einstein, Jung, Bohrs), then one is relegated to the grunt work of gathering identical or nearly identical elements in sightings (past, present, and future) which might give a clue as to what UFOs are, or are not. The books and studies so far are like those Washington, D.C. ruminations here: fraught with everything but the kitchen sink. No one wants to take the "scientific" or quasi-scientific step or discipline to ferret out that which could be meaningful. It's easier to include everything, which is what the great unwashed do when they make a stew or slumgullion. Databasing the common elements in UFO events might elicit something(s) which could (or should) lead us all to insights which might be more productive than the skeptical stances by some oldsters here or the rampaging zeal of the younger set who
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 18:25:18 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 08:37:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:36:52 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:59:36 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:13:33 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 14:53:25 +0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>>>For what? You show me >>>>some evidence of vast aerial battles and widespread loss of >>>>military aircraft, then I will apologiize. Meanwhile, my advice >>>>to you is to take a hard look in the mirror and stop being so >>>>apparently gullible. >Gee, Dick, the book jacket says nothing about vast aerial >battles and widespread loss of military aircraft. Dr. Robert M. >Wood in his review said no such things and neither did John >Schuessler.Neither does the sales form from the publisher. >><snip> >>Why don't you send me a few copies of the newspapers that >>coinfirm vast alien-human aeial battoles with widesp[read loss >>of military aircraft? I'm quite eager to see them. >Dick, where are you getting this garbage from? I would be happy >to send you the bibliography from the book. You would have had a >free copy of the book if you had asked for it before spouting- >off about it. I was not impressed with the publishers blurb on >"Missing Time" many years ago. But I kept my mouth shut until I >had read it. It was an outstanding book. 'Garbage?' That was what the original presentation about the book on this List said, and that was what I reacted to negatively. Did yoiu not read the original post in this thread? Or are you claiming that thiose absurdities about the aerial battles were only in the publisher's blurb and he lied about what is in the book? I'm getting my information from what I read here, in this thread. Tell me it isn't in the book, and then please explain to me why someone said it was. >>>I think another tool UFO researchers need is some humility and a >>>large 'gray basket' and a willingness to recognize when they >>>know-not of what they speak. >>Your definition of 'gray basket' apparently includes every >>nonsensical claim that can't be absoultely refuted (when it >>should be up to the claimant to present the evidence). My 'gray >>basket' certainly does not include wild and woolly, grossly >>conspiratorial, extravagant claims for which not a shred of >>evidence can be produced in public records. >How is it you know what claims are made and that not a shred of >evidence has been produced? More psychic insight? Obviously you did not read the original post and early responses. If you had, I would expect you to have denied their accuracy. >>No, I must buy >>another book. And if I refuse to do that on general principles, >>I am a know-it-all and ignorant. My, my! Who exactly is >>pontificating here, and who is asking for some reasonable >>evidence? >Dick, you have certainly demonstrated your knowledge of >pontification. <snip> >>- Dick Hall > >>Who thinks he knows the difference between science and >>engineering (technology development); the latter can be done in >>secret, as has been demonstrated in aviation, but science is >>badly crippled by secrecy. So is technology development >>sometimes. > >>Secret science is an oxymoron. >Why not try this out on the ghosts of Ed Teller, and Enrico >Fermi, and all those other fine scientists who did outstanding >science in secrecy... and those who worked on radar, and sonar, >and the proximity-fuse, etc., etc., etc.? As I just got through saying, I know the difference between technology development and science; apparently you don't. >As I recall you have a degree in philosophy, and did a lot of >writing for the Navy, and DOE, and NASA and other organizations. I never wrote a word for the Navy or NASA. Where did you get that from? I did do some consulting editing for DOE. And my degree specialized on scientific philosophy, scientific method, logic, etc. >Do you have secret degrees in science? >Did you have a TOP SECRET clearance and need to know for all the >classified scientific projects and sufficient knowledge to say >that the classified research didn't compare with the >unclassified? Or is this another "informed" opinion based on >ignorance? >Stan Friedman
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 The Devil's In The Details II From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 14:59:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:18:16 -0500 Subject: The Devil's In The Details II Furthermore..... I find Stan Friedman's approach to UFO investigation admirable and noteworthy in the extreme. Mr. Friedman takes a UFO thingie and looks at it under the proverbial microscope, not discounting anything at first, and staying with the item when there are elements, even those of a minute nature, which seem interesting. He uses the Sherlock Holmes (or Columbo) methodology: it's the little things which will tell the truth of things. (The popular CBS CSI series use the same protocols, dramatically of course, but useful in real life.) Mr. Friedman sticks with his observations, analyzing them right down to their quantum level as it were. He doesn't take a broad- brush approach, and dismiss the object of his study out of hand, on general bases. He's done this with the MJ-12 papers and everything else. When an item doesn't look right, he checks it out, thoroughly, and either find corroborating materials, or nothing similar, which allows him to dismiss the material. But if there's a scintilla of strangeness and rightful elements in something under scrutiny, Mr. Friedman goes after the truth. That's why he has our admiration and appreciation. He's got the patience of a forensic scientist. There are others who show up here at UFO UpDates whom we also see doing the same thing: Dr. Maccabee, Kyle King, Afred Lehmberg, Brad Sparks, Cathy Reason, et al. But a few detail persons, alone, won't resolve the UFO mystery. It will take a group effort, unless a genius show up, who has
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:21:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:36:52 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> I have permission from Vince White to post the following comments: ----- After listening to Roger Leir on several occasions, reading his papers, examining his implant work, I would only use terms such as: thoughtful, meticulous, scrupulously honest, painstaking, articulate, highly analytical, technically well informed, and very courageous. His first hand investigation and interviews with Varginha witnesses are first rate. Has Dick Hall been to Varginha? What impressed me, listening to his moving account of his interview with a medical doctor who treated one of the survivors of the Varginha C/R was his palpable careful relating only what he knew as hard fact, separation of supposition and speculation, meticulous timeline reconstruction, protection of very fearful witness source,and obvious substantial time, money and effort to thoroughly explore the total situation by actual detailed field work. We need more like Dr. Leir. -----
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:00:36 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:23:16 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hatch >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >Subject: What Was In The Sky? >Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >01-05-05 >What Was In The Sky?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 18:42:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:28:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Maccabee >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:31:22 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>What you wrote above strikes a chord with us (rrrgoup)... >>For many years we worked on a project I'll call "predictivity." >>We noticed that events (some catastrophic, some mundane) were >>happening in a series: mine disasters, tornados, fires, bus- >>nappings [sic], et cetera. <snip> >But what is baffling me is the oddity that UFOs may actually be >harder to research than I thought. I naively thought I could >bring to bear some nice research instruments and gather some >data to not only confirm the existence of them (to the skeptics, >and mainstream world) but help figure out how they operate. >Then I read Project Hessdalen's reports of intelligent >interaction and Project Indentification's amazing reports of the >same and I begin to grow concerned. Here we have guys who have i>nvested their reputations and careers in investigating a >phenomena in the grand science way of wanting to show a >reasonable explanation ("earthlights", tectonic stress induced >plasma, etc) and we find instead that the objects exhibit >intelligence. The idea that "they" react to attempts to research their activities goes way back to 19 50 or so when the Air Force was trying to get photographic data on saucers. They observed that a bunch of sightings had happened in an area of the southwest and set up an observation station. The sightings then occurred elsewhere. It appeared to the AF that the objects may have moved in response to setting up the observation station. <snip> >If the phenomenon is going to interact in this way it seems to >invalidate the whole research project! Showing that UFOs "exist" >seems a pretty lame result compared to the interaction! <snip> >Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and >behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. I mean >at least when we go fishing, the fish can't read our minds and >avoid the hook. >>So, for us, the idea that the ProjectHessdalen was seemingly >>scrutinized in a way that prevented the participants from going >>further, doesn't ring false necessarily. >Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. If this >is the case, then I have a real problem wondering why we bother >at all playing such a game. Do we have to jump through a little
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 00:38:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:38:20 -0500 Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:18:04 -0800 >Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:11:43 -0500 >>Subject: Re: P-47: Classified/Restricted Documents At AFHRA <snip> >>These spreadsheet files contain quit a bit of information on >>each document or file entry, including for most a verbal summary >>for almost every one. I searched each file for key words: >>ufo >>unidentified flying object >>flying saucer >>unidentified >>unconventional >>Got 3 useful hits on UFO in the first file AF_history_01 at row >>numbers 2066,2068 and 2070. UFOs in korea 1952. Of course there >>is no info on the UFO sightings, just a mention (need the >>documents). These may well already exist in Haines' collection >>of Korean War sightings. ><snip> >Bruce, Et Al, >I got some hits using the keys words, "Flying Disc" in history_01: >in row 1690: I found yours on line 1690 when searching "extraterrestrial".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 00:41:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:39:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper > at Drexal University >http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Explained.Despi te.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >01-07-05 >Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >The Iron Skeptic >By Aaron Sakulich >At first glance, there is no phenomenon creepier than crop >circles - huge geometric designs that appear in fields overnight >without explanation, cause, or reason. According to UFO >enthusiasts, hundreds of thousands of these things have appeared >all over the world, and some go so far as to claim that similar >designs can be found in the sand at the bottom of the ocean. <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:06:07 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:41:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hebert >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:00:18 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:51:26 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>What it really boils down to is what those behind the phenomena >>want us to SEE and believe. We play right in to their hands by >>taking much of what is seen (intended for us to see) at face >>value and attempt to analyze accordingly. When we measure >>phenomena as 'phenomena', we get exactly what we look for. >>As long as this is the standard, nothing will or can change. As >>long as we perceive what we and others want us to see, we remain >>focused on a screen with only one channel. >>O, let us get cable. ;> >Welcome back, Amy. Thank you, Dick, but I never left. Been here every day listening. ;> >Lex Mebane of CSI of New York, who died in >December, came to much the same conclusion. We see (and think) >exactly what `they' want us to see (and think), It is a very >interesting hypothesis, and when it comes from Lex, and now you, >I definitely think about it. >I know many people think of me as being a rigid advocate of the >ETH, but I have come to seriously question the straightforward >visitor from another planet interpretation. Question, not >totally discard. Some of the alternative possibilities (other >dimensions, parallel universes, time travel, or Lex's daemonic >manipulators) may not even be testable. Anyway, food for >thought. Whomever you assume 'them' to be, we may be seeing only what 'they' want us to see and therefore... believe. If it is necessary to consider this within the context of other worlds, dimensions, universes or demons, go ahead and allow your mind to explore the possibilities. Although I was referring to illusions created by humans, other beings may be quite capable of similar deceptions. Considering what humans do to humans, if any aliens or whatevers are involved, we-are-screwed. When you see a UFO, you may be seeing exactly what you are intended to see and, therefore, believe. If you see it, chances are you were meant to. When you describe what you saw to others, you become the independent variable and others - dependent variables. Perceptions are transmitted from one participant to the next until it takes on a life of its own as a myth and/or belief system. Therein lies the motive. Like it or not, we automatically filter everything we see and hear through our belief systems. What we believe determines how we react to novel stimuli. If novel stimuli knows this, depending upon its motivations, it could USE this human characteristic to indirectly manipulate perceptions and thus, reactions. Since humans rarely function outside a society, manipulate one or more and you manipulate some portion of the population. This procedure is further proliferated by yet another human characteristic - the belief that we are too smart to be fooled. As long as we accept what we see at face value, we perpetuate the myths. As long as the paradigms are maintained, the parameters remain fixed. Updates keep us 'updated'. Interest groups keep us interested. And the lies become the truth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:33:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:44:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper > at Drexal University >http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Ex >plained.Despite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >01-07-05 >Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >The Iron Skeptic >By Aaron Sakulich I'm not sure where to begin... this is by far the weakest whine yet from young Mr. Sakulich. I have a fairly healthy interest in UFOs, but I am not convinced that ET communicates via crop circles. That said, I believe I could produce a more cogent and persuasive argument against same after a 3-day bender with Greg Boone. No disrespect intended. <g> Crop circles are not UFOs, and no compelling evidence has ever been produced to support the hypothesis that UFOs are in any way responsible for them. Speculation abounds, but as with cryptozoology or Cydonia, a belief in UFOs as ET phenomena is not a de facto belief in ET produced crop circles, alien abductions, or peace treaties. Aaron pulls a couple of bad examples to shakily support a biased view so blind to its own ignorance that it actually takes itself seriously. I read the majority of his screed with a chuckle barely concealed, and with the same lip-licking feeling I used to get in a debate with an unprepared ideologue... tasty. His use of hackneyed generalization and indictable logic, combined with a glaring misperception of the debate overall, leads me to the inescapable conclusion that he is running out of valid issues about which to effectively rant, and is therefore creating issues about which to rant ineffectively. This guy is a poster child for peyote use. Feed your head, Aaron. Stop starving it of independent thought... of speculation. Narrow-mindedness will come soon enough for cripes sake! So, there is only one of two explanations for every crop circle. Either it was made by a man, or it is an exaggeration. What a comfy, cozy, insanely vapid reality it must be in there with Aaron. Sadly his future may never be bright until he takes off the shades. Hand him a button, quick. And his use of the word 'croppie'? Did he make up the word? Never heard that one before. I thought it was cerealogist or similar. Perhaps FrootLoopian would sell more books. In the most excellent words of Warren Oates... "Lighten up, Francis".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Miller From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:17:37 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:46:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Miller >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:00:18 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:51:26 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >I know many people think of me as being a rigid advocate of >the ETH, but I have come to seriously question the >straightforward visitor from another planet interpretation. >Question, not totally discard. Some of the alternative >possibilities (other dimensions, parallel universes, time >travel, or Lex's daemonic manipulators) may not even be >testable. Anyway, food for thought. Dick, Don't do this please. Don't go there. You'll be telling us next that someone has learned to manipulate worm holes and we can get to another planet hundreds of light years away by stepping through a large circular portal filled with water. What is clearly baffling is how a man of your experience and intelligence can have virtually "stuck" to the same set of beliefs/principles/thoughts etc. for so very long without having barely moved an inch over 50 years? Have we got to you at last? You haven't secretly signed up for Leir's e-mail newsletter have you?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Massive Mars Gold Seam From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:47:30 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:49:01 -0500 Subject: Massive Mars Gold Seam Lower middle right of: http://tinyurl.com/56wnf 3 x enlargement: http://www.colsweb.com/MarsGoldSeam.gif
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 06:59:09 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:54:31 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >Subject: The Devil's In The Details? >The older UFO-study guys have a penchant for the historical UFO >events. Why? Because when death is at the door, humans go back >through their lives and experiences rather than set a path to >the future, which for them is not going to happen. >(I won't name those here at UFO UpDates who are ensconced in the >past for the above reason but we all know who they are.) Rich, You actually believe what you wrote? Incredible. After decades of non-stop research you should thank your lucky stars such people are now returning to organizing their archives and preserving them for future generations. While they are doing this for the ingrates of Ufology (I won't name them here, but we all know who they are), new facts, forgotten gems and new slants on the older cases are being discovered. If you do not have a solid grasp of the history of Ufology, you are not prepared to make any kind of new path of any substance. And your illustrious path in Ufology is consituted on what you bring to the table, which is what, exactly? Sorry, Rich, but from personal opinion and view you haven't a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:35:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:02:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 18:25:18 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:36:52 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:59:36 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>>Why don't you send me a few copies of the newspapers that >>>coinfirm vast alien-human aeial battoles with widesp[read loss >>>of military aircraft? I'm quite eager to see them. >'Garbage?' That was what the original presentation about the >book on this List said, and that was what I reacted to >negatively. Did yoiu not read the original post in this thread? I can't be sure I did read the original post. I can be sure that you have misrepresented what is in the book. >Or are you claiming that thiose absurdities about the aerial >battles were only in the publisher's blurb and he lied about >what is in the book? I'm getting my information from what I read >here, in this thread. Tell me it isn't in the book, and then >please explain to me why someone said it was. What you have described isn't in the book. How in the world would I know why someone said it was? I am not claiming psychic powers. <snip> >>How is it you know what claims are made and that not a shred of >>evidence has been produced? More psychic insight? >Obviously you did not read the original post and early >responses. If you had, I would expect you to have denied their >accuracy. >>>No, I must buy >>>another book. And if I refuse to do that on general principles, >>>I am a know-it-all and ignorant. My, my! Who exactly is >>>pontificating here, and who is asking for some reasonable >>>evidence? >>Dick, you have certainly demonstrated your knowledge of >>pontification. ><snip> >>>- Dick Hall >>>Who thinks he knows the difference between science and >>>engineering (technology development); the latter can be done in >>>secret, as has been demonstrated in aviation, but science is >>>badly crippled by secrecy. So is technology development >>>sometimes. >>>Secret science is an oxymoron. >>Why not try this out on the ghosts of Ed Teller, and Enrico >>Fermi, and all those other fine scientists who did outstanding >>science in secrecy... and those who worked on radar, and sonar, >>and the proximity-fuse, etc., etc., etc.? >As I just got through saying, I know the difference between >technology development and science; apparently you don't. >>As I recall you have a degree in philosophy, and did a lot of >>writing for the Navy, and DOE, and NASA and other organizations. >I never wrote a word for the Navy or NASA. Where did you get >that from? On page 477 of Jerome Clark's "The UFO Encyclopedia" 2nd Edition is this statement in the article about you "In the 1970s as a technical editor for a consulting firm, he worked on various projects for NASA, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, the Navy and the National Science Board". If this is in error, I apologize. enerally I have found Jerry Clark to bequite accurate, but..... >I did do some consulting editing for DOE. And my >degree specialized on scientific philosophy, scientific method, >logic, etc. >>Do you have secret degrees in science? >>Did you have a TOP SECRET clearance and need to know for all the >>classified scientific projects and sufficient knowledge to say >>that the classified research didn't compare with the >>unclassified? Or is this another "informed" opinion based on >>ignorance? >You know, Stan, I am getting very tired of your gratuitous >insults. Watch your step. >I am getting very tired of your pontification without facts in >hand. Dick, you have thrown around a number of insults about Dr. Roger Leir, Frank Feschino, etc. I feel sorry for you if you think that there hasn't been a great deal of fine science done in secrecy. That notion is a real insult to the tens of thousands of scientists who have done outstanding science work in secret. Fermi and Teller were not engineers. There was a huge amount of secret science done before the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 09:07:04 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:26:03 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:00:36 -0800 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >>Subject: What Was In The Sky? >>Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >>http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >>01-05-05 >>What Was In The Sky? ><snip> >A minor meteor shower, as noted prior to the event in a post I >made here. The fact remains, and should not be forgotten, that there is much going on out there in a sky fairly _dripping_ an aggregate enigmatic that does nor have a prosaic explanation, and, facilitated by the scurrilous, we connive furiously as a society Frogs with wings 'might' not bump their asses when they hop. Watch the sky for a protracted time through some night-vision devices to expand the perception of that sky exponentially. You see hundreds of times more sky than you can unaided, so it is rather like observing for a much longer period of time waiting for something bright enough to _see_ unaided... one hour becomes hundreds of hours. I've accessed the goggles for dozens of hours over a period of a couple of years now. 'Meteors' streak in, slow, then perform a little button-hook before they blink out and vanish. Unforecast 'Satellites' travel at varying speeds, grind to instantaneous stops lasting tens of seconds, then move off in other directions. 'Bats' chase insects in sub-zero centigrade temperatures using stretched figure-eights and multiple 360 degree turns, then appear and disappear at will... 'Space', 'time' and 'surface area', folks. Much space, much time, and much surface area. Mind, matter, and movement. Stranger than we imagine, some stranger than we _can_ imagine. UFOs _are_ real. Richard Hall and Stanton Friedman, two men who will be fondly remembered when klasskurtzian others are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:10:41 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:29:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:36:52 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >I have permission from Vince White to post the following >comments: >After listening to Roger Leir on several occasions, reading his >papers, examining his implant work, I would only use terms such >as: thoughtful, meticulous, scrupulously honest, painstaking, >articulate, highly analytical, technically well informed, and >very courageous. >His first hand investigation and interviews with Varginha >witnesses are first rate. Has Dick Hall been to Varginha? >What impressed me, listening to his moving account of his >interview with a medical doctor who treated one of the survivors >of the Varginha C/R was his palpable careful relating only what >he knew as hard fact, separation of supposition and speculation, >meticulous timeline reconstruction, protection of very fearful >witness source,and obvious substantial time, money and effort to >thoroughly explore the total situation by actual detailed field >work. >We need more like Dr. Leir. >I would say amen to that. Well, Stan, that's all very fine (whoever Vince White is). Guess we will just have to agree to disagree about Leir. However, where in creation did I ever say anything about Leir and Varginha? Or is this simply more persiflage to avoid the central issues? I never said anything whatsoever about Varingha and Leir, on this List or elsewhere In a recent post you accused me of ignorantly saying things that were not true about the Flatwoods book and the author's claims about vast aerial warfare with aliens. Let's stop the ad hominem diversions and have you directly address that issue. As I did yesterday, anyone can do a simple Google search and find the author in an interview saying exactly what I attributed to him. They can read the book blurbs, reviews, etc. Now, do you
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:12:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:32:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:33:45 -0600 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper >> at Drexal University >>http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Ex >>plained.Despite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >>01-07-05 >>Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>The Iron Skeptic >>By Aaron Sakulich >I'm not sure where to begin... this is by far the weakest whine >yet from young Mr. Sakulich. >I read the majority of his screed with a chuckle barely >concealed, and with the same lip-licking feeling I used to get >in a debate with an unprepared ideologue... tasty. His use of >hackneyed generalization and indictable logic, combined with a >glaring misperception of the debate overall, leads me to the >inescapable conclusion that he is running out of valid issues >about which to effectively rant, and is therefore creating >issues about which to rant ineffectively. This guy is a poster >child for peyote use. Feed your head, Aaron. Stop starving it of >independent thought... of speculation. Narrow-mindedness will >come soon enough for cripes sake! >And his use of the word 'croppie'? Did he make up the word? >Never heard that one before. I thought it was cerealogist or >similar. Perhaps FrootLoopian would sell more books. Kyle I've communicated with young Sakulich. He's not a bad sort... and represents the "common view" about UFOs (and crop circles, etc.) held by many at the university level. He's sort of their spokesman. And coining the word "croppie" was inventive surely. Sakulich is a guy one can deal with. We know where he stands; no subterfuge or obfuscation on his part. He's an "enemy" one can confront... one who isn't sneaky or malevolent, or wrong-headed in the extreme, like Phil Klass.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:04:49 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:48:50 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Hatch >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 06:59:09 -0700 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? >>The older UFO-study guys have a penchant for the historical UFO >>events. Why? Because when death is at the door, humans go back >>through their lives and experiences rather than set a path to >>the future, which for them is not going to happen. >>(I won't name those here at UFO UpDates who are ensconced in the >>past for the above reason but we all know who they are.) > Rich, >You actually believe what you wrote? Incredible. >After decades of non-stop research you should thank your lucky >stars such people are now returning to organizing their archives >and preserving them for future generations. While they are doing >this for the ingrates of Ufology (I won't name them here, but we >all know who they are), new facts, forgotten gems and new slants >on the older cases are being discovered. >If you do not have a solid grasp of the history of Ufology, you >are not prepared to make any kind of new path of any substance. >And your illustrious path in Ufology is consituted on what you >bring to the table, which is what, exactly? >Sorry, Rich, but from personal opinion and view you haven't a clue. Hi Wendy:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:26:53 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:17:37 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:00:18 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 13:51:26 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>I know many people think of me as being a rigid advocate of >>the ETH, but I have come to seriously question the >>straightforward visitor from another planet interpretation. >>Question, not totally discard. Some of the alternative >>possibilities (other dimensions, parallel universes, time >>travel, or Lex's daemonic manipulators) may not even be >>testable. Anyway, food for thought. >Dick, >Don't do this please. Don't go there. You'll be telling us next >that someone has learned to manipulate worm holes and we can get >to another planet hundreds of light years away by stepping >through a large circular portal filled with water. >What is clearly baffling is how a man of your experience and >intelligence can have virtually "stuck" to the same set of >beliefs/principles/thoughts etc. for so very long without having >barely moved an inch over 50 years? Have we got to you at last? >You haven't secretly signed up for Leir's e-mail newsletter have >you? >Never mind Frank Warren's quite startling post on the AFHRA >files, this Dick Hall statement has more impact than Roswell. >Stuart Miller Stuart, I realize that you are, at least partly, joking. However, I have moved many inches, perhaps even a few feet, over 50 years. In my now rather ancient book "Uninvited Guests" I laid out and discussed a variety of alternatives about UFOs. Actually, I have never been the rigid ETH believer that people seem to think I am. So far I just happen to think it makes more sense than most of the other interpretations. Where I have been totally consistent (and will be until I am carried out feet first) is in adhering to scientific method (not necessarily the scientific body of knowledge, which obviously can be wrong or incomplete at times). Evidence uber alles. Change theory when necessary on the basis of strong new (validated, carefulluy checked) evidence. Thanks for the compliment, but I'm sure my comments (Confessions of Richard Couer de Leon?) have had little or no effect on
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:26:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:55:26 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 06:59:09 -0700 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? >>The older UFO-study guys have a penchant for the historical UFO >>events. Why? Because when death is at the door, humans go back >>through their lives and experiences rather than set a path to >>the future, which for them is not going to happen. >>(I won't name those here at UFO UpDates who are ensconced in the >>past for the above reason but we all know who they are.) >Rich, >You actually believe what you wrote? Incredible. >If you do not have a solid grasp of the history of Ufology, you >are not prepared to make any kind of new path of any substance. >And your illustrious path in Ufology is consituted on what you >bring to the table, which is what, exactly? >Sorry, Rich, but from personal opinion and view you haven't a >clue. Wendy... Having been involved in the UFO field for several decades (see our material about Condon, Villas-Boas, etc. at our UFO web-link site: http://www.ufolab.us as a reporter for some of that time, I come to the table with a view that the historical UFO cases are intriguing, but mined (like the JFK assassination) until there is little if anything left of value in them, a view I've stated here before. Brad Sparks (and others) have diabused me of that stance to some extent, but I still wish we who have an interest in UFOs would move to study the present-day cases with a zeal that is unencumbered by the missteps of the past. I recognize that you're in the UFO-history business, and don't like my (misunderstood) idea that the past is hogwash, because that might impact your livelihood. But it's not my intent to besmirch the work of those who still think there's gold in the old sightings/events. (I still am fascinated by the classic cases, and the possibility of hidden cases.) My point was to encourage new studies, new work, on the cases (sightings) at hand - that's all. You'll forgive me for appearing rabid about the previous efforts by UFO experts, which I tried to amend in my paean to Stan
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Massive Mars Gold Seam - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:32:13 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:56:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Massive Mars Gold Seam - Hatch >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:47:30 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Massive Mars Gold Seam >Lower middle right of: >http://tinyurl.com/56wnf >3 x enlargement: >http://www.colsweb.com/MarsGoldSeam.gif >I claim prospector finders rights from 'Big Red' (legal owner of Mars). Jan 8th 2005 >Col - - - - Hello Col: The weight of gold and cost of retrieval would be prohibitive for us at present. For the architects of the Monuments of Mars et. al., already being there, its a different matter. But, the lack of glass tubes seems to indicate disinterest on their part. Maybe it isn't gold at all, just some junk that looks golden by the effects of sunlight and imaging.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Suffolk Police Logs On Redlesham Incident - From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 09:34:49 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:57:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Suffolk Police Logs On Redlesham Incident - >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 20:33:03 +0000 >Subject: Suffolk Police Logs On Redlesham Incident >The following URL has been passed on to me by Ian Ridpath. It >may be of interest to UpDates readers with an interest in the >Rendlesham case: >http://www.suffolk.police.uk/Response/In+Touch/Library/Unusual+Lights+Incident+ At+Rendlesham.htm On this page I clicked the link "unusual Lights" which produces a PDF file that mentions the book "Skycrash" by Butler, Street and Randles. When I did a google search on keyword "skycrash" I found a link http://www.voyager.ukonline.co.uk/rend3.htm On this page it mentions the "Halt Tape" of which a transcription can be found at http://www.voyager.ukonline.co.uk/halttape.htm Does anyone have a copy of the original tape or know where it can be found?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 09:37:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:59:03 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 09:07:04 -0600 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:00:36 -0800 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >>>Subject: What Was In The Sky? >>>Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >>>http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >>>01-05-05 >>>What Was In The Sky? >><snip> >>A minor meteor shower, as noted prior to the event in a post I >>made here. >The fact remains, and should not be forgotten, that there is >much going on out there in a sky fairly _dripping_ an aggregate >enigmatic that does nor have a prosaic explanation, and, >facilitated by the scurrilous, we connive furiously as a society >Frogs with wings 'might' not bump their asses when they hop. The preceding paragraph actually read like this: "The fact remains, and should not be forgotten, that there is much going on out there in a sky fairly _dripping_ an aggregate enigmatic that does nor have a prosaic explanation, and, facilitated by the scurrilous, we connive furiously as a society to pretend this isn't so. It 'may' have been a bolide, true. Frogs with wings 'might' not bump their asses when they hop."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:07:21 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:01:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Dickenson >From: Brett Holman <b.holman.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 01:11:22 +1100 >Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News >Another quibble to keep repeating: please back up your >statement that "astrophysics has been wrong on almost >every call made till now". <snip> Brett, Your quibbling could be 'loyalty to science or academia' but it's just embarrassing for scientists who appreciate the true situation. We know all present and previous cosmology theories are inadequate. You can see that, it's preserved in the record of erroneous names which litter glossaries of astro-phys 'discoveries' - nebula, quasars and suchlike. They are wrongly named because the science was incorrect att. - not surprisingly. You've spent time assembling clouds of science obfuscation but it's wasted; real scientists admit (mostly in private) they're groping in the dark - literally. That's because, as Einstein said, "fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?' Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken." To date "we still don�t have a good idea of how a photon exists in reality" - Dr. Siepmann, Editor, Journal of Theoretics. Ditto for the rest of your stuff - the true situation regarding 'particle physics' is reflected in item http://www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/parts.txt and again was summed up by Einstein - that physics presently consists of "extracting one incomprehensible from another incomprehensible". A brave effort Brett, but a waste of your time, mine and the reader's. Cheers
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 11:18:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:06:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Reynolds >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:41:35 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:19:12 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>(Isn't that how Penicillin and Pasteurization, plus a lot of >>other things, were "discovered'?) >I think you are referring to serendipity or more or less >accidental discovery, which is fine. But that's not the same as >telling me that the moon is made of green cheese, or aliens live >on the back side of the moon, or vast aerial combat has occurred >between humans and aliens with great loss of human life, or that >Roger Leir's 'alien implants' have been shown to be anything >unusual. >>He who has been chastened, >>Rich Reynolds >Just meant it to be friendly debate. No harm in stretching our >minds a little. Richard Hall.. You're an historian of note and amply credentialed about UFOs, the Civil War, and other things, so when you have something to say, I listen... intently. I'm agnostic about many UFO sightings/events, but know that UFOs exist (having seen a few in my day, with witnesses). And like Alfred Lehmberg, have more than faith that they exist, as do you, because of your exhaustive efforts in the field. But my inate reportorial cynicism and your logical skepticism often keep us from adorning bizarre episodes with credibility. You do so from an historian's perspective; I from a journalistic background. But I have been encumbered by a nod to Jung's intuitive concepts and, thus, have to consider things paranormal or weird (to the "normal" person). You, like our guy Shane here, apply logic and reason, so you have to throw out those things which betray ratiocination. My point? That when you question items here, even my meager rantings, I take that as a rightful slap in the head, and am never offended by your views. There are Mount Rushmore types in ufology (the term I find offputting and pretentious, like Graphology, which I studied in college): you are there, with Friedman, Clark, Maccabee and those long gone, like Donald Keyhoe, McDonald, Jessup, and Dr. Mack.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:52:19 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:10:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:12:16 -0500 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:33:45 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>>Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper >>> at Drexal University >>>http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Ex >>>plained.Despite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >>>01-07-05 >>>Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>>The Iron Skeptic >>>By Aaron Sakulich >>I'm not sure where to begin... this is by far the weakest whine >>yet from young Mr. Sakulich. >>I read the majority of his screed with a chuckle barely >>concealed, and with the same lip-licking feeling I used to get >>in a debate with an unprepared ideologue... tasty. His use of >>hackneyed generalization and indictable logic, combined with a >>glaring misperception of the debate overall, leads me to the >>inescapable conclusion that he is running out of valid issues >>about which to effectively rant, and is therefore creating >>issues about which to rant ineffectively. This guy is a poster >>child for peyote use. Feed your head, Aaron. Stop starving it of >>independent thought... of speculation. Narrow-mindedness will >>come soon enough for cripes sake! >>And his use of the word 'croppie'? Did he make up the word? >>Never heard that one before. I thought it was cerealogist or >>similar. Perhaps FrootLoopian would sell more books. Rich, Kyle, Et Al, My regret here is admitting that I read another one of Sakulich's utterances, ad nauseum! >Kyle >I've communicated with young Sakulich. He's not a bad sort... >and represents the "common view" about UFOs (and crop circles, >etc.) held by many at the university level. He's sort of their >spokesman. Rich, I've accepted your view on Sakulich the last time he "put pen to paper", and his character doesn't need to come into question for me, as "ignorance" crosses all lines. I do, however, question the idea that he represents the "common view" of young scholars. >And coining the word "croppie" was inventive surely. >Sakulich is a guy one can deal with. We know where he stands; no >subterfuge or obfuscation on his part. "Ignore" is my preferred action; we do know where he stands certainly - his mind is in a closed box - not seeing the light of day. I would also argue that his rants "do offer" subterfuge and obfuscation," he just isn't aware of it. >He's an "enemy" one can confront... one who isn't sneaky or >malevolent, or wrong-headed in the extreme, like Phil Klass. He's a "side effect" of societal programming, not sneaky or malevolent, just narrow minded and lazy. >It's the "agenda" mokes who make me nervous, not the >confrontational types like Aaron Sakulich. >Rich Reynolds For me it's the "don't bother me with the evidence, my mind is made-up" crowd that makes me twitch.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 11:48:26 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:11:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper > at Drexal University >http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop->Circles.Explained.Desp ite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >01-07-05 >Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >The Iron Skeptic >By Aaron Sakulich <snip> >So there you have it. Crop circles are not, as so many claim, >attempts at communication by aliens. They are certainly not the >work of God himself warning us of our sinful ways. Atlantis has >nothing to do with this. Bigfoot isn't even in the picture. What >they are is a statistical aberration: Most young men fill their >free hours with beer and women; a small portion of the >population prefers to go out and scare the crap out of farmers. >Crop circles are the product of boredom on one hand and >exaggeration on the other, nothing else. >Aaron Sakulich is a senior majoring in materials science and >engineering. Good to see Mr. Sakulich is still at it. What I may have missed is his on the ground field research on the subject he's commenting on. Did he go anywhere or interview anybody or did he just read some stuff and make an armchair conclusion? It would be great one day when he's ready to apply his scholastic muscles in the field more. With a degree in materials and engineering he'd be a great asset to help weed out the scamsters.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 11:03:52 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:12:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:33:45 -0600 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper >> at Drexal University >>http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Explained.Desp ite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >>01-07-05 >>Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>The Iron Skeptic >>By Aaron Sakulich Another thing the iron craptic tries to do is use examples of bogus research to illustrate the tendency for Ufologists to exaggerate (Which is way off the subject of cropcircles). The example he uses is of one Robert Randall who had set up a bogus
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Two Decades Listening For ET From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:17:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:17:04 -0500 Subject: Two Decades Listening For ET Source: Astrobiology Magazine http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1 377&mode=threadℴ=0&thold=0 01-07-05 Listening for ET: Two Decades by David Pescovitz The SETI Institute predicts that we'll detect an extraterrestrial transmission within twenty years. If that turns out to be true, it'll probably be the folks at UC Berkeley's Hat Creek radio observatory who will have heard the call. Right now, the Allen Telescope Array of more than three- hundred dishes is under construction at Hat Creek five hours north of San Francisco. Within a year, the first thirty dishes will be operational, forming the basis of a giant ear that listens for intelligent beings in space while simultaneously gathering data for groundbreaking astronomy research. William "Jack" Welch, UC Berkeley professor of electrical engineering and astronomy, has been a driving force in the design and construction of the Allen Telescope Array (ATA) since the project first got off the ground five years ago as a joint effort between UC Berkeley and the SETI Institute. Named for major donor Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft, the array will eventually consist of 350 6.1-meter radio dishes electronically networked together into a radio telescope with unprecedented sensitivity. Precisely distributed across 2.6- acres on the Hat Creek grounds, the combined dishes will have far greater sensitivity than much more expensive 100-meter telescopes. The SETI project scours millions of radio channels for narrow- band signals, indicative of intelligent origin. It's like listening for a station as you twist your car radio's tuning knob past all the static. Until now, SETI has used limited time from myriad radio telescopes around the world, limiting the number of stars that can be observed. However, the ATA will be dedicated to the project, speeding up the SETI search by a factor of 100. Meanwhile, the unique design of the system enables astronomers to monitor a huge range of wavelengths to observe other cosmic phenomena simultaneously with the SETI search. "SETI is admittedly a long-shot," says Welch, holder of UC Berkeley's first Chair in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. "I don't have the patience to do only that, so it appeals to me to have a steady flow of other data for us to study as well." For example, Welch and his colleagues will use the array to make a cosmological map of atomic hydrogen, the most abundant element we know of. Indeed, the visible universe may be composed of up to ninety-percent hydrogen. Determining its spatial distribution in nearby galaxies could provide insight into the evolution of the cosmos and the mysteries of dark matter. "We'll be able to look halfway back to the beginning of the universe," Welch says. "The ability to observe that far back into time is limited right now." To crank up the telescope's sensitivity, Welch and his colleagues devised a bit of ingenious antenna technology. In traditional pyramid-shaped antennas like those used in the ATA, the signal is picked up at the tip of the structure, called the feed, and runs down wires to the receiver. The problem, Welch explains, is that much of the signal gets lost along the way. To keep the signal as pure as possible, the Berkeley researchers shoehorned the receiver components inside the feed itself. "It's just one new wrinkle for technology that was originally developed in the 1950s, but it enables our feed to essentially have no limitation on bandwidth," Welch says. Right now, just three prototype dishes are being put through their paces at Hat Creek. In the next few months though, the researchers will install more than two-dozen others, nearly one dish a day. By Summer, Welch hopes this first small array will be scanning stars many light-years away. Whether ET is intelligent enough to call remains to be seen, or rather heard, but Welch is convinced that there's something out there. "The recent discovery of planets around many nearby stars is a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 UFO Books & Videos For Kids? From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:22:12 -0500 Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that introduce the phenom of UFOlogy to kids. Often the resources are laden with high brown scientific jargon that's a wee bit too steep for the wee ones. Actually it would be a good idea for the basic groups like 10 to 13 year olds. Just to answer some of their questions. I often ask kids what they know about aliens. What surprises me is that if I ask ten kids, 8 will claim to be aliens and go into astounding detail about their home worlds and how they arrived to Earth. It's quite entertaining and sometimes startling at what they come up with. When I was a kid my first UFO book was a magazine called LOOK and Ivan T. Sanderson's books. I even had a copy of the Condon Report and forgot how I got my hands on it but there were always government surplus stuff around and you'ld be surprised what you'ld find stuck between a book or forgotten in an old desk draw at a flea market :) Anyhow, if any of you have written books or produced vids that kids can understand please let me know.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:20:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:24:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:33:45 -0600 >Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper >>at Drexal University >>http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Explained.Desp ite.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >>01-07-05 >>Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >>The Iron Skeptic >>By Aaron Sakulich >I'm not sure where to begin... this is by far the weakest whine >yet from young Mr. Sakulich. >I have a fairly healthy interest in UFOs, but I am not >convinced that ET communicates via crop circles. That said, I >believe I could produce a more cogent and persuasive argument >against same after a 3-day bender with Greg Boone. No disrespect >intended. <g> >Crop circles are not UFOs, and no compelling evidence has ever >been produced to support the hypothesis that UFOs are in any way >responsible for them. Hi Kyle, The article was rediculous and amateurish at best. Like you I don't yet see any real connection between crop circles and UFOs [many, I'm sure, are hoaxes] other than the odd anomalous video of small orbs zipping about the area. However I think the connection arises from earlier reports of UFO landings in fields of medium or tall grass-even copses of trees- and leaving a swale, pressed down, depression and sometimes a burnt ring in the area effected. These still occur. Ted Phillips has hundreds of instances in his database.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: 'Cryptohominids' And The 'Alien Autopsy' - From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:03:53 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:26:29 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Cryptohominids' And The 'Alien Autopsy' - >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 22:30:25 -0800 (PST) >Subject: 'Cryptohominids' And The 'Alien Autopsy' >For a linked version of this post, please see: http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2005_01_01_posthumanblues_archive.html#110498 946868873869 >There's been some arrestingly offbeat speculation by Ed Gehrman >on UFO UpDates proposing the "alien" in the "alien autopsy" >footage - if an authentic cadaver and not FX trickery - is a >terrestrially evolved humanoid. This idea converges nicely with >my own musings on earthly hominids developing a technological >culture in relative seclusion. Hi Mac, EBK, List, Yes, I believe there is evidence that the creature in the AA footage is an "authentic cadaver", and there is absolutely no evidence for believing that it is a bit of "FX trickery". I do propose that the creature is a "humanoid" if you mean that it resembles a human, but I don't think it's a "hominid". My thesis is that the creature is an evolved monotreme and somewhat resembles humans because of convergent evolution which is an evolutionary process where organisms not closely related begin to acquire similar characteristics, a result of similar responses to similar environmental conditions: http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/Evolution/convergent_evolution_examples.htm I believe this evolution took place on the southern supercontinent of Gondwana. At that time it included most of the landmasses which make up today's southern hemisphere, including Antarctica, South America, Africa, Madagascar, India, Australia- New Guinea, New Zealand, and New Caledonia. Gondwana was located where Antarctica is today, but the climate was typically mild with average global temperatures considerably warmer than they are today. Gondwana was host to a huge variety of flora and fauna for over 180 millions of years. Gondwana began to break up about 160 million years ago. Africa became separated and then India. New Zealand followed about 80 million years ago >For example, I've theorized that ancestors of the Flores >"hobbits" (or a similar race) may have been forced to take up >hidden residence in homo sapiens society. Moreover, the oral >mythology surrounding the Flores beings has the general flavor >of contemporary UFO occupant reports - human abduction, etc. >Even the physical appearance of "ufonauts" and the "hobbits" >share interesting similarities; both are usually described as >short, with large eyes and long arms. Yes this may be true, but I don't believe that the "hobbit" is related to the creature in the AA footage. >There are notable anomalies in the "autopsy" film; the being is >polydactyl with an out-sized head (rather than the comparably >microcephalic head possessed by the Flores specimens) and lacks >secondary sexual characteristics. These traits argue against a >normal mammalian origin, prompting theories of genetic >engineering (presumably at the hands of competent extrasolar >aliens using human stock). These features do not exclude "normal mammalian origins" but I do believe they exclude hominid origins. A monotreme is a mammal with retained reptilian features; this fuels the genetic engineering theories. >The "autopsy" footage has always intrigued me because the >supposed alien looks far too human to be anything other than a >close human relative. This could be explained if the being is >a.) a fake, >b.) a terrestrial genetic/surgical experiment, >or >c.) a "cryptohominid" that fell into government hands after a >hardware malfunction - possibly but by no means necessarily the >famed "Roswell crash." Yes, "C" is the correct answer. >The national security implications of the latter would be at >least as dramatic as the US government learning that its >airspace was being penetrated by extraterrestrials - and on an >anthropological note, far more disturbing. I agree >If the cryptohominid theory is accurate, then it provides a >plausible motive for nonhuman craft to visit our nuclear >installations and military bases, as UFOs have done for 50 >years; fellow terrestrials may wish to determine the risk posed >by emerging destructive technology or even attempt to thwart it. >Coincidentally (?), the modern UFO phenomenon began shortly >after the development of radar, reliable aircraft and atomic >power - three factors that may have justly aroused the concern >of any secretive "aliens" in our midst. It's even possible the >global conflict of the second World War forced cryptohominids to >subtly intervene - perhaps, as I wondered in a previous post, >encouraging the popular conception of UFOs as spaceships from >some other planet. One can hardly think of a better "cover- >story." Yes I agree 100% >Lastly, but by no means unimportantly, there is a vast >overlooked literature of "little people" in our midst that >extends from ancient legend to contemporary times. I'm aware of >one first-hand narrative - which I tend to accept as factual - > involving members of a race of diminutive nomadic humanoids >that can successfully pass themselves off as members of "normal" >society. They claim to predate known North American cultures and >appear to have an abiding interest in at least some members of >"visible" society. Could these strangers have achieved more, >technologically, than they choose to let on in face-to-face >contacts? Yes, I still agree >I think it's perfectly conceivable that at least one race of >human-like beings could be sharing the planet with us. Mammals who appear to be human-like. >If they >belong to an ancient, enduring civilization - however seemingly >disenfranchised - it's probable they're smarter than us; >contact, if desired, would be on their terms. Unless they experience an equipment malfunction as I think happened in New Mexico, May 31 and July 2nd, 1947. >In the meantime, >it's near-impossible to guess how deeply their culture infringes >on our own, or if our own intelligence agencies have been >quietly scrambling, for the last half-century, to determine >whether they represent friend, foe - or something else entirely. Yes that's the gist of it. And we're still not much closer to an
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Weird Iapetus From: Paul Anderson <paulanderson.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:15:35 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:29:28 -0500 Subject: Weird Iapetus Ok, I know this isn't crop circle or UFO-related, but as one of my life-long passions has also been space exploration, here is an update which may be of interest, from the Cassini mission at Saturn. Iapetus, the famous half-light/half-dark moon is even odder it turns out, notably with an unusual long, narrow, tall ridge that circles the moon around it's equator (or at least about half of it, and right through the centre of the "dark" terrain), first seen in new images taken by Cassini in December and in higher resolution during closest approach on New Year's Eve. I'm not suggesting anything specific here of course, it's just one of those odd, unexpected findings that's making people scratch their heads (JPL in particular). 'Saturn's Moon Iapetus Shows a Bulging Waistline' http://tinyurl.com/6dlct 'Cassini Images Iapetus' http://tinyurl.com/5l2rq 'Encountering Iapetus' http://ciclops.lpl.arizona.edu/view_event.php?id=9 Image mosaic showing the "ridge": http://ciclops.lpl.arizona.edu/view.php?id=706 I'm looking forward to Huygen's landing on Titan on the 14th also, should be most interesting. And of course the Mars rovers are still going strong! Paul ________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:45:00 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:30:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 11:49:54 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:28:54 EST >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:27:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>Given the apparent telepathic nature of the interactions and >>>behaviors, this implies we can never get the upper hand. >>What does it take to see whether the project had its cameras >>ready or not?? Just high-resolution stealth monitoring, just >>like the Russians do to avoid our satellite cameras. The >>Russians optically and radar track our intelligence satellites >>so that they can hide military developments so that the >>satellite cameras are not "ready." >Yes, obviously we can make the assumption that optical means are >used to monitor the observers. For UFOs, if military related, >seems a waste of effort and illogical. They can just employ >invisibility/ camaflouge methods, send out a EMP blast, have the >guys arrested or simply go elsewhere. If UFOs are alien, the >same holds true. >Dr.Cornet's findings of apparent telepathy: http://www.abcfield.force9.co.uk/bcornet/bcornet7.html >match Dr.Rutledge's findings. This has come up in alot of >sightings by regular folk whom we can dismiss easily as being >yokels, but do we just dismiss the "more reputable" folk too? How can you be sure this is "telepathy" and not optical surveillance and even microwave monitoring of brainwave functions? Occam's Razor. >>>Well, its not that they can't go further, its just that it boils >>>down to what does the phenomena WANT us to know/record. If this >>>is the case, then I have a real problem wondering why we bother >>>at all playing such a game. Do we have to jump through a little >>>hoop, balance a cracker on our nose or what to get a good >>>picture or data? >>Intelligence agencies already have an answer for that: Ever hear >>of "walk-ins"? These are defectors who "walk in" to our >>embassies abroad or wherever and offer up their services as >>spies, either to stay where they are and spy for us, or to flee >>their country and seek asylum. The problem is that the walk-in >>defector might be a double-agent sent to spy on us or to deceive >>us with carefully rigged disinformation (the true definition). >>US intelligence for a while had a long internal debate about >>whether to just blanket refuse all walk-ins (like your >>suggestion we "don't play the game") because so many turned out >>to be double agents, or whether to accept walk-ins but be >>vigilant, because some may be legitimate. The final decision was >>the latter, and the Angleton camp that wanted to just stop >>accepting defectors was rejected. >Interesting idea. The only difference is that we have no insight >as to the right answer or norm or legitimacy so how can we be >vigilant? If EVERY time we try to take optical spectra of a UFO, >they monitor that we are doing it (via optical monitoring or >telepathy) and change the spectra to some random thing or to >match a jet afterburner or hot air balloon flame, then what >progress is possible? <snip> Sometimes the answers are out there (as the home improvement commercial says). First, by Occam's Razor in science you cannot assume the most complex explanation is right until you have eliminated the simpler. Second, you cannot assume that the evasion tactics will be done every single time. Why do UFO's even allow themselves to be seen at all if they could use stealth so that we can never see them? Either they cannot successfully use stealth, or can only use it partially or intermittently, or they choose not to. Until each possibility has been investigated you cannot just assume the answer to that question. Geez louise, if the NSA took this attitude "Holy cow the Russian codes are so unbreakable we will never decode them!" they (its predecessors ASA and AFSA) would never have decoded the Venona intercepts that exposed the atomic spy rings. Many times "unbreakable" codes have been compromised and broken because a teletype operator slipped up and sent a message in the clear, so the clear text and the cipher text could be compared and all the messages then could be decrypted besides the one sent uncoded by mistake because then the entire cipher system is laid bare. Or a replacement cipher key was accidentally not used and a precious "one-time" pad was used used "two times" thus allowing it to be broken. Applying the analogy to deciphering the UFO mystery, you simply cannot assume that maximum evasion and maximum 100% stealth is used or is even capable of being applied by the UFO's. This goes back to the long tiresome discussions of ETH
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Washington Times Article Of Interest - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 16:42:14 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:34:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Washington Times Article Of Interest - Friedman >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 18:09:33 -0500 >Subject: Washington Times Article Of Interest >Washington Times article of interest to Listers: >http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring.htm >12-31-04 >Inside the Ring >By Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough >THE WASHINGTON TIMES >Loose lips >After The Washington Times disclosed internal Army briefings >that detailed new plans to put women in combat, Lt. Gen. James >Campbell put out a memo ordering officials to better safeguard >materials. Here are his four measures: >"All staff and secretariat offices will keep strict >accountability of the number of copies produced." >"Staff members... will not list the subject of specific meetings >and briefings on their routinely distributed personal calendars. >Either indicate pre-decisional briefing or the names of the >people attending the briefing." >"Within your office, ensure paper-based products with words, >regardless of classification, are discarded in strike bags." >[A strike bag means it is set aside for destruction.] >"Finally, strictly enforce e-mail discipline. Think what you say >and who might read it. Take it to the extreme =E2?" imagine what >you are putting in an e-mail will be on the front page of the >paper tomorrow. When in doubt, use classified e-mail." >[End of excerpt] >Several comments are in order. >This Generals ideas are nothing new and incredible as government >officials have practiced these concepts in years gone by. >Of real interest is the comment about "will not list the subject >of specific meetings and brierfings on their routinely >distributed personal calendars. Either indicate pre-decisional >briefing or the names of the people attending the briefing." >In the past I have heard some people in UFOs state that >documents at the archives should be very specific and detailed >as to the subject matter of a meeting or briefing. For example: >"Top Secret UFO ET material blah blah" In fact it is rather >common to not list subject matter of meetings or whatever. I >have seen at the archives (as I am sure Stan Friedman has) >documents which go something like: Meeting with President, and >X, Y and Z 4:30 PM. So the meeting could be about some routine >matter, it could be a high level matter, or an even higher level >matter. >Point being is that the subject matter of the meeting/briefing >may not be on the document. Also, even though a document may not >be perfect (as to the styles and format that classified >documents are supposed to be written to) it still doesn't change >the fact that it may be a highly classified document. Yes, this argument has come up before, notably by Phil Klass. I was able to show that the exact reverse was the real situation; That very often only the sender and recipient would know what was being discussed in a TS memo. For example, early TS memos to General Twining about Operation Solarium gave no clue as to what
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:35:02 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - White >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >Subject: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >Databasing the common elements in UFO events might elicit >something(s) which could (or should) lead us all to insights >which might be more productive than the skeptical stances by >some oldsters here or the rampaging zeal of the younger set who >pile everything up in a heap, from which a sensible scrutiny >is nearly impossible. This has probably already been done somewhere, and I've suggested it on this list a couple of times, but I'll repeat it - if you want to extract common elements, the big job leading to that happy state is to set up a system of _codes_ for as many facets of each case as humanly possible. This requires people willing to read and encode the statements in each case. Ideally an expert in UFOlogy would do this, but anyone with a systematic approach to tasks could at least theoretically do it. With cases thus broken into codes, database "query language" can extract your common elements in a literal flash! And do so over and over as new ideas occur. It's real simple, for example: UFO_SHAPE: CS = classic saucer CG = cigar OV = oval SP = sphere TR = triangle XX = other ... etc. You get it. (There always has to be an "other", and, in future work, codes can be added by re-scanning the original data if needed.) As better ideas occur to researchers and analysts, these simple and very small "queries" can be modified, new ones generated, over and over, and each query result also occurs in a flash. I'm _very_ puzzled as to why no one has identified a set of already coded data so discussions on the best queries can take place and some results posted here. Imagine the brainstorming potential of this list thinking up new queries, and what conclusions could come forth with very small time delay. If set up right, queries could even be entered on line with results popping up in your browsers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:14:42 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:36:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:17:37 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >Never mind Frank Warren's quite startling post on the AFHRA >files, this Dick Hall statement has more impact than Roswell. <snip> Huh? Someone wrote to an AF general asking about Roswell? So what? How is that "startling"? Anyone can write a letter about anything to an AF general (or the President), and that proves nothing. You can put your own Roswell theory in a letter to an AF general and then you or someone can make a FOIA request for the "government record" of your own letter that you created, which
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 8 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:20:05 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:38:05 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:26:38 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 06:59:09 -0700 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? >Wendy... >Having been involved in the UFO field for several decades (see >our material about Condon, Villas-Boas, etc. at our UFO web-link >site: >http://www.ufolab.us >as a reporter for some of that time, I come to the table with a >view that the historical UFO cases are intriguing, but mined >(like the JFK assassination) until there is little if anything >left of value in them, a view I've stated here before. >Brad Sparks (and others) have diabused me of that stance to some >extent, but I still wish we who have an interest in UFOs would >move to study the present-day cases with a zeal that is >unencumbered by the missteps of the past. >I recognize that you're in the UFO-history business, and don't >like my (misunderstood) idea that the past is hogwash, because >that might impact your livelihood. >But it's not my intent to besmirch the work of those who still >think there's gold in the old sightings/events. (I still am >fascinated by the classic cases, and the possibility of hidden >cases.) >My point was to encourage new studies, new work, on the cases >(sightings) at hand - that's all. >You'll forgive me for appearing rabid about the previous efforts >by UFO experts, which I tried to amend in my paean to Stan >Friedman (and others) in Part Two of my missive. Rich... Let me get my hip waders off. You've made a rather deep honey wagon spill. OK. There now. What was this about? Oh, yes... You don't appear being rabid. You are rabid. Now if the statements you make above are true, then in your first posting, that's not what you said. Being rabid fits... A. You do not understand that very diligent and careful researchers are focusing on present cases with just as much zeal as we old timers. B. "UFO History" is not a business. If it was, many of us wouldn't be hob-knobbing around and wasting time on rabid people. C. "Missteps of the past" are what gives Ufology its character, just like any other science during its evolution. Being rabid means you're clueless. D. You are not "writing a missive." You are in the clutch of rabidly being goofy. Brad Sparks will be an excellent partner for you. You can't go wrong there and should hang on his every word. He's a genius.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:46:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:05:54 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:34 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? ><snip> >>Databasing the common elements in UFO events might elicit >>something(s) which could (or should) lead us all to insights >>which might be more productive than the skeptical stances by >>some oldsters here or the rampaging zeal of the younger set who >>pile everything up in a heap, from which a sensible scrutiny >>is nearly impossible. >This has probably already been done somewhere, and I've >suggested it on this List a couple of times, but I'll repeat it >- if you want to extract common elements, the big job leading to >that happy state is to set up a system of _codes_ for as many >facets of each case as humanly possible. This requires people >willing to read and encode the statements in each case. Ideally >an expert in UFOlogy would do this, but anyone with a systematic >approach to tasks could at least theoretically do it. >With cases thus broken into codes, database "query language" can >extract your common elements in a literal flash! And do so over >and over as new ideas occur. >It's real simple, for example: >UFO_SHAPE: >CS = classic saucer >CG = cigar >OV = oval >SP = sphere >TR = triangle >XX = other >... etc. You get it. (There always has to be an "other", and, in >future work, codes can be added by re-scanning the original data >if needed.) >As better ideas occur to researchers and analysts, these simple >and very small "queries" can be modified, new ones generated, >over and over, and each query result also occurs in a flash. I'm >_very_ puzzled as to why no one has identified a set of already >coded data so discussions on the best queries can take place and >some results posted here. >Imagine the brainstorming potential of this list thinking up new >queries, and what conclusions could come forth with very small >time delay. If set up right, queries could even be entered on >line with results popping up in your browsers. >Anyone? Nicely put Eleanor: It wouldn't involve a _lot_ of work if some of the more detailed, sensible sightings were "computered" by one of the geeks (I mean that affectionately) here. Several cases could acts as a template and if something worthwhile showed up, then more data could be gathered - a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:52:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:09:40 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:20:05 -0700 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 10:26:38 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 06:59:09 -0700 >>>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >>My point was to encourage new studies, new work, on the cases >>(sightings) at hand - that's all. >>You'll forgive me for appearing rabid about the previous efforts >>by UFO experts, which I tried to amend in my paean to Stan >>Friedman (and others) in Part Two of my missive. >Rich... >Let me get my hip waders off. You've made a rather deep honey >wagon spill. >OK. There now. What was this about? Oh, yes... >You don't appear being rabid. You are rabid. >Now if the statements you make above are true, then in your >first posting, that's not what you said. >Being rabid fits... >A. You do not understand that very diligent and careful >researchers are focusing on present cases with just as much zeal >as we old timers. >B. "UFO History" is not a business. If it was, many of us >wouldn't be hob-knobbing around and wasting time on rabid >people. >C. "Missteps of the past" are what gives Ufology its character, >just like any other science during its evolution. Being rabid >means you're clueless. >D. You are not "writing a missive." You are in the clutch of >rabidly being goofy. >Brad Sparks will be an excellent partner for you. You can't go >wrong there and should hang on his every word. He's a genius. Wendy, I am humbled. I'm still rabid perhaps, but not as virulently as I was. I'n familiar with your work, credibility, and sincere nature - and some UFO UpDaters remind me that you're actually a very nice person. I take you comments with good will, and will mull them over. I won't censor myself because of them, but I'll be more
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Groff From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 16:33:41 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:10:41 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Groff >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST >Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that >introduce the phenom of UFOlogy to kids. >Often the resources are laden with high brown scientific jargon >that's a wee bit too steep for the wee ones. >Actually it would be a good idea for the basic groups like 10 to >13 year olds. Just to answer some of their questions. >I often ask kids what they know about aliens. What surprises me >is that if I ask ten kids, 8 will claim to be aliens and go into >astounding detail about their home worlds and how they arrived >to Earth. It's quite entertaining and sometimes startling at >what they come up with. >When I was a kid my first UFO book was a magazine called LOOK >and Ivan T. Sanderson's books. I even had a copy of the Condon >Report and forgot how I got my hands on it but there were always >government surplus stuff around and you'ld be surprised what >you'ld find stuck between a book or forgotten in an old desk >draw at a flea market :) >Anyhow, if any of you have written books or produced vids that >kids can understand please let me know. You might find something here.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: UFOs Physical Or Subtle - Chichikov From: Pavel Chichikov <fishhook.nul> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 19:48:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:16:08 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs Physical Or Subtle - Chichikov >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers -> >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 08:30:00 -0500 >Subject: UFOs Physical Or Subtle <snip> >Betty: I went in the door and it's very bright. I can't take you > any further. >Fred Max: Why? >Betty: Because... I can't take you past this door. >Fred Max: Why are you so happy? >Betty: It's just, ah, I just can't tell you about it.... Words > cannot explain it. It's wonderful. It's for everybody. I > just can't explain this. I understand that everything is > one. Everything fits together. It's beautiful! >This sounds like a typical description of the experience of >Brahman realization, a state of consciousness that has been >sought by yogis and mystics the world over. In the Vedic >tradition, there are several schools of philosophical thought >regarding the nature of Brahman realization... Betty Andreasson's experience of oneness and of the rightness of things is not unknown to Catholics, nor to Christians in general. So far as I know, however, Andreasson is a Christian, and to Christians belief in reincarnation and the transmigration of souls is an error.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Bueche From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 19:59:33 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:32:27 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Bueche >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST >Fwd Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:22:12 -0500 >Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that >introduce the phenom of UFOlogy to kids. Eric Elfman's "Almanac of Alien Encounters", bar none. I suggest it to reporters all the time. Reporters being similar to children in that they need a quick, accurate source of info. Here's a synopsis I wrote up awhile back: Only 168 pages in length, with large type and plentiful illustrations to boot, this almanac somehow manages to be the best overview of the alien encounter/UFO phenomenon from "pre- history" to 2001 that we have seen. Unlike similar books which are intended for the youth market and produced with very little scholarship, this age-neutral book is very comprehensive. The entries are well balanced, offering both pro and con ideas in a neutral and intelligent voice. It is in our estimation an exceptionally accurate overview. This book may have been intended for the youth market, but because of the comprehensive work that obviously went into it, we suggest that it may well satisfy the needs of any person who may be researching or writing on this subject. We particularly recommend it for reporters who need information quickly.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: Two Decades Listening For ET - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 23:16:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:36:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Two Decades Listening For ET - LeClair >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers -> >Date: Saturday, January 08, 2005 5:17 PM >Subject: UFO UpDate: Two Decades Listening For ET >Source: Astrobiology Magazine http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1 377&mode=threadℴ=0&thold=0 >01-07-05 >Listening for ET: Two Decades >by David Pescovitz >The SETI Institute predicts that we'll detect an
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 China And India Know About Underground UFO Base From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:42:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:42:04 -0500 Subject: China And India Know About Underground UFO Base Source: India Daily http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-09a-05.asp 01-09-05 China and India both know about underground UFO base in the Himalayan border area deep into the tectonic plates Staff Reporter Kongka La is the low ridge pass in the Himalayas (the blue oval in the map). It is in the disputed India-China border area in Ladakh. In the map the red zone is the disputed area still under Chinese control in the Aksai Chin area. The Chinese held northeastern part is known as Aksai Chin and Indian South West is known as Ladakh. This was where Indian and Chinese army fought major war in 1962. The area is one of the least accessed area in the world and by agreement the two countries do not patrol that part of the border. According to many tourists, Buddhist monks and the local people of Ladakh, Indian Army and Chinese Military maintain the line of control. But there is something much more serious happening in this area. According to the few locals people on the Indian and Chinese side, this is where the UFOs are seen coming out of the ground, According to many, the UFO underground bases are in this region and both the Indian and Chinese Government know this very well.. Recently, some Hindu pilgrims on their way to Mount Kailash from the Western pass, came across strange lights in the sky. The local guides while in the Chinese territory told them that this was nothing new and is a normal phenomenon from Kongka Pass area the tensed border between India and China. This strange lighted triangular silent crafts show up from underground and moves almost vertically up. Some of the adventurous pilgrims wanted to look into the site. They were first turned by the Chinese guard posts as they were refused entry from the Chinese side and then when they tried to approach the site from Indian side, the Indian border patrol also turned them down in spite of their permit to travel between the two countries. The pilgrims at that stage started quizzing the Indian border petrol personnel. According to them, the security personnel told them that they are ordered not to allow any one near the area of interest and it is true that strange objects come out from under the ground with amplified and modulated lights. India�s Special Forces and possible visit the area by intelligence agencies. The locals start laughing in that area when they are asked about these UFO sightings. According to them the extra-terrestrial presence is well known and is in deep into the ground. They believe neither the Indian or Chinese Governments want to expose the fact for some reason. When they bring up thus matter to local Governments, they are told to keep quiet. This is the region where the Euresian plate and the Indian plate have created convergent plate boundaries. Convergent plate boundaries are formed where one plate dives under another. Thus this is one of the very few areas in the world where the depth of the crust twice as much as in other places. The opposite is found in hot spots like Yellow Stone National Park in America where the earth�s crust in thin. The double thick earth crust allows the creation of underground bases deep into the tectonic plates. Kongka La has beautiful rocks and granites. For some strange reasons neither Chinese nor Indian authorities ever excavate, dig or mine holes in this area. The area is pristine and untouched. Recently, both India and China have moved forward to solve all border disputes and start the Sino-Indian relations all over again. The Aksai Chin area is still disputed. But interesting while negotiations both the Governments are indifferent on this area. India and China as shown in the accompanying maps have huge border along the Himalayas and they are negotiating on all these regions. Though India claims that Aksai Chin is part of India, the common belief in the Government, it is not a show stopper. On the other hand, Chinese after winning Aksai Chin from India in 1962 war, built a strategic military highway. Now they are using an alternate highway no to bother with the area in Kongka La. Recently in the local school, young children of the area entered into a drawing contest. More than half of the drawings had to do with strange objects in the sky and some coming out of the mountains. Many of them even know what and when to look for. Many UFO researchers believe that there are hidden UFO bases under the ocean and deep under the ground. Kongka La is experiencing some strange phenomenon and suspicious objects coming out of the inaccessible huge mountains (Himalayas) and both the Governments refuse to come out and say what these are.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:46:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:10:41 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> Stan and Dick, I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. I have not read the book as I have not felt there is enough hard evidence in the case to be worthy of spending the money. I have studied other investigations and resources regarding the case. There are meteorological records showing that a meteorite horizontally traversed several states (including West Virginia) from east to west. At 7:15 pm several youths saw what they thought was a UFO land on a hilltop. There is quite a disagreement in their accounts. An adult who soon went to the alleged landing site has stated that the alleged landing skid marks and the oily substance on the ground were caused by his pickup truck at the location. He also stated that the alleged putrid smell may well have been from one form of local grass. It is entirely possible that the kids could have become nauseated from hysteria. There are anecdotal monster stories that may have been a frantic misidentification of a barn owl on a tree. This monster subsequently just disappeared forever and no wreckage of a UFO was reported at that site. There was no account of the alleged UFO landing and then taking off from the hilltop. No UFO was ever seen on the ground. The Blue Book report of that time nor any records I am aware of account for the author's alleged claim of a UFO dogfight and the losses of aircraft over the Atlantic ocean. There was the loss of an F-94 plane over the Gulf of Mexico but I do not see any relation to this case. I am not claiming to know more than anyone else regarding this case but I have not yet seen any real evidence indicating that a UFO landed and that an alien was present. Anecdotal stories are worthless unless they lead to hard evidence. I am not claiming to have expertise in ufology but, as I have said before, I am trained as a detective and maintain standards of investigation and evidence as used by current police detectives. I am not a scientist but I am familiar with the scientific method and its standards. I wish _all_ UFO cases were investigated and evaluated using those methodologies and adhering to professional standards. I have also spent decades studying this phenomenon that has been investigated and evaluated by a great many people but these people have been almost all rank amateurs in the above disciplines. To me that is the great failing of the study of the UFO phenomenon. Stan, I don't know why you, after decades of studying Ufology, went into such a personal rant over this case, and why you had to keep upping your argument with things from Dr. Leir , the Varghina case, and "secret evidence" as a weapon against a colleague. This all started from Dick asking you to back up your claim that the Flatwoods monster case involved a real UFO and a real alien. It is a mystery to me why it ended up with you claiming special knowledge because you worked on classified projects and Dick had not. I too had clearances when I was in the military but they were limited to things like radio frequencies of daily flying missions and other arcane stuff I don't even remember. Granted, you are a scientist and worked on nuclear technology but the clearances don't give you anything special related to the Flatwoods case. Stan, sticking only to the Flatwoods case, I ask you to post on UFO Updates the hard evidence that has convinced you, as you stated when in Flatwoods, W.V., that this case was a real UFO and a real alien. Can you show evidence to support the author's
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: UFOs Physical Or Subtle - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 01:15:54 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:49:56 -0500 Subject: Re: UFOs Physical Or Subtle - Goldstein >Source: New Dawn Magazine >http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/ UFOs%20Physical%20or%20SubtleP1.html >June 15, 2003 >UFOs: Physical Or Subtle? >By Richard L. Thompson <snip> Hello Listerions, The above article is quite speculative in its examination of near death experiences, out of body experiences, alien encounters, alien abductions, and "past lives". If you did not read the original please go to the Archive at: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/jan/m08-003.shtml I am not going to try to give any answers to the above but I want to point out that a great deal has been learned in the neurosciences and it would behoove anyone interested in the above topics to have a thorough and contemporary knowledge of that field. In particular I recommend studying neurophysiology, neurotheology, and cognitive neuropsychology. That information
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:51:09 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:34 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >>Databasing the common elements in UFO events might elicit >>something(s) which could (or should) lead us all to insights >>which might be more productive than the skeptical stances by >>some oldsters here or the rampaging zeal of the younger set who >>pile everything up in a heap, from which a sensible scrutiny >>is nearly impossible. >This has probably already been done somewhere, and I've >suggested it on this list a couple of times, but I'll repeat it >- if you want to extract common elements, the big job leading to >that happy state is to set up a system of _codes_ for as many >facets of each case as humanly possible. This requires people >willing to read and encode the statements in each case. Ideally >an expert in UFOlogy would do this, but anyone with a systematic >approach to tasks could at least theoretically do it. >With cases thus broken into codes, database "query language" can >extract your common elements in a literal flash! And do so over >and over as new ideas occur. >It's real simple, for example: >UFO_SHAPE: >CS = classic saucer >CG = cigar >OV = oval >SP = sphere >TR = triangle >XX = other >... etc. You get it. (There always has to be an "other", and, in >future work, codes can be added by re-scanning the original data >if needed.) >As better ideas occur to researchers and analysts, these simple >and very small "queries" can be modified, new ones generated, >over and over, and each query result also occurs in a flash. I'm >_very_ puzzled as to why no one has identified a set of already >coded data so discussions on the best queries can take place and >some results posted here. <snip> The UFO community is still stuck in 1952! Please read up on Jacques Vallee's work, starting with Challenge to Science of 1966. The Battelle Memorial Institute in 1952 devised the first coding scheme for UFO report data. Vallee devised another scheme in 1963. Many others have created inconsistent, incompatible UFO data codes, UFOCAT, etc. By 1968 Vallee realized that computer codes were too limited and restrictive. They crunched too much of the complexity of cases into almost meaningless categories. Vallee said it was important to record the entire report, the literal data, and now we would also say the graphic data (photos, drawings, etc.). A major problem of coding UFO data is that it is completely dependent on the skill and competence of the coder. How many have the patience to spend hours upon hours day after day week after week month after month inputting UFO reports into codes? How accurate will that process be? How will anyone know how accurate? How good will the data entry people be at making physics calculations to process the data in layperson's UFO sighting reports and even to make corrections of witness errors? Also, the AF realized by July 1952 that pattern analysis with UFO reports of such varying low quality, as well as other types of non-UFO intelligence analysis, was completely hopeless and worthless. Instead the AF decided to concentrate on getting instrumented measurements of UFO's. We can disagree with the AF
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 07:35:54 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:52:41 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Connors >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:52:28 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:20:05 -0700 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >I'm familiar with your work, credibility, and sincere nature - >and some UFO UpDaters remind me that you're actually a very >nice person. <snip> Rich, Which UFO Updaters exactly? Hummm? They are wrong. I'm not nice. I do really lousy research. I share nothing. I am undependable and about as sincere as the current crop of NeoCons. I kick stuffed animals. Beat dead horses and pull wings off Pelicanists. Hell, I'd steal the shirt off your back given the opportunity and take pennies from the cups of blind pencil sellers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 9 Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 Fwd Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:56:14 -0500 Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes Aloha List members, I've had some more time to monitor the discussions on this forum and wish to achieve two things with this post. First, to advance the idea that the so called rigorous scientific method advocated by some posters is little more than a methodological bias that's inappropriate to the UFO/exopolitical phenomenon, and second to finally respond directly to some individuals who posted some 'strong' opinions on the forum about the quality of my exopolitics research. First, one of the clich=E9s I've seen bandied around on this forum is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". Really? That's something that's accepted by many on this discussion list who have or pretend to have a rigorous scientific methodology. A website that discusses this clich=E9 and approves its methodological validity is: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/extraproof.html Well as a political scientist what immediately stands out with such a clich=E9 is the implicit methodological bias in it. Why is 'proof' the central focus? Why not the investigatory process? Shouldn't an appropriate approach be, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary investigative processes"? That would properly shift the focus of UFO research from an outcome that is prone to all sorts of subjective bias, 'proof' is subjective and is prone to the consensus of a particular set of individuals and discipline. Peer review journals are based on the consensus of leading thinkers in a discipline, yet this consensus of 'experts' is always subject to all kinds of methodological bias. As many know, Thomas Kuhn's, Structure of Scientific Revolutions lays bare the methodological biases in any field and how the so objective scientific method is based upon so many subjective biases. In my view, moving away from subjective concepts such as 'proof' to a more rigorous social science concept such as 'investigative process', is more appropriate to the UFO phenomenon. I wrote a short explanation for this which I invite you to read at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exopolitics/message/100 Second, I wish to respond to some posters such as Richard Hall who reflect on the quality of my research. Hall has posted the following concerning events concerning the non-renewal of my research affiliation at American University: "Salla has been entirely free to babble nonsense all over the place, to the point where (if you have it right that he has been fired) that he pretty well deserved it. A professor serves at the pleasure of the university, and if he embarrasses his employers by constantly making nonsensical utterances, he is likely to be fired. Duh! He still retains his freedom of speech outside the university and, knowing his type, I'm sure he will continue to babble away all over the place in every nutty venue available to him. You may be confusing "freedom of speech" with "academic freedom," which is another matter altogether. I have no idea whether he has a case there, but I rather doubt it. At this point I take it as a victory for rationality." Now I have never met Richard Hall but know of his background in NICAP and have read his recent posts where is promotes himself as a staunch defender of rigorous scientific method. Now he has chosen to dismiss the quality of my exopolitics research for reasons that are not clear to me. How do I respond to someone who dismisses my work using dismissive statements that are very general without any specific reference to any aspect of my research? Is there a particular source of evidence that he objects to in my research, my investigative process, or something else. It's a paradox to me that someone who staunchly advocates a rigorous scientific methodology is so sloppy in his critiques of others. Now I've done my fair share of critiques of thinkers ranging from political philosophers such Mahatma Gandhi to analytical philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein. I've also marked quite a few graduate papers that are critiques of various political theorists. I've always believed it important to be rigorous in any critique of another thinker so one can engage in a dialogue where all can benefit. This is something we do all the time in political science where the right methodology for a particular political phenomenon is open to debate. I also distributed on this list a defense of my exopolitics method at: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/dec/m15- 009.shtml I find from reading Richard Hall's bio that he has never worked as a researcher/scientist in a university, a government laboratory, or corporation, and is basically self-taught when it comes to the 'rigorous scientific' method he uses for UFO research. Fair enough, all have something to contribute in investigating this extraordinary phenomenon, yet if he advocates a rigorous methodology for UFO research then I believe it appropriate for him to be equally as rigorous when it comes to critiquing others. Making general dismissive statements about my exopolitics research is a sloppy critique and would never get a passing grade in any graduate class I've been responsible for. In fact, it would be likely to get a passing grade in the freshman year. I recommend to Mr Hall that he brush up on what it is he is precisely objecting to in my research so that I can properly respond in a way that enlightens all rather than just getting into mud slinging contest.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Colusa, CA Case 09-10-76 From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:01:28 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:21:20 -0500 Subject: Colusa, CA Case 09-10-76 Listarians,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 10:07:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:23:52 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Reynolds >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 07:35:54 -0700 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:52:28 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:20:05 -0700 >>>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? ><snip> >>I'm familiar with your work, credibility, and sincere nature - >>and some UFO UpDaters remind me that you're actually a very >>nice person. ><snip> >Which UFO Updaters exactly? Hummm? >They are wrong. I'm not nice. I do really lousy research. I >share nothing. I am undependable and about as sincere as the >current crop of NeoCons. >I kick stuffed animals. Beat dead horses and pull wings off >Pelicanists. Hell, I'd steal the shirt off your back given the >opportunity and take pennies from the cups of blind pencil >sellers. >My Chia Pet loves me and that's enough. Wendy...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Massive Mars Gold Seam - Stevenson From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 15:25:15 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:25:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Massive Mars Gold Seam - Stevenson >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:32:13 -0800 >Subject: Re: Massive Mars Gold Seam >>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 12:47:30 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Massive Mars Gold Seam >>Lower middle right of: >>http://tinyurl.com/56wnf >>3 x enlargement: >>http://www.colsweb.com/MarsGoldSeam.gif <snip> >The weight of gold and cost of retrieval would be >prohibitive for us at present. >For the architects of the Monuments of Mars et. al., >already >being there, its a different matter. But, the lack of >glass >tubes seems to indicate disinterest on their part. >Maybe it isn't gold at all, just some junk that looks >golden by >the effects of sunlight and imaging. Hi Larry and Lister's As the size of the yellowish field is very large it may rule out a Parachute and Sun glint on fluid or frozen fluid. It would be extremely interesting to have a close look though and maybe stand in the middle surounded by the 'whatever it is'. There could be tunnel exit/s hidden in the shadow of the slopes not visible on the picture. The suround to the yellow area seems to be flat and suitable for some sort of landing of an investigative probe and l hope that NASA may take a look. Analizing soil and bringing back Mars Rock is fine but Gold is much better, one would think. Even if it is 'Fools Gold'. New webpage in case the source data is lost at; http://www.colsweb.com/mars_gold_seam_massive.htm Maybe 'above dark black op's' can enlighten us more fully rather than mearly saying its a Russian probe decent chute :-)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 09:26:59 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:27:19 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Lehmberg >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 07:35:54 -0700 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:52:28 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:20:05 -0700 >>>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? ><snip> >>I'm familiar with your work, credibility, and sincere nature - >>and some UFO UpDaters remind me that you're actually a very >>nice person. ><snip> >Which UFO Updaters exactly? Hummm? I might have mentioned something along those lines after a tryptophan overdose and too much green tea... sorry. >They are wrong. I'm not nice. I do really lousy research. I >share nothing. I am undependable and about as sincere as the >current crop of NeoCons. This is the negative right out of the developer... accuracy requires a positive print on glossy paper, Ms. Connors. >I kick stuffed animals. Which has always been a rational thing to do with klasskurtzian dolls and other ardent moot-pooters from CSICOPia. No points here. >Beat dead horses and pull wings off >Pelicanists. You say that like it's a _bad_ thing! >Hell, I'd steal the shirt off your back given the >opportunity and take pennies from the cups of blind pencil >sellers. ...Only when you've been channeling Marjorie Main! And that doesn't happen often enough to have to pay freight for it! This assessment is disapproved. Resubmit in 30 days for final disapproval. >My Chia Pet loves me and that's enough. Well - that's not what they've been whispering, salaciously,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Blue Book Archive Announcement From: William Wise <will.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 10:47:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:31:31 -0500 Subject: Blue Book Archive Announcement Dear UFO UpDates List Members: The purpose of this email is to introduce you to the Blue Book Archive. In brief, we have created a web-site which provides free online access to the National Archives Blue Book microfilm collection. Moreover, these documents have been rendered searchable so as to increase the utility of this material to researchers. So far we have scanned and posted approximately 10% of the NARA Blue Book microfilm collection and more content is on the way. To see the results of our efforts thus far please visit our web- site at http://www.bluebookarchive.org I hope you find it interesting and useful! In addition to this online resource we are also making each roll of microfilm we process available as high-resolution (400dpi) scans on CD-ROM in PDF format for only $9.95- less than a third of the cost of the microfilm itself if ordered from the NARA. Moreover, unlike film, document scans can be enhanced with software to increase legibility and are both easy to print and easy to share via email with other researchers. It is also important to note that each purchase you make will help fund our continuing effort to make more of these important historical documents available to researchers such as yourself. Blue Book Archive project members include myself, Jan Aldrich, Brad Sparks, and Tom Tulien. In addition, we've had a great deal of help from many others including members of Project 1947, the Sign Historical Group, the Archives for UFO Research, News and Information Service, and CISU in Italy. Again, I sincerely hope you will find this resource useful to you in your research. If you would like to be informed whenever new microfilm or other documents are added to the archive please register with us at http://www.bluebookarchive.org/register.aspx or just respond to this email stating your desire to be added to our mailing list. If you have any other questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me by replying to this email. Yours Sincerely, William M. Wise Archivist, Blue Book Archive p:757-553-6599 f:757-282-2544 http://www.bluebookarchive.org William M. Wise President, Digital Elite Inc.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? From: William Wise <will.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 11:16:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:34:51 -0500 Subject: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? George Carlin renders his opinion on Ufology and religion (Christianity in particular) in this excerpt from When Will Jesus Bring The Pork Chops? Will ----- They Came From Out of the Sky I find it discouraging - and a bit depressing - when I notice the unequal treatment afforded by the media to UFO believers on the one hand, and on the other, to those who believe in an invisible supreme being who inhabits the sky. Especially as the latter belief applies to the whole Jesus-Messiah-Son-of-God fable. You may have noticed that, in the media, UFO believers are usually referred to as buffs, a term used to diminish and marginalize them by relegating them to the ranks of hobbyists and mere enthusiasts. They are made to seem like kooks and quaint dingbats who have the nerve to believe that, in an observable universe of trillions upon trillions of stars, and most likely many hundreds of billions of potentially inhabitable planets, some of those planets may have produced life-forms capable of doing things that we can't do. On the other hand those who believe in an eternal, all-powerful being, a being who demands to be loved and adored unconditionally and who punishes and rewards according to his whims are thought to be worthy, upright, credible people. This, in spite of the large numbers of believers who are clearly close-minded fanatics. To my way of thinking, there is every bit as much evidence for the existence of UFOs as there is for the existence of God. Probably far more. At least in the case of UFOs there have been countless taped and filmed - and, by the way, unexplained-- sightings from all over the world, along with documented radar evidence seen by experienced military and civilian radar operators. This does not even begin to include the widespread testimony of not only highly trained, experienced military and civilian pilots who are selected for their jobs, in part, for their above-average eyesight and mental stability, but also of equally well-trained, experienced law-enforcement officers. Such pilots and law-enforcement people are known to be serious, sober individuals who would have quite a bit to lose were they to be associated with anything resembling kooky, outlandish beliefs. Nonetheless, they have taken the risk of revealing their experiences because they are convinced they have seen something objectively real that they consider important. All of those accounts are ignored by the media. Granted, the world of UFO-belief has its share of kooks, nuts and fringe people, but have you ever listened to some of these religious true-believers? Have you ever heard of any extreme, bizarre behavior and outlandish claims associated with religious zealots? Could any of them be considered kooks, nuts or dingbats? A fair person would have to say yes. But the marginal people in these two groups don't matter in this argument. What matters is the prejudice and superstition built into the media coverage of the two sets of beliefs. One is treated reverently and accepted as received truth, the other is treated laughingly and dismissed out of hand. As evidence of the above premise, I offer one version of a typical television news story heard each year on the final Friday of Lent: Today is Good Friday, observed by Christians worldwide as a day that commemorates the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whose death redeemed the sins of mankind. Here is the way it should be written: Today is Good Friday, observed worldwide by Jesus buffs as the day on which the popular, bearded cultural figure, sometimes referred to as The Messiah, was allegedly crucified and - according to legend - died for mankind's so-called sins. Today kicks off a "holy" weekend that culminates on Easter Sunday, when, it is widely believed, this dead "savior" - who also, by the way, claimed to be the son of a sky-dwelling, invisible being known as God, mysteriously "rose from the dead." According to the legend, by volunteering to be killed and actually going through with it, Jesus saved every person who has ever lived - and every person who ever will live - from an eternity of suffering in a fiery region popularly known as hell,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 A Sampler Of Outstanding South American Cases From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo - Miami UFO Center <ufomiami.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 11:26:14 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:36:48 -0500 Subject: A Sampler Of Outstanding South American Cases A Sampler Of Outstanding South America Cases By Dr. Willy Smith; from UNICAT data base. A survey of Ufology in South America would not be complete without including a few significant cases histories. The most important and perhaps the best studied incident in Argentina is the Trancas case, but since it has been discussed satisfactorily in the literature it would be redundant to add it here. The Trindade photos in Brazil, have also been widely discussed. The Isla de los Lobos (Island of the fur seals) sighting in Uruguay and the Yacanto, Argentina photo, are hardly known outside their respective countries. However, both are unique cases that remain unexplained and should be presented to the non-Spanish speaking public. Isla de Lobos: http://www.geocities.com/ufomiami.geo/SAMPLER/Isla.html Yacanto: http://www.geocities.com/ufomiami.geo/SAMPLER/Yacanto.html NOTE: Dr. Willy Smith, a closed friend and associate with the late Dr. Hynek, is retiring from Ufology and has ceded us some cases from his UNICAT PROJECT, a UFO data bank designed by Dr. Hynek.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Hamilton From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:39:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:39:09 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Hamilton >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:34 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >The UFO community is still stuck in 1952! Please read up on >Jacques Vallee's work, starting with Challenge to Science of >1966. The Battelle Memorial Institute in 1952 devised the first >coding scheme for UFO report data. Vallee devised another scheme >in 1963. Many others have created inconsistent, incompatible UFO >data codes, UFOCAT, etc. >By 1968 Vallee realized that computer codes were too limited and >restrictive. They crunched too much of the complexity of cases >into almost meaningless categories. Vallee said it was important >to record the entire report, the literal data, and now we would >also say the graphic data (photos, drawings, etc.). A major >problem of coding UFO data is that it is completely dependent on >the skill and competence of the coder. How many have the >patience to spend hours upon hours day after day week after week >month after month inputting UFO reports into codes? How accurate >will that process be? How will anyone know how accurate? How >good will the data entry people be at making physics >calculations to process the data in layperson's UFO sighting >reports and even to make corrections of witness errors? >Also, the AF realized by July 1952 that pattern analysis with >UFO reports of such varying low quality, as well as other types >of non-UFO intelligence analysis, was completely hopeless and >worthless. Instead the AF decided to concentrate on getting >instrumented measurements of UFO's. We can disagree with the AF >but we are obligated to recognize what has been done in the past >by the AF, Battelle, Vallee, Saunders, and others so we can >improve upon their work and not unwittingly reinvent the wheel >again and again as if we never learn anything from the past. >First step in scientific work is always to review past work. As one whose profession is programming and systems analysis, I think you make a very cogent statement here, but I would like to supplement it with an additional idea. For example, a CE-1 case is a category where a UFO is seen within 500 feet of the witness. The witness is usually making an estimate of the distance not having a laser measuring device handy and the object could be rather large and 1,000 feet away from the witness. If he estimates 1,000 feet instead of 500 feet, but the object at 1,000 feet was larger and had more observed detail than a smaller, swifter obect at 500 feet, do we now presume that the CE-1 category object is worthier of study than the larger object not so classified? This calls to mind an area of study called fuzzy logic which is a way of processing data by allowing partial set membership
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:28:55 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:40:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 >Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes >First, one of the clich=E9s I've seen bandied around on this forum >is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". <snip> >Well as a political scientist what immediately stands out with >such a clich=E9 is the implicit methodological bias in it. Why is >'proof' the central focus? Why not the investigatory process? >Shouldn't an appropriate approach be, "extraordinary claims >require extraordinary investigative processes"? Hello Michael I believe that in an ideal world your approach would be correct for all interested parties, but in the real world it is not possible to "require" extrardinary investigation from those who do not see the value of investing the effort. Your recommendation is admirable, but reduces to an exhortation to those who are already investigating to do so more thoroughly. It seems to me that this is an exhortation that preaches only to the converted. The point, in practice, is that those who decline to investigate _always_ will require evidence which by definition is so extraordinary that they expect never to encounter it, and therefore, circularly but inevitably, they will not look for it. This applies, by the way, both to the 'hardened sceptics' and to the 'hardened believers'. Meticulous and detailed documentation/analysis is apt to frazzle the short attention spans of both.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:45:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:10:41 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> >Stan and Dick, >I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the >Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat >between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the >book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft >engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that >they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time >frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. Josh, I would agree that the discussion or flailing away between myself and Dick Hall has gotten out of hand. I think we probably agree on many aspects of ufology. I have referenced his "The UFO Evidence" (and shown a slide of the cover) at over 600 lectures. I have a copy of the book in front of me. The authors blurb on the inside front and back jacket certainly isn't what you claim. Neither the foreword nor the introduction make the claims. Just what is the source of the supposed "Author's blurb"? The events of interest took place on September 12. The Washington DC sightings were in July. That summer was indeed a very busy UFO time and indeed there were more sightingsover DC on Sept. 12. >I have not read the book as I have not felt there is enough >hard >evidence in the case to be worthy of spending the money. I >have >studied other investigations and resources regarding the >case. How can you make such a judegment in admitted ignorance? What in the world do you mean by "hard evidence"? No, Frank hasn't found an alien who was there and does not have any of the many samples that were collected by the National Guard under Colonel Leavitt who was ordered there that night. I don't know what sources you have studied; obviously they were completely inadequate and inaccurate. I would suggest Jerry Clark's "UFO Encyclopedia" article which isn't bad as a primer. Frank was the only one who did detailed filmed interviews, not only with the primary witnesses, but with Colonel Leavitt and A. Lee Stewart, Editor of the Baxton County Newspaper, who was on site that evening and early the next morning. >There are meteorological records showing that a meteorite >horizontally traversed several states (including West Virginia) >from east to west. Metorology deals with weather not meteors. The Meteor group at Harvard has no record of prominent meteors. Yes, there were loads of newspaper articles which settled for the notion that what was seen all over the East were meteors despite the relatively slow speeds, the following of rivers, the abrupt turns, and testimony from many witnesses that what was seen was not a meteor. >At 7:15 pm several youths saw what they >thought was a UFO land on a hilltop. There is quite a >disagreement in their accounts. An adult who soon went to the >alleged landing site has stated that the alleged landing skid >marks and the oily substance on the ground were caused by his >pickup truck at the location. He also stated that the alleged >putrid smell may well have been from one form of local grass. It >is entirely possible that the kids could have become nauseated >from hysteria. Sorry, but the above description is essentially completely in error. The UFO was observed to land, it was seen on the ground. Stewart himself knelt down and smelled the strange odor of the stuff that made the kids sick. etc etc ad nauseum, and interviewed all of them. Who was this supposed adult who went to the site? You really need to read the book or at least Jerry Clark's article... a good introduction >There are anecdotal monster stories that may have been a frantic >misidentification of a barn owl on a tree. This monster >subsequently just disappeared forever and no wreckage of a UFO >was reported at that site. There was no account of the alleged >UFO landing and then taking off from the hilltop. No UFO was >ever seen on the ground. Twelve foot tall Barn Owl? Or maybe the 6' tall owl claimed by CSICOP's Dr. Joe Nickell? Sorry, but the object was seen to land and then moved lower down. Whether the metallic samples picked up by Leavitt's crew were wreckage or not, I don't know. Frank has spent 12 years, driven 100,000 miles, spent hours in libraries, pored over the almost illegible Blue Book files and talked to loads of witnesses... AFTER winning their confidence... No easy task considering all the ridicule that has been heaped on the story by people making up explanations and descriptions off the top of their heads. >The Blue Book report of that time nor any records I am aware of >account for the author's alleged claim of a UFO dogfight and the >losses of aircraft over the Atlantic ocean. There was the loss >of an F-94 plane over the Gulf of Mexico but I do not see any >relation to this case. >I am not claiming to know more than anyone else regarding this >case but I have not yet seen any real evidence indicating that a >UFO landed and that an alien was present. Anecdotal stories are >worthless unless they lead to hard evidence. Again that term "Hard evidence".The book presents some of that evidence. It could have been three times as thick. Eyewitness testimony is hard evidence in most courtrooms. Especially first hand testimony recorded on film.That is what Judges and juries really want. But Scott Peterson was convicted of murder with no hard evidence,as many others have been. I don't have an alien or a saucer from Roswell. Is that supposed to mean it didn't happen? >I am not claiming to have expertise in ufology but, as I have >said before, I am trained as a detective and maintain standards >of investigation and evidence as used by current police >detectives. I am not a scientist but I am familiar with the >scientific method and its standards. I wish _all_ UFO cases were >investigated and evaluated using those methodologies and >adhering to professional standards. I have also spent decades >studying this phenomenon that has been investigated and >evaluated by a great many people but these people have been >almost all rank amateurs in the above disciplines. To me that is >the great failing of the study of the UFO phenomenon. >Stan, I don't know why you, after decades of studying Ufology, >went into such a personal rant over this case, and why you had >to keep upping your argument with things from Dr. Leir , the >Varghina case, and "secret evidence" as a weapon against a >colleague. This all started from Dick asking you to back up your >claim that the Flatwoods monster case involved a real UFO and a >real alien. It is a mystery to me why it ended up with you >claiming special knowledge because you worked on classified >projects and Dick had not. I too had clearances when I was in >the military but they were limited to things like radio >frequencies of daily flying missions and other arcane stuff I >don't even remember. Granted, you are a scientist and worked on >nuclear technology but the clearances don't give you anything >special related to the Flatwoods case. My comments about science and secrecy were directly triggered by Dick's comment that secrecy and science was an oxymoron. I beg to disagree, as a nuclear scientist who worked under security for 14 years. Dick is not a scientist and has not stated he did scientific work or whether he had a TOP SECRET or equivalent clearance Varginha was brought up by Vince White who expressed respect for Dr. Roger Leir's work on that case to help provide some balance for the defamatory attacks on Roger. >Stan, sticking only to the Flatwoods case, I ask you to post on >UFO Updates the hard evidence that has convinced you, as you >stated when in Flatwoods, W.V., that this case was a real UFO >and a real alien. Can you show evidence to support the author's >claims that a UFO - U.S. military aircraft dogfight took place >over the Atlantic ocean and that some of our aircraft were >downed? The book provides ample evidence that there was a real UFO , which landed, that there was a very strange almost certainly mechanical device (rather than flesh and blood Monster) associated with it and that there many reports of blazing slow moving (compared to meteorites) objects behaving in a controlled fashion. Frank as an artist has taken some artistic liberties to create a reasonable scenario of what was happening once one cuts through the coverup of the details of the event,the Blue Book files, and of the loss of the F-94. As I said, I didn't agree to get involved with the 50th anniversary celebration until after doing a lot of checking. What I found in Flatwoods and after reviewing much - certainly not all - of Frank's evidence was very convincing. That is why I wrote the foreword and epilog. Is the book perfect? Of course not. But your ignorance of even the basics of the case, though a knowledgeable person about UFOs, provides a clear reason for reading the book before attacking the case and Frank. Here are a few words on the back cover from John Schuessler "Frank has done an outstanding job of... documenting the 1952 Flatwoods Monster incident. He has combined...extensive field investigation with in depth historical research to bring us a detailed factual account of the case.. I applaud the results of his work.."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:57:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:13:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Bourdais >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:10:41 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> Stan and Dick, >I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. <snip> >Stan, I don't know why you, after decades of studying Ufology, went into such a personal rant over this case, and why you had to keep upping your argument with things from Dr. Leir , the Varghina case, and "secret evidence" as a weapon against a colleague. This all started from Dick asking you to back up your claim that the Flatwoods monster case involved a real UFO and a real alien. Josh, Stan, Dick, EBK and List I am sorry to disagree. This debate started with a question of Aaron Le Clair's on the subject of "Leir's 'Alien Debris', on december 30: "I thought this might interest some on this List: http://www.alienscalpel.com/videos.html A video, and audio file dealing with some supposedly proven alien material. If genuine, it's sad more coverage hasn't been given to it. I'm interested in any comments, pro or con." Then, Dr Leir's credibility was denied, in a rather insulting way. And unjustified, in my opinion, being a friend of him, and knowing his work a bit. I reacted, and Stan as well, for the same reasons. I suggest that you go back to the beginning of this thread. BTW, one argument of Dick's is that Leir's alleged alien implants have not been confirmed by a peer reviewed article in any scientific publication. I replied that, for many reasons, even the NIDS team, which had sponsored him for a time, could not obtain that, and probably did not even try, although they had promised to. This question, which seems important to me, has been lost from sight. And the initial question as well, which was about the alleged Ufo fragment analysis. Another interesting question ! As for the "Flatwoods monster", there is a rich line of thinking, opened many years ago by people like Vallee and Keel, about all kinds of tricks which may be played on us. Also an interesting question.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Mark Lee Center? From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:40:12 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:15:13 -0500 Subject: Mark Lee Center? Hi List members, Does anyone on the List know Mark Lee Center at all? If they do
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:47:04 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:19:00 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 16:33:41 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST >>Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >>I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that >>introduce the phenom of UFOlogy to kids. <snip> >>When I was a kid my first UFO book was a magazine called LOOK >>and Ivan T. Sanderson's books. I even had a copy of the Condon >>Report and forgot how I got my hands on it but there were always >>government surplus stuff around and you'ld be surprised what >>you'ld find stuck between a book or forgotten in an old desk >>draw at a flea market :) <snip> The first book I ever read about UFOs was in my elementary school library. It was called "Is Something up There?". I took the book and never returned it. My bad. But the book introduced me to serious stories about UFOs, and included some impressive photos. The one that impressed me most was the Heflin photos of the "tin hat" type of saucer, with the disturbed dust kicked up below. Today I have a few problems with these photos, but as a child, it got my head thinking. It was written so as not to go over the head of children. Ray Stanford's, Socorro Saucer In A Pentagon Pantry, speaks in pretty plain language, but also includes a lot of scientific jargon that could lead a child to look up the more technical terms and learn things far beyond the UFO problem. It is also a compelling story for people of any age. Other mind-expanding yet child-accessible sources might be the old Time/Life Life Science Library series that included the Senses, Light and Shadow, Time, etc. It was in these books that I first learned of the Theory of relativity via the story Murder On The Relativity Express. Learning how time can slow down for those traveling at high speeds can help in the study or speculation about UFOs. At least it can spur the mind-expansion required for such areas of study. Time/Life books also released a series on Mysteries Of The Unknown which includes a volume on UFOs. Another great book is A Wrinkle In Time by L'Engle. It is not a UFO book specifically, but teaches 4th dimensional theory in a decidedly 'geared for children' manner. Those are just a few examples of books that attracted me to the UFO enigma, and all before I was 12 years old. I think that exposing young children to expansive ideas and theories is always good, since they are much less inhibited to them than adults. Once a child sees the world in a more engaged and questioning way, UFOs become just an interesting adjunct to the wonders all around us. I find this much more useful and less narrow than trying to find books for children that specifically
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 FOIA Appeal Of Denial For Fort Belvoir Records From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:49:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:23:33 -0500 Subject: FOIA Appeal Of Denial For Fort Belvoir Records From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> To: kenneth.luchetti.nul, ;, lester.echols.nul Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:49:07 -0500 Subject: FOIA Appeal re Denial of Access to Certain Public Affairs Records TO: Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management Headquarters, U. S. Department of the Army (DAIM-MD) 600 Army - Pentagon, Room 1E677 Washington, DC 20310-0600 FROM: Larry W. Bryant 3518 Martha Custis Drive Alexandria, VA 22302 DATE: January 9, 2005 Now that more than 20 working days have elapsed since my receipt of the below-quoted Nov. 23, 2004, FOIA-records-request referral to your office, I construe your delayed response as a denial of my FOIA request of Oct. 31, 2004, by which I seek access to all Fort Belvoir-generated and all Fort Belvoir-received records pertaining to my series of whistleblower-solicitation advertisements recently submitted for the Belvoir "Eagle's" prepublication review. I base this formal, written appeal on the protections afforded those ads' content by the First, Fifth, and 14th Amendments to the U. S. Constitution. In particular, Belvoir public affairs officer Donald N. Carr's official interference with those protections (as evidenced by some of the sought-for correspondence) requires your full, prompt disclosure of ALL the correspondence and related documents in question. Your choosing to deny this appeal will cast you as a co-conspirator in perpetuating Mr. Carr's documented obstruction of my constitutional rights and of those of the "Eagle's" readership. What's more, your use of the Act's Exemption No. 5 to shield him from public accountability for his wrongful action in this matter would subvert the purpose of the Act, and hence would fail to survive judicial review. By snail-mail, I'm sending to you a signed printout of this e- formatted letter. LARRY W. BRYANT ----- Text Of The Nov. 23, 2004, Letter To L.W.B. From Fort Belvoir: From: Dennis S. Lavery Chief, Records Management National Capital Region Director of Information Management 10105 Gridley Road - Suite 100 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5840 To: Larry W. Bryant Dear Mr. Bryant: The attached information is furnished in response to your Freedom of Information Act request dated October 31, 2004. The current publishing contract between US Army Fort Belvoir and the Fort Belvoir Eagle publishing company is attached. Other documents are considered exempt from release under Exemption 5 of the Freedom of Information Act. Since this command cannot deny a request, the documents are being forwarded to the Initial Denial Authority for their release determination and direct response to you. The Initial Denial Authority for these records is Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management ATTN: DAIM-MD 600 Army Pentagon, Room 1E677 Washington, DC 20310-0600
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 17:09:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:25:33 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - White >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >>This has probably already been done somewhere, and I've >>suggested it on this list a couple of times, but I'll repeat it >>- if you want to extract common elements, the big job leading to >>that happy state is to set up a system of _codes_ for as many >>facets of each case as humanly possible. This requires people >>willing to read and encode the statements in each case. Ideally >>an expert in UFOlogy would do this, but anyone with a systematic >>approach to tasks could at least theoretically do it. <snip> >By 1968 Vallee realized that computer codes were too limited and >restrictive. They crunched too much of the complexity of cases >into almost meaningless categories. I disagree. Coding cases in no way makes other types of analysis impossible. The full case documentation is still there, open to investigators. Coding is looking at the data in one way, to get some very rapid answers of one type. There's plenty of room in UFOlogy for many different types of analysis. Meanwhile, the coding type answers might just serve as a huge push factor in getting the powers that be moving towards disclosure. Having a query web site
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:06:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:27:28 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Maccabee >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 16:33:41 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST >>Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >>I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:05:44 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:30:47 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Koi >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:50:34 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:48:12 -0500 >>>Subject: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> Hi Rich, Eleanor, Brad et al Was I the only person to find Rich's email highly amusing? After a lengthy rant complaining about the attention being paid to the history of ufology by some researchers, Rich went on to raise several points that have had a lot of time and energy devoted to them by ufologists in the past (thus providing an object lesson in the advantages of being aware of the historical context of ufology to avoid reinvention of the wheel). Well, it made me smile..... I'd be happy to provide some references to assist anyone that wishes to follow up Brad's excellent recommendations. However, due to a work deadline and the need to sleep at some point, at the moment I'll limit myself to quickly cutting and pasting below some references to discussion of UFOCAT from an incomplete draft of the UFO chronology I'm working on. (Apart from the usefulness of reading about UFOCAT itself, many of the discussions listed below are actually in the context of a wider discussion about building or analysing UFO databases). One reference that springs to mind in particular is "Computers in Ufology" by Spencer, John, and Vallee, Jacques and Verga, Maurizio (Chapter 3.6 of "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer)). Rich and Eleanor, it is not clear from you comments about developing database codes whether you have seen the UFOCAT manual or the manual for Larry Hatch's *U* database. I don't think either manual is currently avialable on the Internet, but before you spent a lot of precious time on this topic it is worth getting hold of them (particularly the one for UFOCAT) as they would be helpful in refining your thinking about ufo coding issues (and that's without even looking at the databases themselves). The UFOCAT website: http://www.ufocat.com/ has text (without a hyperlink) refering to the UFOCAT guidebook stating "Contains an HTML version of the UFOCAT 2003 user's guide". I infer from this that the manual for that database may be made freely available on that site in the future. Perhaps CUFOS would be prepared to make it available to you (or on the CUFOS website) until the UFOCAT website is more fully developed? Since the manuals for the UFOCAT and *U* could only serve to wet the appepite of ufologists for the databases themselves, those deriving an income from the databases may be persuaded to see it as in their own commercial best interests to make the manuals freely available on their websites (not to mention this being in the interests of ufology). BTW As Brad's email implies, a code consistent with that used in an existing database would make a pleasant change. Some references to discussion of UFOCAT: Baker, Alan in his "The Encyclopaedia of Alien Encounters" (1999) at page 242 of the Virgin hardback edition. Bullard, Thomas E in Jerome Clark's "The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 3 - High Strangeness" (1996) at page 582 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition forming part of an entry entitled "Waves". Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 3 - High Strangeness" (1996) at pages 481-482 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition in an entry entitled "UFOCAT". Devereux, Paul and Brookesmith, Peter in their "UFOs and Ufology - The First 50 Years" (1997) at page 46 (in Chapter 4) of the Blandford softcover edition. Evans, Hilary in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at page 46 of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition (Chapter 2.3.1, entitled "UFOs as Global Phenomenon"). Hall, Richard in his "Uninvited Guests" (1988) at page 22 (in the Prologue) of the Aurora Press paperback edition. Hendry, Allan in his "The UFO Handbook" (1979) at pages 244-247, 254 (in Chapter 20) of the Sphere softback edition. Hynek, J Allen and Vallee, Jacques in their "The Edge of Reality" (1975) at page 76 (in Chapter 3) of the Henry Regnery hardback edition. Mauge, Claude in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at pages 160 and 163 of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition (in Chapter 2.7, entitled "UFO Statistics"). Randles, Jenny and Warrington, Peter in their "Science and the UFOs" (1985) at pages 59, 60 (in Chapter 4) of the Blackwell hardback edition. Rutkowski, Chris A in "Phenomenon" (1988) (edited by John Spencer and Hilary Evans) at page 304 of the MacDonald hardback edition (Part 4, in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Geophysical Alternatives"). Rutkowski, Chris in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at page 277 of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition (in Chapter 4.3.2, entitled "UFOs as Natural Phenomena"). Schnabel, Jim in his "Dark White" (1994) at page 215 (in Chapter 10) of the Hamish Hamilton softcover edition. Spencer, John in his "The UFO Encyclopedia" (1991) at page 303 (in an entry entitled "UFOCAT Computer Catalogue") of the Guild hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Avon softcover edition), at page 358 of the Headline paperback edition. Spencer, John, and Vallee, Jacques and Verga, Maurizio in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at page 239 of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition (in Chapter 3.6, entitled "Computers in Ufology"). Stringfield, Leonard H in his "Situation Red: The UFO Siege" (1977) at pages 40 (in Chapter 2), 179-180 (in Chapter 8) of the Fawcett paperback edition. Thompson, Richard in his "Alien Identities: Ancient Insights into Modern UFO Pheonemena" (1993) at page 44 (in Chapter 2) of the GHP revised softcover edition. Westrum, Ronald M in "UFO Phenomena and the Behavioral Scientist" (1979) (edited by Richard F Haines) at pages 104-105, 107-108 (in Chapter 5) of the Scarebrow Press hardback edition. Wright, Susan in her "UFO Headquarters" (1998) at page 227 (in Chapter 12) of the St Martin's Press softcover edition.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary From: Roy Hale <vinyl.lover10.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:18:09 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:33:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 >Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes >Aloha List members, >I've had some more time to monitor the discussions on this forum >and wish to achieve two things with this post. First, to advance >the idea that the so called rigorous scientific method advocated >by some posters is little more than a methodological bias that's >inappropriate to the UFO/exopolitical phenomenon, and second to >finally respond directly to some individuals who posted some >'strong' opinions on the forum about the quality of my >exopolitics research. <snip> Some time ago a man sees a structured metallic disc at close quarters, a Humanoid comes out of the disc and beckons him forward. He goes forward, and then he is told that the humble human is not alone in the universe. The disc closes the hatch and then zooms off at great speed. The humble Witness is left with an unforgettable life changing experience, and also a Dilemma who in the hell will believe such stuff? He then decided to place this piece of information deep within his mind, buried for years and tossed over in his mind on an almost daily basis, questioning his sanity, seeking to explain the contact he had. Finally he settled his mind, he had the experience, he heard the words, he saw the disc, he walked away from the scene and left himself open to his own debate for years to come. Then the Internet arrived, he got a shock, people were ready to burn his experiences, he thought to himself, are they upset that they were not the ones who had absorbed the words of a universe full of hopes? But finally after reading so many opinions on his experience, he just decided that his truth was okay with him, as long as the other people just carried on in their mindset, not disrupting
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 20:27:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:38:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths - >Source: The Triangle Online - The Student Newspaper > at Drexal University >http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2005/01/07/SciTech/Crop-Circles.Explained.Despi te.Alien.Myths-830956.shtml >01-07-05 >Crop Circles Explained Despite Alien Myths >The Iron Skeptic >By Aaron Sakulich >At first glance, there is no phenomenon creepier than crop >circles - huge geometric designs that appear in fields overnight >without explanation, cause, or reason. According to UFO >enthusiasts, hundreds of thousands of these things have appeared >all over the world, and some go so far as to claim that similar >designs can be found in the sand at the bottom of the ocean. <snip> Whoa - if Mr. Sakulich weren't around to swab out our throats for us, we'd sure as hell strangle on our own spit, eh? Space time and surface area, Mr. Sakulich. Space, time, and surface area.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 'Little Green Men'? From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:45:28 -0500 Subject: 'Little Green Men'?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 10 Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Helwig From: Brandon Helwig <Brandonhelwig.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 02:02:02 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:49:26 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? - Helwig >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:38 EST >Subject: UFO Books & Videos For Kids? >I need recommendations for books, videos, websites etc. that >introduce the phenom of UFOlogy to kids. >Often the resources are laden with high brown scientific jargon >that's a wee bit too steep for the wee ones. >Actually it would be a good idea for the basic groups like 10 to >13 year olds. Just to answer some of their questions. Greg, It was around the age of 9 or 10 when I became interested in the field and I'm 24 years old now. Unfortunately, most of my UFO book collection is in storage right now so I'm doing this from memory. I probably read on an adult level then, but these are some of the books I enjoyed as a youngster: UFOs and How to See Them, by Jenny Randles... (I think that's the title, I know it was from Jenny Randles). There are a lot of great pictures in this book too. I recall lending this book out to friends as well to get them excited about the topic. I haven't seen the book in a few years, but aside from the tips to improve your chances of possibly seeing a UFO, it offered various tidbits about UFO history. Books from Charles Berlitz, particularly World Of Strange Phenomena, World Of The Incredible But True, World Of The Odd And Awesome and subsequent sequels. These aren't necessarily UFO books, but he packed in lots of different 'paranormal' stories into those books and it's just riveting reading for any 12 year old (or any age). I always remembered those books just being a whole lot of fun and it sparked my interest in a lot of different topics. I lent those books out to friends as well. As far as some of the more 'famous' UFO books, titles by David Jacobs and John Mack were a little harder to get through from a 12 or 13 year old perspective, but I did get through them. I had no trouble getting through books by Budd Hopkins, Whitley Strieber, Raymond E. Fowler and others. If I recall correctly, Hopkins' Intruders was the first UFO related book I read when I was 9. The book was incredibly fascinating to me. I don't recall ever having problems reading any book by Hopkins. I must have read Intruders several times and was extremely excited over the TV movie when it came out. Another book I enjoyed was Crash At Corona by Stan Friedman. I still have my autographed copy. :-) I begged my mom to take me to his UFOs Are Real lecture at the University of Central Florida in the early 1990s. Also, I haven't picked up Fate Magazine lately, but I loved that as a youngster too. But again, I probably wasn't the typical 10
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Close Encounter Of The York Kind From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:12:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:12:31 -0500 Subject: Close Encounter Of The York Kind Source: Excalibur - York University's Newspaper - Toronto http://www.excal.on.ca/index.php?option=3Dcom_content&task=3Dview&id=3D81&It= emid=3D2 01.10;05 Close Encounter Of The York Kind Written by Dan Verbin - Technology Editor A probing conversation with York's very own UFO enthusiast. Is the truth really out there? [Photo] Have you noticed that the students in your early morning classes are always yawning and, nine times out of ten, look tired? Well, according to Nick Balaskas their drowsiness could be due to the fact that they were being prodded by aliens during the night. "There's a lot of evidence that alien abductions are very real and they are being done, whether it's by our government or whether it's by aliens or whether abductions are by both, I don't know," he says, adding that academics and high ranking members of government that have gone public with allegations of an alien cover-up have died suspiciously. "Statistically, if you take this small group of experts and you see what the percentage of fatal accidents is, there is a strong suggestion that maybe there is something real going on that somebody doesn't want the rest of the public to be aware of." Balaskas, a lab technician in York's physics department and the co-host, along with Brad Snell, of the Glendon Radio (CKRG 89.9FM) program Cosmic Horizons, is York's resident alien expert - a man who has spent the better part of his life in search of the extraterrestrial and the unknown. Not surprisingly, his cramped Lumbers Building office is full of UFO-related material, from books to photos to a fragment of "Starchild" - a skull that he believes may be alien-human hybrid in origin. One could justifiably call him York's very own Fox Mulder, except he doesn't have that "The Truth Is Out There" poster hanging on his wall and his office is not in the basement. Born in Greece 50 years ago, Balaskas immigrated to Montr=E9al with his family when he was two and a half, moving to Toronto during his high school years and eventually earning a BSc in physics at York. After graduating, he embarked on various projects in astronomy and seismology until landing in his present position 11 years ago. Balaskas' interest in the paranormal began early. He recalls being fascinated with UFOs as a young boy, passionately watching science fiction movies about "Martians attacking Washington DC" on TV. So how did he go from a childhood fascination with The Day The Earth Stood Still to pondering about E.T. for real? It wasn't until his next door neighbour translated her German copy of I Know the Secret of the Flying Saucers by Major Donald E. Keyhoe into English, so Balaskas could understand it, that he became hooked for life. "I was so fascinated because now something that I was watching on television actually had a basis in reality," he says. "I thought, =91This is incredible.'" After studying the alien phenomena for years, Balaskas believes without a doubt that the American government is actively involved in a UFO cover-up. And he further believes the Canadian government is in on it too. During his time as a UFOologist, he says that he has uncovered vast amounts of evidence that leads him to conclude that earthly alien visitations are being kept secret from the public in order to avoid a mass panic. To further his work, he was recently in Washington DC in search of proof that over half a century ago former president Franklin Delano Rooselvelt stored a crashed flying saucer, along with its dead alien occupants, in the sub basement of the Capitol Building - a basement that he claims he was told does not "officially exist". While Balaskas remains skeptical about many UFO sightings, he feels that aliens may be travelling to Earth through other means, and in all probability could be here at this very moment, undetected. Unfortunately, he has never had a close encounter of the third kind, so he has been unable to find out first hand if his theory holds up. "Personally, I have not knowingly met any aliens," he says. "[Aliens] could be inter-dimensional travellers and actually project themselves on our three dimensions from the real four dimensions that are out there." Interestingly, Balaskas notes that his generation is the first one to be cynics when it comes to the otherworldly. "People don't realize that many cultures, including our parents and grandparents, took for granted that there were extraterrestrial beings. They had different names for them, like angels, but they talked about them coming from the heavens. It's now, this generation, that seems to be very skeptical and they should be justifiably so. Because at least in the public domain we don't have any proof that there is even any life [in outer space]." Though some of his theories may seem a little out there, Balaskas is quick to point out that most UFOs are witnessed by otherwise reliable sources. "[UFOs are a] phenomena that is real, real in the sense that objects are still being observed in the skies by credible people and not only credible people - like police officers for example - but also by experienced people, astronomers or airline pilots who obviously see something they have never seen before and report it." Balaskas explains that it is fallacious to believe that all UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin. There are many new technologies that are still classified, and so not in the public domain, and these can easily be mistaken for crafts of alien origin. "They're not alien or even based on alien technology but they won't be revealed until much later," he comments. The SR-71 Blackbird is an example of this phenomena. The jet - which began secret test flights in the '50s and had the ability to travel three times the speed of sound - may account for many UFO sightings of the period. With planes able to travel at much faster velocities today, he says that many sightings may just be experimental or top-secret government projects. So what does Balaskas want people to get out of all his UFO research? "I just want to make other people aware of certain facts and if they're interested in them and if they think they're worthy of further investigation, allow them to actually pursue it." Balaskas is trying to accomplish this goal with Cosmic Horizons. Besides aliens, the program has recently discussed topics such as the real age of the universe, why the Mayan calendar mysteriously ends at the year 2012, Nostradamus, and evidence that the Holy Grail actually resides in Canada. "We'll have guest experts on a variety of topics, some of them very controversial and some of them even silly. Nevertheless, the whole premise of the show is to let the students be exposed to different points of view and come up with their own conclusions. We don't try to be dogmatic," he remarks. "Listeners can call in and ask our guests questions. We want it to be stimulating and provocative but most importantly informative." While he does not watch much TV anymore, it is quite obvious that he has a huge appetite for the unusual, as one is hard pressed to get a word in edgewise once Balaskas begins discussing UFOs or his unconventional views on science and religion. "From my experience, it seems that usually fiction mimics fact. But reality is much more interesting and much more fascinating than any of the few X-Files or Outer Limits episodes that I have ever seen," he says. "I used to watch these movies about flying saucers on television but it wasn't until my neighbour actually introduced me to a book that suggested that what I was watching on television, that was fictitious, was in fact based on real life [that I got interested in UFOs]. And when I investigated a lot of the cases that were mentioned in the book, I found that they were even more fascinating than what was in these movies." Does Balaskas know of any UFO hotspots in Ontario? Do we have our very own Area 51? He remains mysteriously elusive on the matter and will not reveal much. "UFOs are attracted to certain areas, nuclear power plants for example. They have been recorded there in the past," Balaskas
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Colusa, CA Case 09-10-76 - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 05:45:32 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:13:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Colusa, CA Case 09-10-76 - Hatch >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:01:28 -0700 >Subject: Colusa, CA Case 09-10-76 >Listarians, >The September 10, 1976 Colusa, CA, CE-I should be >listed as having had EM effects. Hi Wendy:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:16:21 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:00:41 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: William Wise <will.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 11:16:55 -0500 >Subject: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >George Carlin renders his opinion on Ufology and religion >(Christianity in particular) in this excerpt from >When Will Jesus Bring The Pork Chops? >----- >They Came From Out of the Sky >I find it discouraging - and a bit depressing - when I notice >the unequal treatment afforded by the media to UFO believers on >the one hand, and on the other, to those who believe in an >invisible supreme being who inhabits the sky. Especially as the >latter belief applies to the whole Jesus-Messiah-Son-of-God >fable. Yes - George Carlin has been a minor god in my personal pantheon since the beginning. At his worst too, at his most commercial and self-serving. At his most drug addicted. At his most seditionistic and contrary. At his most anarchistic. He's always rung true. He's always been real. For my money... he's always been right. I can't understand why he hasn't been knocked off..... Errol - this guy really oughta come on SDI before they whack
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:51:28 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:04:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> To: <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:28:55 -0000 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 >Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes >>>First, one of the clich=E9s I've seen bandied around on this forum >>>is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". ><snip> >>Well as a political scientist what immediately stands out with >>such a clich=E9 is the implicit methodological bias in it. Why is >>'proof' the central focus? Why not the investigatory process? >>Shouldn't an appropriate approach be, "extraordinary claims >>require extraordinary investigative processes"? >Hello Michael >>I believe that in an ideal world your approach would be correct >for all interested parties, but in the real world it is not >possible to "require" extrardinary investigation from those who >do not see the value of investing the effort. This is said as if conveniently and arbitrarily deciding not to investigate something of abundant and compelling interest to others is a reasonable and justifiable act. >Your >recommendation is admirable, but reduces to an exhortation to >those who are already investigating to do so more thoroughly. A tough exhortation when the evidence of duplicity and distraction regarding these matters is so plain in the currently written, historical, photographic, anecdotal, physical, and personal records of so many individuals, Sir. Salla's recommendation is more than merely (and dismissively) "admirable." It is an imperative. >It >seems to me that this is an exhortation that preaches only to >the converted. This implies that there is some potentiality for conversion, Sir. There is not. The persons you address here have their minds made up and set in old concrete. By way of example, I am a paragon of scientific balance and cognitive rationality when compared to Philip Klass, imo. >The point, in practice, is that those who decline to investigate >_always_ will require evidence which by definition is so >extraordinary that they expect never to encounter it, and >therefore, circularly but inevitably, they will not look for it. This is said like it was an acceptable behavior. It is not. Not in any shape manner or form. Not at any level or sub-stratum. Not for any reason, justification, or end. It should not be _remotely_ tolerated. >This applies, by the way, both to the 'hardened sceptics' and to >the 'hardened believers'. Meticulous and detailed >documentation/analysis is apt to frazzle the short attention >spans of both. This is said like the "hardened" of _any_ type was a majority and held equal sway from their ends of some ufological Bell curve. I suspect that if the klasskurtzian wing of our ufological house didn't usurp the support of a thoroughly corrupted mainstream they enjoy, they would fall in upon themselves like a house of soggy graham crackers. Or, has
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:06:53 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:31:21 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: William Wise <will.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 11:16:55 -0500 >Subject: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >George Carlin renders his opinion on Ufology and religion >(Christianity in particular) in this excerpt from >When Will Jesus Bring The Pork Chops? >Will >----- >They Came From Out of the Sky >I find it discouraging - and a bit depressing - when I notice >the unequal treatment afforded by the media to UFO believers on >the one hand, and on the other, to those who believe in an >invisible supreme being who inhabits the sky. Especially as the >latter belief applies to the whole Jesus-Messiah-Son-of-God >fable. <snip> Hi Will and Lister's What George carlin fails to mention is that if folk believe God to exist then they must believe Extra Terrestrials exist because God and Jesus etc. would be in Heaven and therefore ET anyway. So, anyone who is Religious must know ET exists. Any belief in any God infers belief in ET therefore its all good press for Ufology.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Query Ancient UFO Crash in Siberia? - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:04:22 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:49:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Query Ancient UFO Crash in Siberia? - Dickenson Hello List Busy recently so may have missed something. Has there been any check on this story: http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/installation1.html concerning "unbreakable metal remains" and "radiation sickness" etc? Cheers
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Martian Toblerone In Color From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:05:15 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:50:17 -0500 Subject: Martian Toblerone In Color Upon enhancing part of the Martian Gold field picture (see recent posts) there is revealed what looks like a building and Martian Toblerone (triangular) UFO over 1000 metres size. The UFO is thought to be without the smaller Toblerone Scout craft which usually sits on top. This observation is by no means firm data and is mere speculation by colsweb.com which may be of interest to some Ufologists and conspiracy theorists. http://www.colsweb.com/toblerone-mars.gif or for full details see
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:23:41 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:53:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>Stan and Dick, >>I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the >>Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat >>between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the >>book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft >>engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that >>they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time >>frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. >Josh, >I would agree that the discussion or flailing away between >myself and Dick Hall has gotten out of hand. I think we probably >agree on many aspects of ufology. I have referenced his "The UFO >Evidence" (and shown a slide of the cover) at over 600 lectures. >I have a copy of the book in front of me. The authors blurb on >the inside front and back jacket certainly isn't what you claim. >Neither the foreword nor the introduction make the claims. Just >what is the source of the supposed "Author's blurb"? Stan, Answer: The bookseller's web site! >The events of interest took place on September 12. The >Washington DC sightings were in July. That summer was indeed a >very busy UFO time and indeed there were more sightingsover DC >on Sept. 12. <snip> >>There are meteorological records showing that a meteorite >>horizontally traversed several states (including West Virginia) >>from east to west. >Metorology deals with weather not meteors. The Meteor group at >Harvard has no record of prominent meteors. Yes, there were >loads of newspaper articles which settled for the notion that >what was seen all over the East were meteors despite the >relatively slow speeds, the following of rivers, the abrupt > turns, and testimony from many witnesses that what was seen was >not a meteor. I refer Stan and the List to the American meteor Society web site: http://comets.amsmeteors.org/meteors/showers/gamma_aquarids.htm l). There is a lesser known meteor shower, the Gamma Aquarids, that occurs about Sept. 1-14. This write-up gives its history, which has been erratic, and its typical rate of hourly activity is not particularly high. The author states, "...the possibility exists that this [meteor] stream produces a periodic display rather than an annual one." Photographic meteor surveys sometimes have shown no evidence of it. However, two photographic meteors from this stream were detected by the Harvard Meteor Project on Sept. 11, 1952. Furthermore, as an internet search readily shows, this meteor stream has produced prominent fireball meteors in some years on September 10 or September 11. The hypothesis that this meteor shower likely explains 'UFO' reports of streaking lights (as opposed to daylight discs or other clear-cut objects) remains a viable one until proven otherwise. It also may have produced a prominent fireball. The historical records are incomplete and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:43:24 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:54:20 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Balaskas >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >>Subject: What Was In The Sky? >>Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >>http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >>01-05-05 >>What Was In The Sky? >>Hundreds of People Report Lights, Fireball, in Sky >>We've been taking calls from dozens of viewers all across the >>area, from Rib Falls, Plover, Marshfield, Merrill, Mole Lake, >>Antigo and everywhere in between, all describing the same thing: ><snip> >An absolutely classic bolide meteor, with a high probability of >meteorite falls. No mystery at all. The only mystery to me is >that so many people are unaware of fireball meteors. Hi Richard! No mystery at all? Only a debunker would be so quick to dismiss it as such without further investigation! Similar such sightings by multiple witnesses over large regions have been reported many times in the past and most can reasonably be explained as bolide meteors or fireballs (or re- entry space debris), but is this the correct explanation for all of them? Below is a past UFO UpDates post on an article written by Philip Klass which had a similar explanation for another well known UFO sighting, Kenneth Arnold's UFO encounter of June 24, 1947. http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/apr/m07-014.shtml What I find very interesting is that at the end of his article, Philip Klass also concludes that fireballs were also the explanation for two other lesser known but very important old UFO sightings that baffled trained observers at the time; the U.S.S. Supply UFO sighting of Feb. 28, 1904 (which Dr. Bruce Maccabee spoke about at the MUFON Symposium in Dearborn, Michigan recently) and my favourite, the Feb. 9, 1913 ongoing precession of tadpole- shaped "fireballs" that was reported in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (which Chris Rutkowski has written about in the past). Philip Klass concludes his article saying "If a similar event were to occur today it might cause some observers who had seen the Independence Day movie to panic, fearing it was a UFO/ET invasion.". Although this may be an understanable motive for Philip Klass and other debunkers to dismiss all such fireball- like UFO reports as simply fireballs, it can never be
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:20:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:48:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:21:17 -0500 >Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO Report >If you can identify specific FLIR light images with specific gas >burnoff flames, then please let me know and I'll test your >suggestion against the FLIR images. In Figure 14 of your report, you refer to a Bright UL. In this case, there are several candidate oil platform flares that I calculate are within the FOV (within some error). These platforms have no names I could find, but show up in the Landsat images as "bright" in IR. Platform #1, 92deg,15min,14.07sec by 19deg,14min, 30.9sec provides an elevation of -2.1deg and azimuth of -133.5deg (83 statute miles away) Platform #2, 92deg,12min,36.41sec by 19deg,15min, 48.1sec provides an elevation of -2.1 deg and azimuth of -131.4 deg(82 statute miles away). Platform #3 has 3 flares at which provide an average elevation of -2.1deg and azimuth of -129.deg (81 statute miles away). (92deg,10min,21.7sec by 19deg,17min,39.1sec) (92deg,10min,10.4sec by 19deg,17min,35sec) (92deg,10min,8.6sec by 19deg,17min,36.3sec) The FLIR gives about 0 elevation and -134 deg azimuth. Regarding the "Dim UL", it too can be correlated to one of the three platforms listed above at least azimuth-wise. Elevation-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Blue Book Archive Announcement - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:15:17 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:56:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Blue Book Archive Announcement - Boone >From: William Wise <will.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 10:47:16 -0500 >Subject: Blue Book Archive Announcement >Dear UFO UpDates List Members: >The purpose of this email is to introduce you to the Blue Book >Archive. In brief, we have created a web-site which provides >free online access to the National Archives Blue Book microfilm >collection. Moreover, these documents have been rendered >searchable so as to increase the utility of this material to >researchers. Oh thank you Mr. Wise!!!! You've a customer in me for sure! What a great service to the public you're providing. A true gem for sure! Best,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:05:08 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:57:33 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:39:46 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >>The UFO community is still stuck in 1952! Please read up on >>Jacques Vallee's work, starting with Challenge to Science of >>1966. The Battelle Memorial Institute in 1952 devised the first >>coding scheme for UFO report data. Vallee devised another scheme >>in 1963. Many others have created inconsistent, incompatible UFO >>data codes, UFOCAT, etc. >>By 1968 Vallee realized that computer codes were too limited and >>restrictive. They crunched too much of the complexity of cases >>into almost meaningless categories. Vallee said it was important >>to record the entire report, the literal data, and now we would >>also say the graphic data (photos, drawings, etc.). A major >>problem of coding UFO data is that it is completely dependent on >>the skill and competence of the coder. How many have the >>patience to spend hours upon hours day after day week after week >>month after month inputting UFO reports into codes? How accurate >>will that process be? How will anyone know how accurate? How >>good will the data entry people be at making physics >>calculations to process the data in layperson's UFO sighting >>reports and even to make corrections of witness errors? >>Also, the AF realized by July 1952 that pattern analysis with >>UFO reports of such varying low quality, as well as other types >>of non-UFO intelligence analysis, was completely hopeless and >>worthless. Instead the AF decided to concentrate on getting >>instrumented measurements of UFO's. We can disagree with the AF >>but we are obligated to recognize what has been done in the past >>by the AF, Battelle, Vallee, Saunders, and others so we can >>improve upon their work and not unwittingly reinvent the wheel >>again and again as if we never learn anything from the past. >>First step in scientific work is always to review past work. >As one whose profession is programming and systems analysis, I >think you make a very cogent statement here, but I would like to >supplement it with an additional idea. >For example, a CE-1 case is a category where a UFO is seen >within 500 feet of the witness. The witness is usually making an >estimate of the distance not having a laser measuring device >handy and the object could be rather large and 1,000 feet away >from the witness. If he estimates 1,000 feet instead of 500 >feet, but the object at 1,000 feet was larger and had more >observed detail than a smaller, swifter obect at 500 feet, do we >now presume that the CE-1 category object is worthier of study >than the larger object not so classified? >This calls to mind an area of study called fuzzy logic which is >a way of processing data by allowing partial set membership >rather than crisp set membership or non-membership. Set >categories may be a useful tool, but also a hindrance when >considering specific cases. Thanks Bill that is an excellent example. Does the UFO sighting get denied CE-I status just because an inccurate or imperfectly estimated distance just happens to put it outside the definition of a CE-I? Someone might make a special study of CE-I's and miss such a case because a data entry person followed instructions and coded it as Daylight Disc or Nocturnal Light instead (range greater than 500 feet). The solution to that particular problem, as you suggest, is to fuzz up the definitions and then review the data carefully to make a refined selection of case data. However Vallee's realization back in 1968 was that the way around the rigid limitations of computer coded entries (which originated with the 80-column IBM computer punch cards and Battelle in 1952 was the first to apply it to UFO cases) was to enter the entire case into the database not just the coded data reduction.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Secrecy News -- 01/10/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:51:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:59:03 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/10/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 3 January 10, 2005 ** THE USE OF PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES ** IRAQI INSECURITY ** CAN DEFECTORS SUE THE CIA? ** NEW FOIA RULINGS ** NEW FROM CRS THE USE OF PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES The Bush Administration has issued dozens of National Security Presidential Directives (NSPDs) but the content and even the subject matter of most of these instruments of presidential authority is unknown. In itself, this is not a new phenomenon. In 1992, the General Accounting Office (GAO) attempted to conduct a review of presidential directives in the previous Bush Administration but was denied the access that congressional investigators sought. "Without access to detailed information about NSDs [national security directives, as they were then known], it is impossible to satisfactorily determine how many NSDs issued make and implement U.S. policy and what those policies are," the GAO reported to Congress. See "The Use of Presidential Directives to Make and Implement U.S. Policy," GAO Report NSIAD-92-72, January 1992: http://www.fas.org/irp/gao/nsiad-92-72.pdf But given the current Administration's predilection for the unfettered exercise of executive power, one can only imagine what national security policies are being "made and implemented" without notice or oversight. Last week, at least the title of one more Bush Administration NSPD came to public awareness, thanks to Jeffrey Lewis of ArmsControlWonk.com, who noticed that the government speaker at a National Academy of Sciences conference last year had cited the directive in his conference bio. So we now know that NSPD 28 concerns "Nuclear Weapons Command, Control, Safety, and Security." See: http://tinyurl.com/6b6lt A compilation of all publicly acknowledged or referenced NSPDs is here: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/index.html IRAQI INSECURITY There are 20,000 to 30,000 armed insurgents in Iraq, according to the director of Iraq's National Intelligence Service, and they are passively supported by an estimated 200,000 Iraqi sympathizers. See this interview with NIS director Major General Muhammad Abdallah al-Shahwani, published in Al Sharq al Awsat on January 5, and translated by the CIA's Foreign Broadcast Information Service: http://www.fas.org/irp/world/iraq/ash20050105.html Meanwhile, the estimated strength of Iraqi security forces is constantly shifting and disputed. "As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee," said Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) on January 6, "I have been increasingly frustrated by our inability, either in the committee, whether in public or secret briefings, whether as a body or through other discussions, to get what turns out to be accurate and reliable information from the civilian command, from the administration [about Iraqi security forces]." "Yesterday afternoon we had an Armed Services Committee hearing, a secret hearing, for 3 hours. I received information regarding the force capabilities of the Iraqi police and military that was at significant variance from what I was told a week before in Baghdad, which itself was at considerable variance from what we were told 2 months before, which then was half of the force level we were told existed a year before that." "I hesitate to use this word on the Senate floor, but it applies here--I don't like being lied to," Sen. Dayton said. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s010605.html CAN DEFECTORS SUE THE CIA? On January 11, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case known as Tenet v. Doe, which revolves around the question of whether individuals who spied for the U.S. in the expectation of certain benefits can sue the Central Intelligence Agency for breach of contract. An 1875 ruling, in a case known as Totten v. U.S., suggests they cannot. But a federal appeals court ruled in 2003 that a lawsuit brought by two defectors from a former East Bloc country could proceed. "We should not precipitously close the courthouse doors to colorable claims of the denial of constitutional rights," according to that 2003 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The CIA petitioned the Supreme Court to review that decision, and the Court agreed to do so. See "Spy vs. CIA: It's a shot in the dark" by Bill Adair, St. Petersburg Times, January 10: http://tinyurl.com/5adev The CIA's petition to the Supreme Court in Tenet v. Doe and the respondent's opposition may be found here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/index.html#totten NEW FOIA RULINGS Recent judicial rulings in Freedom of Information Act cases are listed and annotated in a new collection from the Justice Department Office of Information and Privacy. Courts ruled for the government and against the requester in many but not all cases. See "New FOIA Decisions, October - December 2004": http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/2005foiapost1.htm NEW FROM CRS Some new or newly updated reports of the Congressional Research Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following: "Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004: National Standards for Drivers' Licenses, Social Security Cards, and Birth Certificates," January 6, 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32722.pdf "V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft," updated January 7, 2005: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL31384.pdf "F/A-22 Raptor," updated January 6, 2005: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL31673.pdf "Germany's Role in Fighting Terrorism: Implications for U.S. Policy," December 27, 2004: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32710.pdf "Balancing Scientific Publication and National Security Concerns: Issues for Congress," updated December 16, 2004: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL31695.pdf "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Budget Request and Plan, FY2005-FY2009," updated December 2, 2004: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/RL32347.pdf "Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity," January 5, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32725.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:16:49 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:03:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:10:41 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:30:22 -0400 >>>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>Stan and Dick, >>I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the >>Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat >>between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the >>book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft >>engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that >>they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time >>frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. <snip> >I have a copy of the book in front of me. The authors blurb on >the inside front and back jacket certainly isn't what you claim. >Neither the foreword nor the introduction make the claims. Just >what is the source of the supposed "Author's blurb"? The original post to UpDates on Dec. 11, 2004, stated the following, directly quoting Feschino himself about his book. All the headlines are about the "Military Engagement" and "the day in 1952 when Air Force took on UFOs" and then most of the story
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Press Release Ref. Rumsfeld Redux (1) From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:41:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:43 -0500 Subject: Press Release Ref. Rumsfeld Redux (1) PRESS RELEASE: CONTACT: Larry W. Bryant (703-931-3341) Rumsfeld Redux (aka "Bryant's 'Bleak House'") When English novelist Charles Dickens penned his masterwork "Bleak House" (centering on a generations-long lawsuit - "Jarndyce and Jarndyce"), little did he (or could he) suspect that, some 150 years hence, an American non-novelist might become embroiled in similar, real-life legal circumstances. The current litigation in question - Larry W. Bryant v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, et al. - began its first phase with his filing of a First Amendment complaint on June 30, 2004, against Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and the secretary of the Army, challenging the Army's rejection of Bryant's classified advertisement "Blow the Whistle on Bush's 'Gulf of Persia' Resolution!", which he'd submitted on June 7, 2003, for publication in the Fort Myer, Va., weekly newspaper (the "Pentagram"). For a copy of that complaint, see the web site of Bryant's attorney, Jonathan L. Katz, of the Silver Spring, Md., law firm Marks & Katz, LLC (http://www.markskatz.com/MilitaryCases.htm ). (Note: Upon winning this lawsuit, Marks & Katz doubtlessly will become the premier First Amendment litigator on the East Coast.) During the succeeding months, as the case wended its way toward trial through the vast procedural arena known as the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Bryant focused his energy on submitting his several other whistleblower- solicitation ads (aka "issue ads") to various military-owned "commercial enterprise newspapers" across the country. Invariably, these additional prepublication-review submissions met with no response (despite his repeated follow-up) or with flat-out rejection at the hands of the post/base public affairs offices assigned to process them. But, lo! - with these latest submissions, a new development surfaced: some of the public affairs officers decided to view these ads' content as "political in nature"; and, via the anti- political-ads provision of DoD Instruction 5120.4, they felt empowered to ban the ads' publication summarily. Here are the titles of the banned ads (whose entire text may be viewed at the Marks & Katz web site via the "pdf" version of the newly filed complaint: http://www.markskatz.com/complaintlwb2005.pdf ): * Blow the Whistle on Iraqnam's Battle-of-Baghdad Cover-up! * Blow the Whistle on ALL Atrocities at Abu Ghraib! * Blow the Whistle on the Army-CIA McCarthy Saga! * Join the Revolt Against the "Feres Doctrine"! * Blow the Whistle on the Military's Psychiatric Retaliation Against Whistleblowers! * Resist the Government's Drafty Spin! As of Jan. 7, 2005, this expanded banned-at-the-bases mind-set has engendered a brand-new lawsuit, which the court probably will consolidate with the one filed in 2004. And this Phase 2 of "Bryant v. Rumsfeld, et al." has a few more co-defendants: the secretaries of Army/Navy/Air Force, as well as the commandant of the U. S. Marine Corps. As Bryant's discovery process moves forward in Phase 1, attorney Katz expects shortly to file a motion in Phase 2 for a preliminary injunction against the defendants - seeking, inter alia, to have the anti-political-ads provision of DDI 5120.4 declared invalid on its face. Meantime, Bryant has this to say about recent developments: "This entire litigation (including two related cases dating back to the mid-eighties and nineties) abounds in irony amidst a codified society reminiscent of the Chancery life in Dickens's London. You have to go way back to the late 1950's to savor my cases' 'Bleak House' flavor. That's when I submitted my very first issue ad to a military newspaper - the 'Flyer,' published for personnel at Langley Air Force Base, Va. Of course, the base PA chief, a Capt. Oldenburgh, chose to reject the ad, by which
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Leather As A Countermeasure? From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:15:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:17:02 -0500 Subject: Leather As A Countermeasure? Hey folks - This is speculative at this point, but it seems there are three or four reports floating around, including, believe it or not, from UFO implant researcher and remover Dr. Roger Leir, that leather "can stop telepathic" stuff from aliens. Now regardless of what you think of UFOs, when I hear the same thing from rather different sources, I perk up. I'd say it has to be _genuine_ leather, real biological stuff, in other words. We already know that biological things are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-10-05 From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:30:02 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:19:38 -0500 Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-10-05 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings Release Date: January 10, 2005 Peach Mountain Pottsville, Pennsylvania Cigar Shape Object Date: September/October, 1964 Time: Early evening Number of witnesses: 3 Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Cigar Shape Full Description of event/sighting: When I was 6 years old my mother (36 years) and sister (8 years) were sitting at the kitchen table doing homework. It was a pleasant early fall evening and the leaves were off falling off the trees. I looked up because of a bright light and saw a cigar shaped object fly by the kitchen window. This was strange because it was so close to our house. It was flying in between our house our neighbor's which was less than 50 yards away. In order for the object to pass our window it had to be no more than 15 feet off the ground. Our house was on a hill so we were higher than our neighbor's. My mother sister and I jumped up and ran out of our back door to watch it. We actually ran with it for about 30 feet before my father called us back inside. My mother called The Pottsville Republican, our local newspaper, who told her it was just a comet or meteor. My memory of all this is rather vivid. There was no noise what so ever and it was moving rather slowly about 8-10 miles per hour. It has a yellowish glow, it was not so bright that you couldn't look right at it. It did not look like the "typical" UFO pictures of flying saucers that you see. It moved along with the topography of the land, because we watched it move up over a hill as it disappeared over the horizon. This all lasted about 5 minutes and my mother and sister both have similar and distinct memories of the incident. Thank you very much to the witness for the report. ------------------ Clark AFB Philippines Air Police Reports Large Object Picked Up On Radar Date: From 2/63 to 8/64 Time: Approx: 11:30 p.m. I was in the Air Police at Clark AFB from 2/63 to 8/64. I was on post one night about 11:30 p.m. on the far end of the run way where they kept the uploaded 102s. I had a radio on my post so I could hear all of the action. All at once CSC called the Strike Team to go down to the end of the Runway close to where my post was and check to see if they could find anything on the runway. The radar site had picked up something large on the runway. I saw the Strike Team search the area and they called in that they did not find anything. Everyone went back to normal and I did not think much of it all. Then the Radar Site called back and they picked up the large object again coming on the runway from the Jungle. This time they had a lot of troops searching the area. I was thinking that if this was some aliens and they were looking for specimens to take back with them than I was probably the best candidate as I was very close to the action but all along. I would not even be missed for a long time. This is the only time I was really scarred during my 4 years in the Air Police. I could feel the hairs going up on my back. To make a long story short nothing was ever found but it has to be something large enough for our Radar to pick up. Thank you to the person for their report. --------------------- Bloomington Indiana John Tosti Buzzed By UFO Date: 1990s Time: Evening Well here is a video, of the image still you have of John Tosti, being buzzed by a UFO. It was taken by John, in the '90's as you will see he as taing the craft, and it dissapears, but buzz's him. he didn=92t notice it buzzed him till he went in and watched the tape, cause it was soo fast as you will see.. I also grabbed a few stills, and you can see in the still possible figures in the craft. Video clip - Bloomington Indiana John Tosti Buzzed By UFO - Footage 1.68 mb Footage can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D22 55 Footage and all photos are =A9 John Tosti 2005 (Please respect this copyright) Thank you to John for all the material. -------------------------- Kaufman County, Texas Object Video Taped Around Small Plane Date: October 30, 2004 Time: Daytime sighting Hi Brian, I'm going to attempt to send you three clips of a small plane I taped on 10-30-2004, one at a time in WMV format. On this one taping, there's two UFOs that interact with the plane and one, (diamond shaped) that fly's by. I've slowed the clips down so you may not be able to play them, I don't know. On #3 clip, is a large orb, (nearly transparent), that comes from the bottom of the screen and plainly comes up behind and then over the plane, then comes back down, very impressive. The diameter of the orb appears to be at least half the size of the plane that I would guess to be about forty feet long. If you get this clip and can open it, I've got several that I know you would want to see that I will send you. I'm sending you this e-mail first, and then #3 clip, let me know what happens. Thank you to the witness for the report, photos and video footage. View all three video clips at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2249 Video clip #1 - Kaufman County, Texas Object Appear Around Small Plane - Footage 205 kb. Video clip #2 - Kaufman County, Texas Object Appear Around Small Plane - Footage 77.3 kb. Video clip #3 - Kaufman County, Texas Object Appear Around Small Plane - Footage 250 kb. ------------------------------ Kaufman County, Texas Object Appear Around Jet Airliner Date: November 7, 2004 Time: Approx: 3:00 p.m. Hi Brian, On 11-07-2004 at about 3:00pm, I was taping this passenger jet when this orb appeared to be paralleling it for a while, then it headed up at an angle to intercept it. It seems to me the orbs are intelligently controlled or the planes are like a magnet to them in some way. What they are, I have no idea. I know one thing for sure, if they are close to the planes as they appear to be, some of them are huge. This one seems to go right up to the tail of the jet and follow it through the clouds. If this orb was like just five or ten feet in diameter, I think it would be very hard to see at 25 to 30,000 feet,what do you think? Anyway, I'm sending you this clip and am working on another one I taped on this same date of a rod-type object that appears to be interacting with a jet. I sent you one rod-type object earlier this month on this same date that you posted, but this one is another one I thought you and your readers needed to see. Video clip - Kaufman County, Texas Object Appear Around Jet Airliner - Footage 848 kb. Video clip can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2253 Thank you to the witness for the report, photos and video footage. --------------------------- Galleywood, U.K. Loud Sound And Orange Strobing Light Date: Early December 2004 ? Time: Approx: 2:30 a.m. Dear Brian, I want to tell you about an event that happened to me about 1 month ago, I had fell asleep in front of the television, and when I woke up it was about 2:30 am so I dragged my self up to bed and got changed up stairs in the bedroom. My wife was asleep so I got changed in the dark, well I had some light from the street lights their orange sodium here in the U.K., It was quiet and the weather was dry and mild. In the distance I thought I could here the sound of a motorcycle making its way up the road that passes my 2 floor masionett which is situated above a parade of shops, so I am a bit higher above the ground than in a normal house. I expected this (motorcycle) to take maybe 20 seconds to reach my masionett and pass by, but this was not a motorcycle. It got to us in about a second when it passed by. The noise was very loud and their was an orange light strobing. I did not have time to look out of the window, but I turned my head to follow the sound. The strobing light was seen through my second bedroom window traveling in a left to right direction, also the time display on my red led clock radio shimmered and I felt as if I was in some kind of field or shock wave. My wife slept all through this, perhaps anyone in Galleywood in the U.K. had the same experience as me. Thank you to the witness for their report. ---------------------- Los Angeles, California Bright Red Laser Light Date: December 19, 2004 Time: Midday On Dec 19th in the middle of the day I was looking at the moon through a Meade 90mm Telescope when I saw I can describe only as a bright red laser light coming out of the dark side of the moon, I followed it for about 30 seconds and then it just started bouncing all over the place and I lost it. I swung the telescope back around to the moon just in time to catch 2 asteroids passing between the earth and the satellites. I found a link to the Asteroids but nothing on the light. Article can be found at Space.com - Small Asteroid Passes Between Satellites and Earth: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/asteroid_close_041222.html Thank you to the witness for the report. ---------------------------- Chino, California Numerous Witness Watch Strange Red Light Date: December 31, 2004 Time: Approx Midnight On New Years Eve, me & several friends & family members saw a weird red light moving slowly in the sky a little after midnight. When I saw the light it wasn't moving in a straight line but was curving around a little. I thought it might be a VERY high helicopter, but it seemed to be too big and red to be a helicopter at that height moving the way it was. Then it suddenly disappeared. About 30 seconds later it appeared again in a different location (but in the same general part of the sky), and continued moving in a seemingly random pattern. My brother described it as "a ball of fire in the sky". I looked in the paper all week to see if anybody else reported seeing the strange moving light but there was nothing, at least until my brother called me today to tell me about your article. I then called my nephew to tell him to go buy the paper. He was really intrigued because he said his girlfriend was at work at Subway Sandwiches Monday and on her break she was in the parking lot and 3 or 4 people were looking and pointing up in the sky at a weird red light. Maybe it's all coincidence, I'm not sure? Thank you to Sara at the newspaper and the witness for this report. ---------------------- San Francisco, California Seven Umbrella Shaped Objects Date: January 1, 2005 Time: 5:00 a.m. Number of witnesses: 2 Number of objects: 7 Shape of objects: Umbrella shaped (balloon like) Full Description of event/sighting: Looked up into the sky. It was above some buildings on top of Telegraph Hill & Lombard Street. South of the bay (where Alcatraz is). They came from the West and moved along the top of the buildings in the sky. The sky was dark and light at the same time. The clouds seem dark black with white surrounding them and were moving in large clusters, scattered throughout the sky. The 7 objects were moving in a cluster. Several more above the rest. Sort of like a flock of birds, all moving at the exact same speed. They did not increase or decrease their speed as they moved from the West to the East. It couldn't have been more than 15 seconds and then they were gone. They were all bright objects, followed by a stream of light. I remember less and less everyday. Thank you to the witness for the report. -------------------- Sydney, Australia Bright Flashing Light Date: January 7, 2005 Time: Approx: 11:25 p.m. Dear Brian, I live in the inner western suburbs of Sydney and while it is relatively built up the sky of late has been remarkably clear. I was standing outside in my backyard when I noticed a sudden flash in the sky to the South at approximately 60 degrees. As I looked in this direction the flash reappeared and continued to flash intermittently on a further seven occasions. The light travelled in a northerly direction covering a further 60 degree arc before disappearing in mid-air. The flashing object emitted a brilliant white strobe-like light not unlike a camera flash. No other lights were noticeable and there was absolutely no sound at all. The reason it was particularly noticeable is that over the city there is a no- flight curfew from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. for all aircraft excepting military and emergency services aircraft. This object certainly did not fit the profile of any of these aircraft. While I was unable to discern a vehicle per se it would appear to have been at a height of about 5000 feet. Thank you. Kind regards. Thank you to the witness for the report. Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 2189 email: hbccufo.nul Website: http://www.hbccufo.org HBCC
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Hillarious ET Art On Huygens Landing Picture From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 23:12:17 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:22:22 -0500 Subject: Hillarious ET Art On Huygens Landing Picture http://www.colsweb.com/TitanProbeLandingArea.htm The most outstanding line art figure found yet featuring; Mantis Grey ET, Chinese Dragon, Boxing glove, Crystal , Starfish and Mermaid.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:05:32 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:24:44 -0500 Subject: Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication Problems in Extraterrestrial Communication by Douglas Raybeck Anthropology Department Hamilton College Clinton, NY 13323 CONTACT IX March 6-8, 1992 Palo Alto, CA INTRODUCTION It is a truism of information theory that for communication to occur, there must be some commonality, some sharing between sender and receiver. The commonality may derive from perception, from cognition, from experience, but there must be a common reference point upon which to build shared meaning. In the absence of such a mutual point, all messages are unique and no information can be exchanged, since there is no means to decode it. This situation, or something very much like it, may very well obtain when we first encounter extraterrestrial intelligence. Communicating with extraterrestrials is a science fiction theme that is both current and venerable. Hugo Gernsback, the father of contemporary science fiction, wrote stories in which he suggested some of the communication differences that might be encountered with aliens or with robots. Since the thirties, most science fiction treatments of the problems involved in communication with extraterrestrials have suggested that the major difficulty to be encountered is a cultural/psychological one. Commonly two species are operating under different assumptions, sometimes with different biological substrates; each persistently misinterpreting the actions of the other. The resolution of the difficulty comes when the misinterpretation is recognized and taken into account. Part of my purpose in this paper is to suggest that the difficulties inherent in extraterrestrial communication will likely be much more basic, more profound, and more difficult to resolve than has generally been envisioned thus far. Not surprisingly, our conceptions of encounters with extraterrestrials generally reflect our assumptions about communication, and are modeled on our own experiences. Thus, anthropology with its concern for cultural differences and a relativistic appreciation of these dissimilarities frequently supplies the intellectual model for cross-species encounters. Communication difficulties are usually attributed to differing cultural backgrounds, experiences and assumptions. Those projections that come closer to the mark also acknowledge the contribution that differing biologies can make not only to behavior, but to thought. Our own capacities and limits as a species are embedded in our biological nature, and it is reasonable to expect that this will be the case for other life forms as well. In addition to describing the problem of extraterrestrial communication, I also wish to suggest a means of dealing with (solving?) it. Since the seventies, the possibility of communicating with life forms beyond our planet has garnered increasing attention in the community of scientists. From the inclusion of pictures, music, earth sounds, and spoken greetings that were included on the first Voyager, to the current efforts of the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) project, the issue of communication with extraterrestrials has become more of a concern for the scientific community and less the exclusive domain of science fiction (Morrison, et al. 1977, Sagan 1973). Thus, while this essay is admittedly speculative, I can hope that it will play a constructive role in the task of conceptualizing and implementing attempts at extraterrestrial communication. HUMAN LANGUAGE AND ITS BIOLOGICAL SUBSTRATE True language, with its generative grammar and reliance on symbols, is widely regarded by anthropologists, linguists and others, as a distinguishing characteristic of our species (Miller 1981). Human language has the capacity to generate new meaning and to allow language users to exchange messages that are at once unique, yet decipherable (Eastman 1978, Miller 1981). Human language has two principal qualities that account for this capability. First, humans are capable of associating sound and meaning in an arbitrary fashion. Unlike closed-call systems, where animals communicate with utterances that convey emotional states, humans can wed non-emotional meaning to a pattern of sounds in a fashion that is wholly arbitrary. This frees us from the constraints of environmental stimuli and allows us to create new meanings. If the relationship between sound and meaning is not biologically embedded (as a cry of fright would be) then language users can create novel references, and begin to generate culture, a learned constellation of symbolic meanings. Second, human language possesses a characteristic that Chomsky describes as an underlying deep structure that enables language users to send and to receive meaningful messages that may never before have been sent or received (Chomsky 1957, Chomsky 1972). Chomsky and others have argued that the deep structure for language is the same for all humans, and accounts for phonological, structural, and even semantic universals that can be found across human languages as diverse as English, Urdu and Malay (Brown 1991, Chomsky 1972, Greenberg 1963, Greenberg 1966, Ullman 1963). Over the past twenty years, considerable evidence has accumulated that people use very diverse languages in very similar ways and that the semantic distinctions underlying these divergent languages are essentially universal (Herrmann and Raybeck 1981, Osgood, et al. 1975, Raybeck and Herrmann 1990). There is a clear argument that there exists a human language, capable of great elasticity and productivity, yet nonetheless, distinctively structured and ultimately constrained by a deep structure that is Rwired-inS (Ardila and Ostrosky-Solis 1989, Bloom and Lazerson 1988, Chomsky 1972, Hanlon and Brown 1989, Jerison 1990, Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974, Marin 1982). In short, there are limits on human language: there are limits on the messages we can send or receive, and there are limits on our ability to process information. These are part of our human heritage. The human capacity for language is not simply learned, but depends on identifiable neural structures in the brain (Ardila and Ostrosky- Solis 1989, Hanlon and Brown 1989, Lenneberg 1967, Marin 1982, Thompson and Green 1982). The capacities for understanding speech and for generating it are separately localized, usually in the left hemisphere (Geschwind 1990). These areas, BrocaUs and WernickeUs respectively, are well connected by a neural network, and there are also connections to other areas of the brain that process and store information concerning vision, proprioception, touch, etc. (Geschwind 1990, Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974, Stokoe 1989). Further, localization of language functions in the brain appear to be sites of motor functions as well (Ojemann 1982). Twenty-five years ago Lenneberg succeeded in demonstrating that the development of language skills follows an immutable path that correlates very strongly with the development of motor skills (1967). Ojemann has gone so far as to argue that the brain sites involved in language processing are associated not only with motor function, but also with short-term memory (1982). I appreciate that the reader may find these arguments a bit abstruse, but the point to be made here is important. It is becoming increasingly apparent that there exist neurological structures that serve as correlates for those capacities we recognize as language (Hanlon and Brown 1989, Marin 1982, Premack 1986). Our communication abilities, and very likely our general cognitive abilities, are to a significant extent Rhard wiredS in a fashion that gives us great flexibility, yet also implies distinct limits on our capacities for language and for thought. More than thirty years ago George Miller established a strong argument that the human capacity to process information is limited. He suggested that we have difficulty in managing more than seven cognitive distinctions at one time, and that the reason for this limitation was probably located in the physiological substrate of the brain (Miller 1956). There is also evidence that those logical relationships that we regard as essential to meaning are probably a reflection of underlying neurophysiology (Premack 1985, Premack 1986, Pribram 1986, Skarda and Freeman 1987, Stokoe 1989). Fundamental semantic relations such as antonymy are employed similarly across widely divergent cultures, suggesting a physiological base (Raybeck and Herrmann 1990). That the development of these semantic relations in children parallels cross-cultural patterns of use, only strengthens this supposition (Landis, et al. 1987). Others have argued that our ability to create symbols requires the construction of internal representations of the external world (Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974). This aptitude, in turn, involves associating information from various sensory modalities (taste, touch,sight, sound) in order to construct these representations of external stimuli(Ardila and Ostrosky-Solis 1989, Jerison 1990, Marin 1982). There is a neuron-rich area of the left hemisphere located in the folds of the Sylvan fissure that seems to be the site where various sensory information is cross-connected (Geschwind 1990, Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974). Termed the inferior parietal lobule (IPL), this structure seems to be an association area of association areas. Information entering the IPL from one sensory modality can be cross- referenced to other modalities. Theoretically this would permit the IPL to promote the construction of internal representations of the external world. Thus, the IPL seems to be deeply implicated in such curious events as synesthesia, where the information of one modality is registered as though it came from another (e.g. That sound is very bright.) However, the IPL is also the probable source of our mundane, yet very special ability to create symbols and to process cognitive distinctions. Shorn of the preceding physiological details, it seems apparent that our communication and cognitive abilities have a distinctive structure, and a set of limits that are embedded in and reflective of our neurological substrate. There are limits to our ability to process information, to encode it and to decode it. Further, the rules of logic that underlie cognition as well as communication may also reflect a specific and delimited neurological substrate. It seems quite possible that, should we encounter an extraterrestrial intelligence, its communication and cognitive abilities may differ from our own in a fashion that would greatly impede inter-species communication. PROBLEMS IN EXTRATERRESTRIAL COMMUNICATION It seems fair to assume that any other life form we may encounter will be a product of a specific evolutionary past. Its capabilities and intelligence will be shaped by the environmental and selective pressures that characterize its planet of origin, and that will probably differ considerably from those forces under which our own species evolved. While there are grounds to believe that two intelligent species would share some aspects of perception, cognition and behavior, such as an appreciation of cause-effect, there is also reason to believe that intelligent species might exhibit significant differences in aspects of perception, cognition and behavior. Evolution depends upon variable responses to selective pressures. Those organisms that succeed evolutionarily do so by having more offspring and passing additional genetic information to future generations. The qualities that determine success are determined by the challenges that the organism faces, and these, in turn, reflect the nature of the environment (Cavalli-Sforza 1991, Gould 1977, Jerison 1990, Pribram 1986). Intelligence has been useful for humans, but ants have got on quite well with a set of communal, genetically based, responses to their environment. Other environments could presumably create evolutionary pressures quite different from those encountered on this planet. Beyond the assumption that there would be species competition (and that is an assumption), the manner in which a species would develop is quite unpredictable. On this planet there is a general evolutionary tendency for species to change in the direction of greater organismic complexity and greater size (within obvious limits). Let us assume that we encounter an extraterrestrial life form that is markedly different from ourselves. As the product of its own evolutionary past, it too has a series of capacities and limits that are Rwired in,S and that differ from ours. Herein is a significant problem to cross-species understanding. The existing differences may be so fundamental that the basic problem may well be discovering the nature of the basic problem. I know this suggestion runs counter to some science fiction notions that for communication with extraterrestrials all we need is an open mind and time to exchange simple messages. However, it is quite possible that the extraterrestrial life form will process more or fewer distinctions than we do, that its language production rules may differ, that the basic logic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 11 UFO Over Bangkok In 1973 From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:06:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:26:37 -0500 Subject: UFO Over Bangkok In 1973 An initial news item was submitted by myself and published in FSR Case Histories, Supplement 18, p. 17. This follow-on report in Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 21, No. 3/4, pp. 29-31, was published in November 1975. The Bangkok Ufo Photographs by Donald A. Johnston While travelling through Bangkok on my way to a teaching assignment in southern Thailand during October 1973, I was fortunate to make the acquaint- ance of two reporters on the staff of the English language newspaper, *The Bangkok Nation*. I confessed an interest in the UFO phenomenon and, because news items were by this time appearing in the Asian papers on the U.S. "Pascagoula" wave, I questioned them on whether they knew of any local reports. My candidness soon was rewarded when they revealed two very interesting reports. The first, much to my amazement, was a contactee case involving a former member of the Thai Parliament. This prestigious individual's encounter was alleged to have occurred sometime during 1972. His name and address were given to me, but unfortunately my stay in Bangkok was too short to arrange for a translator and an interview. The second case proved much easier to investigate because it happened to involve two of the staff members of *The Bangkok Nation* -- their chief photo- grapher and his assistant. It was also more recent and involved photographs of the object. The sighting began in the evening of August 30, 1973, shortly after 8.00 p.m., when Mr. Sombat Srichuros, 19, an attendant of Aree Gas Station on Rama IV Road, reported to *The Bangkok Nation* that he had seen a flying object with flashing green lights over Soi Aree [Aree Street]. Two school girls, Lisanette Hansen, 12, and Christina Loowrakwong, 13, of Soi Aree Court, reported the same or a similar object passing behind Aree Court and San Francisco Court. Lisanette Hansen, whose father, Mr. Ashjorn Hansen, works as an inter- national marketing expert for the U.N., said the object had small square windows with bright lights inside. Christina, who saw the object first, stated it was in the shape of a "half wing" with many red lights going on and off on top. They reported the object moved slowly and smoothly without sound, and disappeared in the direction of Klong [canal] Toey Port. The parents of the girls rushed out after they were told of the UFO and waited for some time in hopes of catching a view of the object should it return. It did not. One other resident in the area reported the UFO to the local police station but said they paid no attention to his claim. *The Bangkok Nation* photographers Thewin Chanyawongse and Vinich Thinviratana next reported sighting a similar UFO with a flashing red light in the centre and two blue flashing lights, one on either end, as they were driving on Sukhum[v]it Soi 20 at 10.00 p.m. (north west but in the same approximate area as the other sightings). Reporters from the newspaper called Don Muang [International] Airport to check for radar contact, but no contact was reported. No scheduled aircraft or helicopter flights were in the area. Mr. Thewin took a series of six photographs of the object with a 35mm camera equipped with a telephoto lens as it flew by. I was unable to meet with Mr. Thewin because he was out on assignment, but was able to encourage Mr. Vinich to allow me to borrow the negatives to these pictures for analysis. When analysis was finally performed (I waited some time after my return to the United States and was slightly remiss in having this done), the negatives were found to show two lights -- sadly of only point source dimen- sions. However, it was determined that the lights *were in focus* and that the camera, by judging from stars which could be found in the background, had not moved or jumped noticeably during any of the exposures. It was further deter- mined that the lights were blinking with some type of alternating pattern, as was reported, and that the distance between the lights had remained fairly constant, suggesting they had emanated from one object. The first negatives show the lights almost perpendicular to the horizontal, with the orientation changing until in the final negative they are parallel with the horizontal. Although I have not yet received a reply from Mr. Thewin regarding camera specifications or exposure time, through analysis the exposure time can be estimated as no more than a few seconds. Negative number 5, greatly enlarged, is reproduced alongside. The blur in the lower right-hand corner is of a large blossom to a bush-size plant which stands about the height of a man. The object was travelling from left to right across the frame when the exposure was taken, and it appears that there are two dark spots directly behind and to the left of each light which are presumably shadows of the light sources. It should be mentioned that it is the opinion of the photoanalyst that the photos represent the wing lights of an aircraft that has banked and levelled off. If these lights were blue as reported by Messrs. Thewin and Vinich then this explanation would seem dubious due to their unconventional colour pattern. In any event, it is my opinion and the opinion of the analyst that the photos indicate the presence of some type of object and cannot be said to be of any natural celestial phenomena or the result of negative tampering. Unquote. Comment: The important item in this article is the contactee case and not the as always doubtful LITS (lights in the sky) report. Contactees are found in all regions of the world and this one from a relatively unknown country does indicate this is a global and massive conditioning process. Also, while on special assignment upcountry with the Royal Thai Supreme Command Forward, I briefly interviewed the commanding flag officer, a Royal Thai Navy admiral, who matter-of-factly told me that any and all UFO reports were routinely forwarded to the U.S. Military Advisory Group at the American Embassy in Bangkok. Again, most developing countries passed on this type of information to their sponsoring country whether it was/is the U.S., the Soviet Union, China, etc.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:38:35 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:29:26 -0500 Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? - Sparks >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 17:09:47 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:44:58 EST >>Subject: Re: The Devil's In The Details? <snip> >>>This has probably already been done somewhere, and I've >>>suggested it on this list a couple of times, but I'll repeat it >>>- if you want to extract common elements, the big job leading to >>>that happy state is to set up a system of _codes_ for as many >>>facets of each case as humanly possible. This requires people >>>willing to read and encode the statements in each case. Ideally >>>an expert in UFOlogy would do this, but anyone with a systematic >>>approach to tasks could at least theoretically do it. <snip> >>By 1968 Vallee realized that computer codes were too limited and >>restrictive. They crunched too much of the complexity of cases >>into almost meaningless categories. >I disagree. Coding cases in no way makes other types of analysis >impossible. The full case documentation is still there, open to >investigators. I gave an example of how limited coding can be when done alone, without having full case data onbline. Others can be suggested as Martin Shough has done, and Vallee long before. You should read up on it instead of disagreeing without knowledge of the issue at hand. >Coding is looking at the data in one way, to get some very rapid >answers of one type. There's plenty of room in UFOlogy for many >different types of analysis. Meanwhile, the coding type answers >might just serve as a huge push factor in getting the powers >that be moving towards disclosure. Having a query web site >available would be a substantial boost to public education about >UFOs. I think that makes it very much worth doing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Morris From: Neil Morris <neil.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:18:31 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:32:03 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Morris >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >why?). UpDates Archive search's a good place:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:40:22 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:34:17 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Hatch >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >why?). Hi Terry: This List and others has gone in endless circles trying to chase down the origins of the LGM moniker. About all we agreed on is that it is generally used derisively, and goes way back. It might could have been lurking for decades, maybe in folklore or science fiction, before somebody seized on it as a cheap implement of ridicule. Nobody seems to know who did that first either, not that I know about. What I do know, is that out of 18,370 events now listed in my database, I cannot find any 'little green men'.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:04:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:36:05 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Lehmberg >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: "UFO Updates" <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >why?). From: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/jan/m08-002.shtml Vallee writes in his 'Anatomy of a Phenomenon' in 1965 on page 153: Are these sightings coherent, and what are the characteristics most often attributed to their 'entities' by the authors of such reports? What do we obtain if we seek to extract the chief features from these accounts? Let us hurry to claim that 'little green men', which everybody seems so fond of, have never been described in reality. "It is a curious fact," remarks I. Davis, "that it seems impossible to discover the exact origin of the word 'green' with saucer occupant reports. Where and when the expression 'little green men' was first used, by whom, why or in connection with what case, has not yet been determined." Our own efforts to clarify this point have proved equally vain. If we gather all reports that seem to present some guarantee of reliability, and if we try to extract from them a coherent interpretation, we have to divide the alleged occupants into two groups. On one hand, we find descriptions of men (more than fifty have been described in about twenty cases) similar to us in height and behavior; on the other hand, many accounts speak of "dwarfs" measuring between three and four feet in height... Seems like that jury has been out a long time... And from Dr. Rudiak: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/dec/m31-018.shtml ...Much more info and pertinant links. The search took seconds on the UFO UpDates provided Google UpDates Archive search. Type in [ "Little Green Men" origin ] ...and get _all_ the info. Do this with anything you want to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 UFO Over The Plaza Mexico Bullring From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:27:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:41:01 -0500 Subject: UFO Over The Plaza Mexico Bullring INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 11, 2005 Source: El Universal Online, Mexico City Date: Sunday, January 9, 2005 UFO Seen Over the Plaza Mexico Bullring Images showing a flying object appeared on television yesterday, taken during the tenth corrida of the 2004-2005 bullfighting season. 07:00 Images of a flying object seen over the Plaza Mexico Bullring appeared yesterday on the La Jugada television show, broadcast on Televisa Channel 2 at 22:30 hours. The object, resembling a balloon, was captured for a few minutes as is hovered in the air. It then rose upward to vanish in the sky. Bullfighters Jose Luis Angelino, from Tlaxcala, and Humberto Flores, from Jalisco, appeared in Mexico City's Plaza Monumental. They were the winners of the tenth corrdia of the 2004-2005 season. Each of them cut an ear [off a bull] and were
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 UFO over La Pampa Argentina From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:21:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:42:25 -0500 Subject: UFO over La Pampa Argentina INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 11, 2005 Source: La Arena (newspaper) Date: 01.08.05 On December 18, 2004 at 15:45 hrs, a rural contractor managed to photograph a strange flying object in a field near Santa Rosa. Roberto Maggio was taking snapshots of the various machines working on tasks related to harvesting without ever being aware of the UFOs presence. The object was not seen by other persons working in the area either. At night, upon downloading the digital photos from his camera to the PC, he was startled to detect an object tha showed a blurry outline. On top and bottom, however, the object was somehow sharper, presenting a darker central area. Maggio was also able to detect a small, blurry dot in an earlier photo which was supposedly the same object, but appearing with a better perspective in the next shot. The witness claims not having noticed insects or any other objects which could have led to misinterpretation moving in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Strange Lights in Chile's 5th Region From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:54:36 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:44:50 -0500 Subject: Strange Lights in Chile's 5th Region INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 11, 2005 Chile: Strange Lights In The 5Th Region Source: OVNI.Cl Date: 12.31.04 Strange lights engaged in complex maneuvers over Chile's 5th Region startled tourists in the area HORCON, December 31, 2004. On Saturday, December 18th at around 20:30 hrs., Alejandra Bauerle was spending time on the beach with some friends near Cau-Cau, Horcon. Upon looking at the sky and the lovely sunset with few clouds in existence, they became aware of some strange lights crossing the firmament. At first they believed they could be aircraft, but after analyzing the contrails left in their wake and the objects' irregular and sudden movements, they dismissed the possibility altogether. "It started out like a dot (perfectly round) and became larger, first in a vertical line and then turned to the left. We thought it could be a commercial aircraft (flying low) but it was too large to be the trail of an airplane. We looked at it through binoculars and could only see the light," said the witness. "I'm not sure if the light is the object or rather the impression that it left. In fact, no object at all could be seen, only the tremendous light that became larger and changed course," she added. Despite the lack of certainty regarding the nature of the phenomenon, the images are being analyzed by experts in anomalous aerial phenomena. It should be noted that Horcon Beach has been the scene for other UFO-related incidents, such as the case involving a strange luminous dome-shape photographed at sea by some fishermen in 2001.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:02:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:47:34 -0500 Subject: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 11, 2005 Source: El Imparcial Date: 01-08-05, 20:27 hrs Mexico: Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? Change noted yesterday described as "strange" Scientists startled by peculiar phenomenon involving coastal hill. by Luis Gonzalez HERMOSILLO, Sonora(PH) -- More than half of a hill located on the Hermosillo coast apparently "vanished". The event was classified by Sonoran scientists as "strange and surprising" According to a series of images taken by EL IMPARCIAL which were classifed as "historically significant", a hill belonging to the Sierra de Cirios range near Puerto Libertad ceased to exist in a matter of hours. At 08:54 minutes yesterday, a reporter and photographer from this newsroom saw what they took to be a UFO as they drove along Rt.36 North along the coastline. After this sighting there occurred a strange phenomenon in which rocky formations changed composition (sic). At 14:08 hours, as shown by photographs taken from the site, a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:56:03 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:53:06 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:06:53 +0000 (GMT) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? <snip> >What George carlin fails to mention is that if folk believe God >to exist then they must believe Extra Terrestrials exist because >God and Jesus etc. would be in Heaven and therefore ET anyway. Not at all Mr. Stevenson. Apples and Oranges or, in this case, the "clearly demonstrated" compared with the "taken on faith." The latter must subscribe to a physics beyond our understanding and the former doesn't have to obey any physics at all. >So, anyone who is Religious must know ET exists. Not at all. In fact, ET, when referred to at all in Christian fundamentalism, is a minion of Satan. >Any belief in any God infers belief in ET therefore its all good >press for Ufology. I think not, Mr. Stevenson. Solving the UFO problem has not been served by regressives in any manner I can perceive, and has been moved along in the small manner that it has only by progressive attitudes and acts of individual courage. Pithy cynicism finds an ultimate barrier that can be broken through, eventually, and the 'affect' can be pretty humbling when you think you have all your feces consolidated in one convenient bag. I always remind myself of the impossible amounts of space and time and surface area involved in just the universe that we _know_ to keep a respectful perspective. What do _you_ do?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Saucer Story Flew For A Time From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:46:43 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:56:17 -0500 Subject: Saucer Story Flew For A Time Source: The Daily Breeze http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1340321.html 01-11-05 South Bay Yesterday: Saucer Story Flew For A Time Truman Bethurum from Redondo Beach captivated crowds in the 1950s with his tales of riding in a spaceship and its exotic occupants. By Josh Grossberg Daily Breeze This is the story of the planet Clarion and its race of small, but fully formed, men. We know of their existence because on Sept. 24, 1953, Redondo Beach resident Truman Bethurum told a Daily Breeze reporter that he saw them. In fact, Bethurum did a lot more than see them. According to several articles, he rode on their flying saucer 11 times. And its captain, Aura Rahnes, promised to take Bethurum to visit Clarion in the near future. Another thing Bethurum noticed: The Clarions all dressed like Greyhound bus drivers. And, not only did they speak perfect English, but they also spoke in rhyme. At the time of his encounters, Bethurum, was working on a construction job in the Nevada desert when the Clarionites, as he called them, stopped by for a visit. "What I saw cost me my job and endless ridicule," Bethurum said at the time. His tale was filled with vivid details. Capt. Rahnes was a beautiful woman who had a "slender Latin-type face" and wore a radiant red skirt, black velvet short sleeve blouse and a black beret with red trim. And they didn't refer to their ship as a saucer. They called it a "scow." And they enjoyed polkas and square dances. The ship itself was 300 feet in diameter, 6 yards deep and made of burnished stainless steel. It hovered silently inches above the ground. Coming at a time when flying saucer mania was riding high, Bethurum's tale of olive-skinned, black-haired aliens, quickly captured the nation's attention. He enthralled a capacity (and paying) audience at the aptly named Neptunian Club in Manhattan Beach and, within a few years, was on the lecture circuit, entertaining enthusiasts with tales of intergalactic visitors. He spoke to Lions Clubs, and appeared on radio and television programs. He was especially popular with the Unidentified Flying Object Club of Sacramento and visited them several times. And in 1954, he wrote a book, Aboard a Flying Saucer. Even today, his allure continues to resonate; a Google search of his name lists more than 500 entries. Life on Clarion was blissful. According to Bethurum, there were no divorces, graft, tobacco or liquor. And Clarionites lived to be 1,000 years old. Bethurum said he was given a message by the aliens for the people of Earth: We won't achieve space flight until we eliminate strife among men. That wasn't the only prediction that didn't pan out. He was also informed that Mars contained heavy industry. Some time after the initial encounter, Bethurum saw Rahnes drinking a glass of orange juice at a restaurant, but she ignored him.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Richard Hall's 'Alien Invasion' From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:10:23 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:20:19 -0500 Subject: Richard Hall's 'Alien Invasion' Hello all: It was a lot of work, but I have now included all usable cases from Richard Hall's latest book: Alien Invasion or Human Fantasy, the 1966-1967 UFO Wave, into the *U* UFO Database. There were a lot of cases *U* didn't have, (and vice versa) but my statistics have shifted considerably as a result. For one thing, 1967 now outranks 1973 for sheer number of sightings listed here for the first time. What made 1973 special was events were concentrated in/about October: http://www.larryhatch.net/YDAY73.html while mid-late 60s cases are spread throughout the year more evenly: http://www.larryhatch.net/YDAY6569.html I had to redo my sightings maps as a result of this. Here is North America 1965-1969 http://www.larryhatch.net/NAM6569.html plus Europe and South America http://www.larryhatch.net/EUR6569.html http://www.larryhatch.net/SAM6569.html Now I'm going to redo the statistical displays for the same period.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Aliens 'Could Exist On Saturn Moon' From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:06:01 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:22:32 -0500 Subject: Aliens 'Could Exist On Saturn Moon' Source: The News Telegraph - UK http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/10/nspace110.xml&sS heet=/news/2005/01/10/ixnewstop.html 01-10-05 Aliens 'Could Exist On Saturn Moon' By Roger Highfield Science Editor When the Huygens probe lands on Titan later this week, the pioneering space mission could encounter a bizarre form of life, a scientist claims. The European probe will parachute down through the hazy atmosphere of Saturn's largest moon on Friday after a seven-year voyage. Now an American team has challenged a basic assumption that has been used to guide the millions spent on the search for life elsewhere in the cosmos that life could only exist where there is unfrozen water and suggested that Huygens could encounter an alien on Titan. Titan is an environment of yellow clouds and oily black methane lakes, which is thought to resemble that of Earth billions of years ago. The search for water has guided efforts to find life on Mars, on Jupiter's moon Europa and further afield. Titan is too cold for large quantities of unfrozen water to exist but Dr Steven Benner, of the University of Florida, says that life could flourish without water. In the journal Current Opinion in Chemical Biology, he and colleagues describe how organisms could survive in exotic environments. The Florida team identified two absolute requirements for life to exist a suitable temperature range to allow chemical bonding and an energy source (for example, the sun or radioactive decay). Titan meets both requirements. "This makes inescapable the conclusion that if life is an intrinsic property of chemical reactivity, life should exist on Titan," Dr Benner says.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:37:12 -1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:25:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:28:55 -0000 >Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 >>Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative= Processes >>First, one of the clich=E9s I've seen bandied around on this forum >>is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". ><snip> >>Well as a political scientist what immediately stands out with >>such a clich=E9 is the implicit methodological bias in it. Why is >>'proof' the central focus? Why not the investigatory process? >>Shouldn't an appropriate approach be, "extraordinary claims >>require extraordinary investigative processes"? >I believe that in an ideal world your approach would be correct >for all interested parties, but in the real world it is not >possible to "require" extrardinary investigation from those who >do not see the value of investing the effort. Your >recommendation is admirable, but reduces to an exhortation to >those who are already investigating to do so more thoroughly. It >seems to me that this is an exhortation that preaches only to >the converted. >The point, in practice, is that those who decline to investigate >_always_ will require evidence which by definition is so >extraordinary that they expect never to encounter it, and >therefore, circularly but inevitably, they will not look for it. >This applies, by the way, both to the 'hardened sceptics' and to >the 'hardened believers'. Meticulous and detailed >documentation/analysis is apt to frazzle the short attention >spans of both. Aloha Martin, You raise important methodological points concerning the different consituencies that UFO research targets. First, there are the 'unconverted', sceptics, and most of the general public; second, the 'converted' who accept the extraterrestrial hypothesis; and third, the researchers who range anywhere along the spectrum between the first two constituencies. You say: "in the real world it is not possible to "require" extrardinary investigation from those who do not see the value of investing the effort." Your response here implicitly highlights the importance of one constituency, the sceptical public, for those doing UFO research. You are correct that this constituency demands 'proof', yet thet demand reflects a methodological and discliplinary bias 'since' proof is the subjective outcome of an investigation. What if the proper investigative process was the critical thing rather than a specific outcome such as proof? Getting it right in terms of how to construct a proper investigation of the extraordinary claims of witnesseses is the key rather than a particular outcome such as proof in my opinion. I think the problem is that those with a natural science training will desire to have 'proof' as the natural focus since this is consistent with the methodological tools they've been trained in, and is most familiar to them in terms of their own professional experience in coming up with the right answer to any particular problem. In contrast, social scientists will lean towards developing the right investigatory process since this is more consistent with their training, and understanding that there is often no one right answer, but a number of valid perspectives that are supported by the evidence. So we have different discliplinary approaches here that are equally valid since at the end of the day the UFO phenomeon and the extraordinary claims that it generates have implications for all scholarly disciplines. Personally, I'm appalled at how natural scientists have dominated the UFO field as though their discliplinary/methodological approach was the only game in town. When a competent social scientist such as John Mack comes along, there is initially much debate but I can see from this forum that the social science methodologies that Mack identified and used in dealing with alleged 'abductees' have not played a great role in influencing discussions here. Also, I don't see why the sceptical public needs to be the primary let alone the exclusive focus of UFO research. There is another constituency, the 'converted' who want to build on the evidence, testimonies that are available about the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) in order to understand the big picture concering . Do 'serious researchers' ignore the evidence concerning the ETH where secret agreements are allegedly in place with various governments since the sceptical public is still debating evidence for ET life on Mars and elsewhere? It seems to me that it's important that UFO researchers start responding to the need of that constituency that does want thorough scholarly analyses of the more 'extraordinary claims' of various witnesses/whistleblowers etc., concerning an undisclosed ET presence and a shadow government that has secretly set up a vast infrastructure that greatly exceeds the first Manhatten project in scope and secrecy. I think that there will always be a group of UFO researches whose primary activity is amassing sufficient evidence using rigorous scientific methodologies that impress those that remain sceptical of the ETH. However, there is now a growing group of researchers who are researching the extraordinary claims that are of interest to that other constituency 'the converted'. This is the field I and others have described as exopolitics and what I've discovered is that there is enormous interest in the extraordinary claims of individuals who describe secret agreements in place between governments and various ET races, and the various strategies used by government agencies in suppressing this information. What initially got me researching exopolitics/UFOs was the disclosure project press conference organized by Steven Greer in May 2001. Here in my view was an extroardinary event involving credible individuals making extraordinary claims. Dr Greer correctly identified that this is what would awaken the general public and it worked at least in my case to awaken me from my dogmatic slumber concerning the true forces/processes driving global politics. Personally, I'm not concerned at all by sceptics who still want to debate whether ETs exist since my focus is on the testimonies of those who have evidence of an undisclosed ET presence, and to understand the political implications of all this for global politics. You go on to say that my request for an investigative process : "reduces to an exhortation to those who are already investigating to do so more thoroughly". This is not correct at all. I'm requesting a different methodological approach that shifts the emphasis away from 'proof' to 'investigatory process'. Without this methodological shift, UFO researchers can only be more thorough by becoming more detailed in their analysis. You are correct that: "Meticulous and detailed documentation/analysis is apt to frazzle the short attention spans of both" the sceptical public and the converted. This however is not what I'm recommending at all. What we need is to shift the focus so as to get the investigatory process right so we can properly evaluate the extraordinary claims of witnesses, whistleblowers, abductees, etc. This means using social science methodologies so we can properly investigate cases where the evidence is prone to all sorts of possible distortions, and where variables such as government interference, disinformation, intimidation, threats, etc., are factored into the investigation. We need to come up with new evidentiary standards and processes for investigating the extraordinary claims of UFO witnesses, whistleblowers, etc. Ultimately researching the UFO phenomeon is more analogous to investigating human rights abuses or organized crime, rather than coming up with a new
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:27:02 -0500 Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall All: I've spent the past couple of days watching two guys I have a great deal of respect for, Stan Friedman and Dick Hall, go at each other over the Flatwoods Monster case and, in particular, Frank Feschino's new book and the question of whether Feschino makes claims of some great aerial battle between UFOs and the US Air Force on September 12, 1952. Well, I've read the book (more on that in a bit), and here's the scoop. Dick is right - Feschino does indeed write about a great aerial battle between UFOs and the USAF on September 12, 1952. In fact, he devotes the better part of three chapters to it, and around 100 pages (of 337). To put the issue to rest definitively, and for the edification of those who may not purchase the book (again, more on that in a bit), I'll take the time to quote - at length - from Chapter 18, at which point the story is well underway: 'Secretary of Defense Robert Lovett advised President Truman that an all-out air assault against these objects was inevitable, that the UFOs should not compromise the United States any further. An enraged Truman agreed. I cannot help but echo the words stated by President Truman in 1949, 'It is much better to go down fighting for what is right than to compromise your principles.' President Truman then ordered every-rocket bearing and cannon-armed jet along the mid-Atlantic toward the UFOs. At approximately 7:05 pm EDT, U.S. fighter jets were en route to intercept the objects ninety miles off the coast... In minutes, the first scrambled jets from McGuire AFB reached the UFOs. Within seconds, these fighters unleashed an aerial assault. The UFOs retaliated with return fire and destroyed the nearest striking jets. As jets and UFOs scattered, the remaining jets prepared for another attack. Several more fighters arrived from Dover AFB and NAS New York and entered the air battle. A full-scale air battle was underway and the sky was covered with dozens of 2.75 rockets, HVARs, and thousands of rounds of gunfire. The UFOs started destroying the jets one after another, until the next wave of striking jets arrived. Jets arrived from Mitchel AFB and fired upon the UFOs. These UFOs retaliated with fire and destroyed more jets. Seconds later, a wave of jets from Newcastle arrived. The Newcastle jets were also heavily armed with rockets and salvoed their FFARs and HVARs while the UFOs were firing at the rest of the swarming jets. One of the UFOs had been separated from the other two crafts, becoming a primary target. While jets continued their relentless fire on the other two UFOs, fighter jets from NAS Willow Grove arrived. Dozens of fighter jets swarmed throughout the air battle, launching rockets and firing countless rounds of gunfire. The singled out UFO became a primary target and was overwhelmed with firepower. The UFO managed to destroy many jets, but more and more kept attacking. The relentless fighter jets fired at the UFO from every angle and direction. The UFO did not flee and continued firing back, until it was finally hit at approximately 7:20 EDT. The electrically charged gravity field surrounding the object was damaged. This object lost altitude rapidly and burst into flames... (pp. 236-239, The Braxton County Monster: The Cover-Up of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed, by Frank Feschino).' It goes on and on from there. Feschino provides no (as in nada, zip, and zilch) back-up for these claims. He prefaces them (several times) with variations of "I believe this is what happened..." It may be just me, but I don't think serious UFO researchers, writers, or filmmakers should ever preface their conclusions with "I believe..." The thing is, the book does contain some interesting notes about the incident in Flatwoods itself, and Feschino has clearly spent a great deal of time assembling information and interviewing people (although the term 'witness' is overused, as if often the case with UFO books). However, most of that good work is undermined by his wild, unsubstantiated claims (bordering on bad science fiction) of this great USAF vs. UFOs air battle on the night of September 12, 1952. The Flatwoods case would remain in my 'gray basket' simply because (a) 'something' clearly happened out there and (b) no- one has yet offered a reasonable explanation for what that 'something' was. Whether or not that 'something' was extraterrestrial in origin, however, is far from proved, and Feschino's book brings the reader no closer to the truth, whatever it was. A final word on UFO books in general, from one who reads a lot of them, and whose background is in history, political science and the law. Footnotes, or endnotes (whichever you prefer) are sorely lacking in most (Feschino's book is a glaring example). If you want people to take what you're writing seriously, you should provide notes. Contrary to what one UFO researcher told me, by way of explanation for not using notes, the average reader will not find them 'confusing'. It allows the reader to check where the author is getting the information for his claims (and no, a bibliography, no matter how extensive, does not fulfil the same function). A good example of a well-documented book is Richard Dolan's UFOs and the National Security State. Another is Karl Pflock's Rosell: Inconvenient Facts and the Will to Believe. For example, in Pflock's book, he claims that Colonel Blanchard had a reputation as a 'loose cannon'. To his credit, Pflock provides his source for this critical assertion, in the chapter endnotes, which means I can check him on his claim, and judge its merit. Unfortunately for Pflock, the source he cites is an 'anonymous Air Force General' which, to me at least, is hardly persuasive. Without that note, however, I would have had no way to check (other than calling Karl). The point is that notes are essential documentation for any author who wants to be taken seriously, not just by the high muck-a-mucks of science, journalism, politics and academia, but by regular schmoes like me.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:10:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:28:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary - >From: Roy Hale <vinyl.lover10.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:18:09 -0000 >Subject: Re: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:37:09 -1000 >>Subject: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Investigative Processes >>Aloha List members, >>I've had some more time to monitor the discussions on this forum >>and wish to achieve two things with this post. First, to advance >>the idea that the so called rigorous scientific method advocated >>by some posters is little more than a methodological bias that's >>inappropriate to the UFO/exopolitical phenomenon, and second to >>finally respond directly to some individuals who posted some >>'strong' opinions on the forum about the quality of my >>exopolitics research. ><snip> >Some time ago a man sees a structured metallic disc at close >quarters, a Humanoid comes out of the disc and beckons him >forward. He goes forward, and then he is told that the humble >human is not alone in the universe. The disc closes the hatch >and then zooms off at great speed. The humble Witness is left >with an unforgettable life changing experience, and also a >Dilemma who in the hell will believe such stuff? He then decided >to place this piece of information deep within his mind, buried >for years and tossed over in his mind on an almost daily basis, >questioning his sanity, seeking to explain the contact he had. >Finally he settled his mind, he had the experience, he heard the >words, he saw the disc, he walked away from the scene and left >himself open to his own debate for years to come. >Then the Internet arrived, he got a shock, people were ready to >burn his experiences, he thought to himself, are they upset that >they were not the ones who had absorbed the words of a universe >full of hopes? Hello Roy, >But finally after reading so many opinions on his experience, he >just decided that his truth was okay with him, as long as the >other people just carried on in their mindset, not disrupting >his quiet little life, because he still remembered that unique >day. Precisely!!! Wish I'd written this myself, about myself. ;)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:55:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:30:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:20:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO Report >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:21:17 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Maccabee's Mexican Airforce Radar/FLIR UFO Report <snip> >Regarding the "Dim UL", it too can be correlated to one of the >three platforms listed above at least azimuth-wise. Elevation- >wise, the FLIR lists 3 deg while the oil platforms are about - >2deg, which seems too much error. I checked this a couple times >during the FLIR video and it is roughly the same result. The l>arge elevation difference led me to suspect this "Dim UL" was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 The Secret CIA UFO Files From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:32:46 -0500 Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files It must be true if the CIA said it <g> ----- Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html The Secret CIA UFO Files by Jim Wilson The Central Intelligence Agency says it has finally come clean about UFOs. To absolutely no one's surprise, it knew more than it ever let on. "Over half of all UFO reports from the late 1950s through the 1960s were accounted for by manned reconnaissance flights," says Gerald K. Haines, a historian for the National Reconnaissance Office who studied secret CIA UFO files for an internal CIA study that examined the spy agency's involvement in UFOs through the 1990s. Why lie about UFOs? "The Soviets could use UFO reports to touch off mass hysteria and panic in the United States and overload the U.S. air warning system so that it could not distinguish real targets from phantom UFOs," Haines says. If Cold War hysteria seems to be a less than satisfactory explanation, perhaps it is because there really is more to the story. Popular Mechanics has learned from nonclassified sources that the United States had a serious reason for wanting the public to keep believing that the strange lights in the sky were of unearthly origin. The government kept the UFO myth alive to disguise the embarrassing fact that during the hottest days of the Cold War, America's two most secret intelligence gathering assets-the A-12 and SR-71 spyplanes-flew toward hostile terrain with the equivalent of cow bells dangling from their necks. The deception of the public began in the early 1950s. It involved the then highly secret, and to this day little-known, A-12. If you think you saw an SR-71 Blackbird at an air and space museum, the odds are you were actually looking at an A-12. The idea for the plane was conceived in 1954 by CIA director Allen Dulles. The objective of this secret program, according to aviation historian Paul F. Crickmore, was to build a spyplane capable of flying higher and faster than the U-2. The secret development program, which was originally called Project Aquatone, and then Gusto and then Oxcart, led to the first A-12 mockup. It became connected with UFO lore in late 1959 when, according to Crickmore, it was trucked from the famous Lockheed Skunk Works, in Palmdale, California, to Groom Lake, Nevada. (Also known to UFO enthusiasts as Area 51, this formerly secret test site is located about 100 miles north of Las Vegas, Nevada.) Hidden in the desert and surrounded by then active Atomic Energy Commission testing grounds, the A-12 mockup underwent a series of tests to determine and then reduce its ability to deflect and absorb radar signals. The CIA liked what it saw and ordered a dozen. Lockheed had built what to this day is considered the most amazing aircraft of all time. But before it could fly, it needed engines that could propel the plane to Mach 3.2 and an altitude of more than 97,600 ft. In February 1962, Pratt & Whitney announced its already overdue J58 engines could not be delivered anytime soon. As an interim solution, they offered less powerful J75 engines that, according to Crickmore, would take the A-12 to about 50,000 ft. and a speed of Mach 1.6. CIA engineers accepted the offer after calculating that an A-12 equipped with a pair of J75 engines should be able to fly faster than Mach 2. The radar- deflecting shapes of the F-117A (top) and SR-71 (above) lend themselves to misinterpretations as UFOs. "In order to placate the directors who controlled the agency's purse strings, [Lockheed test pilot] Bill Park dived an A-12 to Mach 2," says Crickmore. "[It] relieved some of the high-level pressure on the design team." Without intending to, Park also opened a new chapter in UFO history. One of the features about UFO sightings that has consistently baffled the experts is their apparent ability to swoop downward, hover and then soar into the sky at impossible speeds. Viewed head on, this is exactly how an A-12 or an SR-71-its J58- powered successor-appears to move at times during a normal flight. The maneuver is called a "dipsy doodle." Col. Richard H. Graham, who commanded the U.S. Air Force 9th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing and has written a history of the SR-71 titled SR-71 Revealed, recently explained the dipsy doodle to PM. The pilot begins by climbing to about 30,000 ft. with the afterburners glowing. At about 33,000 ft., with the plane at Mach .95, he noses the aircraft over. Heading down at a pitch as great as 30 degrees, the plane falls as fast as 3000 ft. per minute. After 10 to 20 seconds, the pilot pulls out of the dive, then accelerates skyward at more than twice the speed of sound. There is one more very UFO-like characteristic of the SR-71: The glow of its exhaust periodically turns green. The SR-71 burns fuel modified to withstand high temperatures. It doesn't light easily. "One early 'hiccup' was ignition," Crickmore recalls. "The [J58] engine would not start no matter what procedure was tried." Eventually the problem was solved by the introduction of a chemical that explodes on contact with the atmosphere. Graham says it must be introduced into the engine when it is started, and it also kicks-in the afterburners. This happens after each aerial refueling, which, given the SR-71's enormous thirst, is quite often. Each time, it produces another image that could be misinterpreted as a UFO-flashing colored lights. The green flash and distinctive dipsy doodle can be spotted from miles away. Observing the pattern created by these strange sights provides a map to the SR-71's target area, giving those on the ground enough time to hide whatever the spyplane has been sent to photograph. Curiously, the ebb and flow of UFO sightings in the Southwest correspond with the comings and goings of secret aircraft. Some of the most intense UFO spottings coincided with the testing of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:11:08 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:34:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:23:41 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>>There are meteorological records showing that a meteorite >>>horizontally traversed several states (including West Virginia) >>>from east to west. >>Metorology deals with weather not meteors. The Meteor group at >>Harvard has no record of prominent meteors. Yes, there were >>loads of newspaper articles which settled for the notion that >>what was seen all over the East were meteors despite the >>relatively slow speeds, the following of rivers, the abrupt >>turns, and testimony from many witnesses that what was seen was >>not a meteor. >I refer Stan and the List to the American meteor Society web >site: http://comets.amsmeteors.org/meteors/showers/gamma_aquarids.htm >l). There is a lesser known meteor shower, the Gamma Aquarids, >that occurs about Sept. 1-14. This write-up gives its history, >which has been erratic, and its typical rate of hourly activity >is not particularly high. >The author states, "...the possibility exists that this [meteor] >stream produces a periodic display rather than an annual one." >Photographic meteor surveys sometimes have shown no evidence of >it. >However, two photographic meteors from this stream were detected >by the Harvard Meteor Project on Sept. 11, 1952. >Furthermore, as an internet search readily shows, this meteor >stream has produced prominent fireball meteors in some years on >September 10 or September 11. The hypothesis that this meteor >shower likely explains 'UFO' reports of streaking lights (as >opposed to daylight discs or other clear-cut objects) remains a >viable one until proven otherwise. It also may have produced a >prominent fireball. The historical records are incomplete and >difficult to research. The main 'sighting' sure sounds like one. >Where are the real UFO reports for September 11-12? And in fact the Gamma Aquarid meteor shower had its radiant (its
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:16:07 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:37:05 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:43:24 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:31:44 -0800 >>>Subject: What Was In The Sky? >>>Source: CBS News Channel 7 - Wausau, Wisconsin >>>http://www.wsaw.com/home/headlines/1324506.html >>>01-05-05 >>>What Was In The Sky? >>>Hundreds of People Report Lights, Fireball, in Sky >>>We've been taking calls from dozens of viewers all across the >>>area, from Rib Falls, Plover, Marshfield, Merrill, Mole Lake, >>>Antigo and everywhere in between, all describing the same thing: >>An absolutely classic bolide meteor, with a high probability of >>meteorite falls. No mystery at all. The only mystery to me is >>that so many people are unaware of fireball meteors. >Hi Richard! >No mystery at all? Only a debunker would be so quick to dismiss >it as such without further investigation! Nick, Guilt by association, eh? If I suggest the very obvious, far most likely hypothesis for what was seen whcih Phil Klass happens to have misapplied in the past, then I am a debunker? Well, I have been called all sorts of things, most recently 'ignorant,' but I have never been called a debunker! >Similar such sightings by multiple witnesses over large regions >have been reported many times in the past and most can >reasonably be explained as bolide meteors or fireballs (or re- >entry space debris), but is this the correct explanation for all >of them? Yes, until someone presents well-documented data that doesn't so precisely fit the fireball meteor model. How do I know? I have investigated hundreds of fireball meteor reports and used to exchange information with the President of the American meteor Society, who was a Board Member of NICAP. >Below is a past UFO UpDates post on an article written by Philip >Klass which had a similar explanation for another well known UFO >sighting, Kenneth Arnold's UFO encounter of June 24, 1947. >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/apr/m07-014.shtml >What I find very interesting is that at the end of his article, >Philip Klass also concludes that fireballs were also the >explanation for two other lesser known but very important old >UFO sightings that baffled trained observers at the time; the >U.S.S. Supply UFO sighting of Feb. 28, 1904 (which Dr. Bruce >Maccabee spoke about at the MUFON Symposium in Dearborn, >Michigan recently) and my favourite, the Feb. 9, 1913 ongoing >precession of tadpole- shaped "fireballs" that was reported in >the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (which >Chris Rutkowski has written about in the past). >Philip Klass concludes his article saying "If a similar event >were to occur today it might cause some observers who had seen >the Independence Day movie to panic, fearing it was a UFO/ET >invasion.". Although this may be an understanable motive for >Philip Klass and other debunkers to dismiss all such fireball- >like UFO reports as simply fireballs, it can never be >scientifically or morally justified when it is intended to >supress the truth. What relevance does this Klass material have to the present
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:26:01 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:38:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Shough >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:15:30 -0500 >Subject: Leather As A Countermeasure? >Hey folks - >This is speculative at this point, but it seems there are three >or four reports floating around, including, believe it or not, >from UFO implant researcher and remover Dr. Roger Leir, that >leather "can stop telepathic" stuff from aliens. >Now regardless of what you think of UFOs, when I hear the same >thing from rather different sources, I perk up. >I'd say it has to be _genuine_ leather, real biological stuff, >in other words. We already know that biological things are >about the only dependable detectors, so why not countermeasure? >Anyone for trying out that old leather coat? Hi Eleanor I know nothing about this topic at all and I'm in no position to comment on the experiences you refer to, but it does occur to me that leather is skin. Isn't this what we all have on our heads
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Cammack From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:42:03 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:40:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Cammack >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:15:30 -0500 >Subject: Leather As A Countermeasure? >This is speculative at this point, but it seems there are three >or four reports floating around, including, believe it or not, >from UFO implant researcher and remover Dr. Roger Leir, that >leather "can stop telepathic" stuff from aliens. <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:53:55 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:42:21 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Shough >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:40:22 -0800 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? >>From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >>Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >>I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >>entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >>list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >>why?). >This List and others has gone in endless circles trying to chase >down the origins of the LGM moniker. >About all we agreed on is that it is generally used derisively, >and goes way back. >It might could have been lurking for decades, maybe in folklore >or science fiction, before somebody seized on it as a cheap >implement of ridicule. Nobody seems to know who did that first >either, not that I know about. >What I do know, is that out of 18,370 events now listed in my >database, I cannot find any 'little green men'. Hi Larry & Terry Don't recall if this was mentioned last time around, but the earliest account I recall was the two green-skinned fairy children who supposedly appeared out of a cave in Suffolk, England, as recorded by Ralph of Coggeshall and other chroniclers in the 13th century. When they learned English they said they came from a sunless country where everything was green. According to folklorist Katharine Briggs "green is generally acknowledged to be the fairy colour especially in Celtic countries". There are numerous anecdotes and "reports" in support of this going back centuries.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 04:55:11 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:43:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - Hatch >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:15:30 -0500 >Subject: Leather As A Countermeasure? <snip> >I'd say it has to be _genuine_ leather, real biological stuff, >in other words. We already know that biological things are about >the only dependable detectors, so why not countermeasure? >Anyone for trying out that old leather coat? >Eleanor = = = This is a new one on me. Setting my tinfoil hat aside, I speculate: Suppose some alien monitoring device detects the leather somehow, reacting to some special penetrating rays. Maybe it would think it had only found a cow and leave you alone.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Holman From: Brett Holman <b.holman.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:59:11 +1100 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:45:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News - Holman [Hi Errol, am re-submitting this as it seems to have been lost in transit. Thanks.] >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:07:21 +0000 >Subject: Re: Causality & Blind Science News >>Another quibble to keep repeating: please back up your >>statement that "astrophysics has been wrong on almost >>every call made till now". ><snip> >Brett, >Your quibbling could be 'loyalty to science or academia' but it's >just embarrassing for scientists who appreciate the true >situation. My pointing out one or two minor mistakes could be called quibbling. Unfortunately, nearly everything you say is wrong. When you so obviously don't know what astronomers think a Seyfert is, why should anyone take your "harsh" criticism of their interpretation at all seriously? You don't even have the background knowledge to properly interpret a caption on a photograph, let alone come up with a well-founded critique of modern cosmology. Which leads me to another point: I don't think it's embarrassing to be wrong. _Except_ when you continue to be wrong after you should know better. That's why I have found it hard to understand your continual harping on the fact that science discards incorrect theories in the light of new data, as though this were somehow a bad thing. But it has dawned on me that you have a morbid fear of being wrong. That's why you are so unforgiving of scientists's mistakes. And it's also why you refuse to admit your own. You can't make progress this way. >We know all present and previous cosmology theories are >inadequate. Yes, we know all previous theories are inadequate. That's why they're called "previous". But there are degrees of inadequacy. The standard relativistic big bang theory is inadequate, but it's much better than the steady state cosmology, or the static cosmologies that preceded it. Whatever cosmological model is favoured a century hence will very likely incorporate something very similar to a big bang in it, even if it also involves colliding branes and the like. A better known example is gravity. Just because Newtonian gravity is inadequate compared to general relativity, doesn't mean that it is completely wrong. We can still use it quite successfully for sending spacecraft to the planets. And we don't yet know that all present theories are inadequate. There's that tiresome quibble, "evidence", to be gathered and dealt with first. And they too may turn out to be only partially inadequate, not completely inadequate. So let's just wait and see. >You can see that, it's preserved in the record of erroneous >names which litter glossaries of astro-phys 'discoveries' - > nebula, quasars and suchlike. >They are wrongly named because the science was incorrect att. - >not surprisingly. So many things wrong with so few words! Firstly, if the name is "erroneous", so what? The name is not the thing itself. Just because we continue to call something by its historical name does not mean "all present ... cosmology theories are inadequate". We could call galaxies, I don't know, "Honda Civics", and this wouldn't change any of the things we've discovered about them - their structure, composition, evolution, distance, etc. Secondly, you have to give new things labels in order to describe, discuss and distingush them, even at the risk of later confusion as their true nature becomes more clear. This is just a matter of practicality. Perhaps the names should later be changed to reflect the new understanding, but it can be hard to change such habits, and since it doesn't really matter what they are called (see previous paragraph), why bother? Finally, "nebula" and "quasar" are not actually "erroneous" names. They are descriptive: this is how these objects appear in the telescope. Nebulae *do* look cloudy. Quasars *do* have quasi-stellar images. Are you going to tell me they don't? So, I repeat: please back up your statement that "astrophysics has been wrong on almost every call made till now". Here's one way you could do it. Grab a hold of any astrophysics textbook. If your claim is true, you should be able to show that "almost every" section of that textbook is wrong. Let's set the bar low - let's say you only need to show that 75% of the sections are wrong. I have one here, Carrol and Ostlie's "An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics", an excellent book but a little old now (1996). Its 1325 pages comprise 111 sections, from stellar parallax to stellar atmospheres, from asteroids to active galaxies (including Seyferts!) If you can prove - that is, not merely assert - that 83 of those 111 sections are wrong - that is, substantially and substantively wrong, not just a matter of an updated measurement or ignorance of a more recent discovery - I'll admit you were right. If you can't manage to do this, I doubt you would admit that you were wrong, but you might just learn something about astrophysics in the process and put your criticisms on a somewhat less shaky foundation. >You've spent time assembling clouds of science obfuscation but >it's wasted; real scientists admit (mostly in private) they're >groping in the dark - literally. No, my time is wasted because you very rarely actually defend any of your statements. I suspect this is because you cannot actually do so, but feel free to prove me wrong. (See above.) You are lucky, though, to have those "real scientists" on your side. But it's a real shame they'll only admit to it in private - lucky for you I'm not cynical. >That's because, as Einstein said, "fifty years of conscious >brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the >question, 'What are light quanta?' Nowadays every Tom, Dick and >Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken." You know, in my experience "real scientists" don't spend their time plucking quotes from other people out of context to make their case - they learn the fundamentals of their subject first, and then get out and start observing the world and try to work out what's going on. Anyway, this quote is from a letter to Michel Besso written in 1951, and is in reference to wave-particle duality, which Einstein was never comfortable with. So what? Older scientists often have trouble with radical new approaches, even ones they have helped to bring about. Wave-particle duality is counter-intuitive, but that's quantum mechanics for you. We've verified it endlessly by experiment, so philosophical qualms are interesting but not in themselves proof of anything. Unless you have some _specific_ reason to criticise our understanding of photons, this is merely yet another appeal to authority. >To date "we still don't have a good idea of how a photon exists >in reality" - Dr. Siepmann, Editor, Journal of Theoretics. Siepmann is a medical doctor. If I cared what an MD thought about photons, I'd ask my GP. http://www.geocities.com/dr_oshkosh/ >Ditto for the rest of your stuff - the true situation regarding >'particle physics' is reflected in item >http://www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/parts.txt Yes, I've already discussed that page, in the post you've just replied to. Please read what I write before replying. It's only polite. >and again was summed up by Einstein - that physics presently >consists of "extracting one incomprehensible from another >incomprehensible". I haven't been able to find a source for this one. Given your track record with quotes, I'm not prepared to take your word that this is what he said. But again I ask, why do you think that this proves anything? Why do you never explain what you think these quotes mean? And why do you constantly appeal to scientists as authority figures, when you otherwise deride everything they've done? >A brave effort Brett, but a waste of your time, mine and the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:29:27 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:48:06 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:56:03 -0600 >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:06:53 +0000 (GMT) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? ><snip> >>What George carlin fails to mention is that if folk believe >>God to exist then they must believe Extra Terrestrials exist >>because God and Jesus etc. would be in Heaven and therefore >>ET anyway. >Not at all Mr. Stevenson. Apples and Oranges or, in this case, >the "clearly demonstrated" compared with the "taken on faith." >The latter must subscribe to a physics beyond our >understanding and the former doesn't have to obey any physics >at all. >>So, anyone who is Religious must know ET exists. Hello Alfred, Difficult though it was to believe that Col's post was written by an adult, I can see where he's coming from. He's just missed the point by a million miles. The converse of his argument might also be true; namely ufologists "ought" to believe in God. The issue of course is intelligent design, an argument that seems to go on continually at various American school boards - for the latest version see http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/41e38a59b325e Watching this argument is fascinating as Darwinists are now on the backfoot and facing the same problems as religious believers experienced 150 years ago when Darwin first stepped forward with his ideas. The point is, are we here by complete accident or did someone or something put us here? Sir Fred Hoyle and Proffesor Chandra Wickramasingh postulate very firmly that we were put here via directed panspermia. If their argument is correct, then there is a God. We might see him with a gray hue, fabulous eyes, a spindly body, and a strong urge to abduct some of us from time to time. Others will see Him as a Devine body or image. So yes, when folk walk into their churches or synagogues or temples, in theory they may well be worshiping an alien as
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Richard Hoagland's Nonsense From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:53:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:53:43 -0500 Subject: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense Source: Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy Site http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/hoagland/index.html Richard Hoagland's Nonsense Introduction Mars is in the news. The Americans sent two rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, which landed on Mars a few weeks apart in early 2004, and the European Space Agency sent a probe called Mars Express (which had a lander, Beagle II, with which contact was lost) which went into orbit in late 2003. They join earlier missions such as the Mars Global Surveyor (which I will call MGS from here on out), and Mars Odyssey (just Odyssey from here on out). With all this Good Astronomy happening, you just know a lot of Bad will follow. And it has. There have been all sorts of silliness happening from the usual groups, including claims that the Beagle II failed because the U.S. shot it down, aliens on Mars shot it down, aliens on Mars are known by NASA, NASA is covering up alien artifacts, NASA is causing bad weather on Earth, NASA is the devil, etc. Leading the way with this nonsense is none other than Richard C. Hoagland. He is the guy who has been touting the idea that the "Face on Mars" is not just a big hill - which is what it really is - but is instead a giant statue surrounded by pyramids, a city, a fortress, etc. You can imagine what I think of these claims, and if you can't, I will gently remind you that the name of this website is Bad Astronomy. I have considered Hoagland to be a fringe pseudoscientist, not really worth debunking. Sometimes, claims are so silly that they aren't worth bothering. But things have changed recently. Hoagland has been given lots of airtime on the late-night "Coast to Coast AM" radio show, which has millions of listeners. His most recent antics involve the new Mars missions. He is claiming that, among other things, NASA is covering up evidence of alien life on Mars. He says the evidence is in the images returned from Mars by the probes, and the "real" data are being hidden from view. These claims, like most conspiracy claims, are silly, internally inconsistent, and pretty easy to show wrong. So you might think no one pays any attention to him, right? If only. He is actually rather notorious in the pseudoscience community. And remember, "Coast to Coast" has an audience of 10 million people. If even a tiny fraction believes in his nuttiness, that still adds up with such a large pool of listeners! Now, I have been on the C2C show several times myself (once to actually debunk one of Hoagland's ridiculous claims), and I am of the opinion that most of the audience listens to the usual crackpots on the program with their tongues firmly planted in their cheeks. But with so many listeners, it's inevitable that many will take Hoagland seriously. And you know what? I've let this fester long enough. This kind of pseudoscience is like a virus. At low levels, it's no big deal, but when it reaches a certain threshold it becomes sickening. I don't think Hoagland has reached the level of, say, the Moon Hoax, but he might someday if ignored. I run a risk here of actually giving him the press he clearly wants so desperately, but it's also a risk to ignore his nonsense, again like the Moon Hoax. And let me be very clear here: Hoagland's claims are insulting. I really don't like it when the devotion and hard work of scientists is unfairly impugned. These scientists are people who are doing what they do because they love it. I get irritated when the subject I love - astronomy - is abused, and Hoagland is indeed treating it in an ugly manner. He has the right to say such things (up until it becomes fraud), but I also have the right, and the necessity, to show where he's wrong. A lot of the arguments I make on these pages are gleaned from other people's work. When I have done that, I note it and link to their work where I can. If I am quoting from Hoagland's website I use a black background with white letters, to distinguish it from other sources. I'll note that in these pages, there are bound to be some errors I have made. Maybe a date is wrong, or a small fact is in error, or some such thing like that. There was a lot of writing and research I had to do for these pages, so some mistakes are bound to creep in. When they do, I'll correct them, note that I have corrected an error on the page, and move on. That's one of the big differences between science and pseudoscience: science learns from its mistakes, and gets stronger. That's why it's the best way of thinking we've got going. Let me add this, because it's pertinent: years ago, when I wrote my page debunking the Moon Hoax, Hoagland wrote his own page. Amazingly, to me, he also debunked the Hoax, saying the Apollo landings were real! In fact, his debunking is quite excellent and thorough, and, I'll point out, even corrected a mistake I had on my own Moon Hoax page! Since he appears to hate NASA so much, and has stretched the truth in the past, his debunking was shocking to me. But then I realized why: he claims that alien bases exist on the Moon, and uses NASA imagery to "prove" it. So he was really stuck: he had to support NASA on his page, because if he said the Moon landings were faked, how would he have those pictures he'd been touting? The irony of that situation is delicious to me. One of NASA's biggest detractors, forced by his own nonsense into supporting them. The point to remember about this, though, is that when it suits him, he is capable of doing credible research. So why does he make such outrageous, clearly silly claims? Well, you can make up your own mind about that. The table of contents at the top of every page will help you navigate these murky waters. As time goes on, I will add new pages. There are existing claims by Hoagland I haven't tackled, and no doubt he will squeeze out more pseudoscientific claptrap as time goes by. Like Bart Sibrel, Nancy Lieder, and all the others, Hoagland will probably never run out of nonsense to peddle.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Our Cosmic Self-Esteem - Sir Martin Rees Pt III From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:00:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:00:39 -0500 Subject: Our Cosmic Self-Esteem - Sir Martin Rees Pt III Source: Astrobiology Magazine http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1 381&mode=threadℴ=0&thold=0 01-10-05 Summary: Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin Rees describes how for the first time, humans as a species may start to change in observable ways within single lifetimes and under some loose control of our own influence. If this future plays out, the future itself becomes more difficult to forecast. Our Cosmic Self-Esteem Interview with Sir Martin Rees, Part 3 By Helen Matsos Britain's Astronomer Royal, Martin Rees, took time from his busy schedule to talk with Astrobiology Magazine's Chief Editor and Executive Producer, Helen Matsos. His three-part interview considers a broad range of alternative planetary futures, while highlighting today's changes in one of the oldest sciences, astronomy. Martin Rees earned his degrees in mathematics and astronomy at the University of Cambridge, where he is currently professor of cosmology and astrophysics and Master of Trinity College. Director of the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge, he has also been a professor at Sussex University. He has been Britain's Astronomer Royal since 1995. He has modeled quasars and has made important contributions to the theories of galaxy formation, galaxy clustering, and the origin of the cosmic background radiation. His early study of the distribution of quasars helped discredit the steady state cosmological theory. He was one of the first to propose that enormous black holes power the quasars. He has investigated the anthropic principle, the idea that we find the universe the way it is because if it were much different we would not be here to examine it, and the question of whether ours is one of a multitude of "universes." He has written nine books. Through his public speaking and writing he has made the Universe a more familiar place for everyone. Helen Matsos (HM): Earlier this year our magazine interviewed the Vatican Astronomer, Brother Guy Consolmagno. He discussed how the possible finding of alien life would impact world religions. Do you have any views on that? Martin Rees (MR): I admire what the Vatican is doing in astronomy. The search for extraterrestrial life is the most exciting quest in 21st-century science. We know too little to say what the odds of success are; we don't know enough to say if it's likely or unlikely. But I think it's a fascinating search. Of course, there are two parts to the search. One is the search for simple life elsewhere in the solar system, or evidence of a biosphere around an extrasolar planet. The second is the search for complex life. What is the chance that simple life would get started, and then evolve by Darwinian selection into a biosphere anything like the one we have on Earth, with intelligent beings on it? Many people believe that simple life may be common but that advanced life may be rare. HM: In your book "Our Cosmic Habitat," you say that a quadrant of the sky seems well suited to human habitability. With the discovery of extrasolar planets, it is now thought that as many as a quarter of the stars in our galaxy have solar systems around them. How do these findings relate to the ideas in your book? MR: The realization that planetary systems are common around many stars is an exciting development. We don't know what fraction of those stars would have habitable planets, but most of us confidently expect there should be many planets in our galaxy that resemble the young Earth, on which life might have gotten started. It would be exciting to find any evidence for biological activity on those planets. Within ten to twenty years we could find this. Obviously the detection of any life beyond the Earth would be of great importance. It would show us that the probability of life getting started was not infinitesimally small, that it happened not just once but more than once and probably very many times. he search for intelligent life is a different problem, and that may fail even if the search for simple life succeeds. Many people would be depressed if the search for intelligent life failed. It would be disappointing if the SETI searches yielded no results. It would make the cosmos seem a lonelier place. But, I think there'll be some compensations, which I discuss in my book. In particular, I think it would raise our cosmic self- esteem. We could then regard our Earth, tiny though it is, as perhaps being the most important place in the galaxy. It might be the only place where life has evolved into a complex biosphere, containing creatures with structures like our brains, able to contemplate their origin. I think another perspective astronomy brings to bear on these issues is that astronomers are aware of the tremendous time span lying ahead of us. Most educated people are aware that we are the outcome of nearly four billion years of Darwinian selection, and I think many tend to think humans are the culmination of all that. But astronomers know that our sun is less than halfway through its life span. Our sun will flare up and die six billion years from now, a period of time longer than the sun's history so far. Some people imagine that there will be humans watching the sun's demise six billion years from now, but any creatures that exist then will be as different from us now as we are from bacteria or amoebae. We should think of ourselves as still in the early stage of the emergence of complexity and intelligence. It's hard to conceive what forms that might take on Earth or far beyond Earth. But I think we should see ourselves as nowhere near the culmination of evolution. Even if life is now very rare in the galaxy or unique to Earth, that doesn't mean life is forever going to be a trivial afterthought in the cosmos. In the time lying ahead, life from Earth could spread all through the galaxy. The Earth could be cosmically important as the seed from which life spreads more widely. HM: So we may evolve to a high enough state that we could disperse as an intelligent species throughout the universe. But what about the possibility that life already exists elsewhere? MR: It's possible that the universe is already teaming with life, but it's equally possible that life is very rare and almost unique to the Earth. In the later case, some people may think that makes life an irrelevant triviality in the cosmos. But if we are mindful of the time that lies ahead, in that far future, life starting from Earth has abundant time to spread through the entire galaxy. HM: In your book, "Our Final Hour..." MR: (laughs) It was called "The Final Century" in Britain, but the Americans, with their craving for instant gratification, wanted instant dis-gratification too, and so they called it "Our Final Hour." I was really annoyed about that. HM: Two countries separated by a common language, I suppose. You say in the book that humans might not survive until the end of this century. MR: Well I say civilization might not survive. To wipe out all humans is unlikely. But I think a setback as bad as a global nuclear war is quite likely. HM: And then what happens? How does the story end? MR: One extreme, pessimistic scenario is that, during this century, we suffer disasters which foreclose all future technological progress and perhaps make it difficult for civilization to survive on Earth. The optimistic scenario is that, during this century, human communities spread beyond the Earth for the first time. Self- sustaining groups established a hundred years from now would not be destroyed whatever happened to the Earth. That could be the first step towards evolution beyond the Earth. A feature of this century, which I emphasize in the book, is that not only are traditional technologies changing faster than ever, but the world is changing in different ways. Humans beings themselves are going to change. For several thousand years, the one thing that hasn't changed has been human nature and the human physique. But in this century we have targeted drugs, genetic manipulation, and maybe even implants in the brain. This makes it harder to predict a hundred years into the future than it would have been for someone in 1900 to predict our present-day world. That suggests there are greater uncertainties and greater risks facing us now. But it also suggests that if humans did establish groups beyond the Earth, then it wouldn't take more than a few centuries at most before they evolve into different species. They would be able to use genetic techniques to adjust themselves to survive in a very alien habitat. HM: What are your thoughts on sending men to Mars and the idea of terraforming Mars? MR: My view about manned space flight is that, as a scientist and practical man, I'm against it, but as a human being, I'm in favor of it. The practical reason for sending men into space is getting weaker with every advance in robotics and miniaturization. So it can only be justified as a human adventure. The American public is very risk adverse, even though a 2 percent risk, which is what the shuttle flights have had, is not very high by test pilots standards, and is far lower than the risks that many individuals would take on their own behalf. I believe the only future for manned space flight is to do it much more cheaply, where private sponsorship or private enterprise can fund it. And also when adventurers are prepared to accept much higher risks. I believe the first people to go to Mars may go with one-way tickets, but they'd be pioneers. I hope by the end of the century there will be communities on Mars, but I think they will be more in the style of ancient explorers than present-day astronauts.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Planet Beyond Our Solar System Photographed From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 06:31:40 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:28:14 -0500 Subject: Planet Beyond Our Solar System Photographed Source: Space.Com http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/aas_exoplanet_050110.html Astronomers Confident: Planet Beyond Solar System Has Been Photographed Tue Jan 11,11:42 AM ET Robert Roy Britt Senion Science Writer SPACE.com SAN DIEGO - Astronomers are highly confident that they've taken the first photograph of a planet outside our solar system. Make that two photographs. A new image from the Hubble Space Telescope confirms with a high degree of confidence a picture made previously by astronomers at the European Southern Observatory (ESO) and reported by SPACE.com in September. The planet - still just a candidate, actually - is an odd duck in many respects. It does not orbit a normal star, and it is much more massive than the largest planets in our solar system. Still, if confirmed, it represents a landmark in astronomy along the road to the ultimate goal of finding and photographing Earth-like planets around other stars. The Hubble image was released here today at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society. The planet candidate appears to orbit a failed star known as a brown dwarf. The initial observations at ESO's Very Large Telescope could not determine whether the apparent planet was actually at the same distance as the brown dwarf or if it was a background object. The Hubble observations show that the two indeed appear to be travelling together through the sky, suggesting they are gravitationally bound, as originally suspected. University of Arizona astronomer Glenn Schneider, who led the new study, said he's 99.1 percent sure the object is in orbit around the brown dwarf. He expects to be 99.9 percent sure in April when more Hubble observations are made as the planet presumably moves a bit farther along in its orbit. "Stay tuned for the final confirmation, but it's looking pretty good," Schneider said. The planet candidate is about 1.5 times the diameter of Jupiter and about five times as massive. It orbits the brown dwarf star at about 30 percent farther than Pluto is from our Sun. The brown dwarf does not have enough mass to trigger thermonuclear fusion and shine like a normal star, but it is also outside the realm of planethood, being some 25 times more massive than Jupiter and glowing with infrared light. The setup is about 225 light-years away. "This is the first image of a planet outside our solar system," said UCLA astronomer Eric Becklin, quickly correcting himself to say it was an image most likely to be of an extrasolar planet. "So we really need to be sure." Becklin and others eagerly await the April observations. If confirmed, the finding would have "enormous impact" on the ability of astronomers to get funding for future telescopes that would look for Earth-like planets, said Steve Maran, press officer of the American Astronomical Society. And what to make of a planet orbiting a failed star? Astronomers are already debating what constitutes a planet and whether the definition should include how they formed versus what they orbit. Becklin, who was not involved in the imaging, said there is evidence for planets orbiting planets and planets floating alone
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:59:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:29:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? - >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:02:56 -0500 >Subject: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? >INEXPLICATA >The Journal of Hispanic Ufology >January 11, 2005 >Source: El Imparcial >Date: 01-08-05, 20:27 hrs >Mexico: Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? >Change noted yesterday described as "strange" >Scientists startled by peculiar phenomenon involving coastal hill. >by Luis Gonzalez >HERMOSILLO, Sonora(PH) -- More than half of a hill located on >the Hermosillo coast apparently "vanished". The event was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Vanishing Mexican Mountain Attracts Scientific From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:10:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:32:12 -0500 Subject: Vanishing Mexican Mountain Attracts Scientific INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 12, 2005 Vanishing Mountain: Phenomenon Attracts Scientific Scrutiny By Shaila Rosagel =96 El Imparcial Scientists qualified the phenomenon recorded at Sierra de los Cirios, near Puerto Libertad, as an optical illusion. The strange event recorded on the Hermosillo Coast drew the attention of scientists who analyzed the photos and then camped out at the site to study the case. Astronomy professors visited the site on Rt. 35 North of the Hermosillo Coast to observe=97all night Saturday and early morning yesterday=97and find an explanation of what was captured by the camera lens of an EL IMPARCIAL photographer. The conclusion reached by astronomers and ophtalmologists is that it is an "optical illusion=94 caused by ambient temperature, the distance between the observer and the object, the angle of incidence of light and the intensity of the light itself. "What appears in the photos is a mirage effect known as light refraction,=94 said Julio Cesar Saucedo Morales, a professor of astronomy. The astronomer discarded any relationship between this optical illusion and the meteorite fall that occurred on November 29, 2004. "The phenomenon is due to the air and soil being at different temperatures. These optical illusions can be seen from diferent directions,=94 he stressed. Saucedo Morales was joined at the site by Russian astronomer Anton Lipovska and his wife, as well as amateur astronomer Hector Ruiz Figueroa.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:57:37 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:33:46 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files >It must be true if the CIA said it <g> >----- >Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine >http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html >The Secret CIA UFO Files >by Jim Wilson >The Central Intelligence Agency says it has finally come clean >about UFOs. To absolutely no one's surprise, it knew more than >it ever let on. <snip> >What better way to hide extraordinary aircraft than to wrap >them in the compelling fiction of aliens? Yes, and the Roswell officers mistook balsa wood sticks for extraordinary, unbreakable, ET materials. Because they were glued, and had pink flower drawings on them. But it was a top secret balloon. Karl Pflock explained all that, and much more, in his book.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:15:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:35:01 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Kaeser >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files >It must be true if the CIA said it <g> >----- >Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine >http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html >The Secret CIA UFO Files >by Jim Wilson >The Central Intelligence Agency says it has finally come clean >about UFOs. To absolutely no one's surprise, it knew more than >it ever let on. >"Over half of all UFO reports from the late 1950s through the >1960s were accounted for by manned reconnaissance flights," says >Gerald K. Haines, a historian for the National Reconnaissance >Office who studied secret CIA UFO files for an internal CIA <snip> The problems is that the statistics don't support Haine's allegations, with a higher number of reports at times when there no test flights taking place, but I'm more curious as to why this is being promoted now on the Popular Mechanics web site
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 March 2005 - Laughlin UFO Congress From: <ufocongress.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:56:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:47:12 -0500 Subject: March 2005 - Laughlin UFO Congress 14th ANNUAL International UFO Congress Convention & Film Festival March 6 - 12, 2005 - Flamingo Resort - Laughlin, Nevada USA INVITED SPEAKERS Sunday * Dr. Thomas Van Flandern - Author of "Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets" Monday * Donald Ware - Rising Consciousness of World Leaders * Freddy Silva - Crop Circles, Cathedrals and Sacred Spaces: The Energy Connection TBA * Tom Valone, PhD =96 New Energy TUESDAY * Dr. Rudy Schild =96 Dark Matter and Dark Planets * Dr. Simeon Hein & Ron Russell - Remote Viewing, including a mini training session * Jim Marrs =96 "Inside Job: Unmasking the 9/11 Conspiracies". * Sean Morton =96 "Future Prospects of the World According to the Bible Code" by Joseph Noah Wednesday * William Henry =96 Stargates of the Gods * Michael Salla, PhD =96 Legacy of the Nazi Germany =96 Extraterestrial Connection. Budd Hopkins & Dr. David Jacobs =96 Transgenic Beings * Dolores Cannon - Medical Cures by Aliens, and "The Convoluted Universe, Book 2" Thursday * Open Mic Session For Experiencers - Led by Barbara Lamb * Ann & Jason Andrews (U.K.) =96 A lifelong abduction case * Steve Jones (U.K.) =96 An Abductee comes forward * Joe Lewels & Barbara Lamb =96 Joint presentation of their research, as well as research of the late Dr. John Mack, into the Reptilian phenomena Friday * Wendelle Stevens =96 UFO Contact from the Planet Korendor * A. J. Gevaerd (Brazil) - Top researcher from Brazil brings new cases from South America * Dr. Roger Leir =96 Will also present his medically based research into the Varginha case * Paola Harris (Italy) =96 From Phil Corso to Charles Hall: The need for witness testimony * Charles Hall - Author of "Millennial Hospitality" =96 an account of one man=92s experiences with ETs Saturday * Jaime Maussan (Mexico) - UFO update from South of the Border * Whitley Strieber =96 Topic to be announced. ( * Tentatively confirmed ) * Jim Marrs =96 Update on the Redgate Case * Dr. Nick Begich =96 The next challenge for our generation =96 How we use new technologies (Speakers whose names appear with an * are confirmed as of January 4, 2005 This schedule is subject to change - for detailed schedule, registration form, prices and transportation, go to our website at: http://www.ufocongress.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 12 New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:48:28 -0500 Subject: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15041 Gee, wouldn't it have been neato if they'd just have twisted that satellite camera a wee bit more just to put that 'Face on Mars' thingie to rest? Yet this is a pic of a canyon from the same region of the debated Cydonia region. Whether you're a believer or not, you've got to hand it to the engineers and overall teamwork of the Mars missions of last year. There's so much news coming in from Mars that we should see the Associated Press, Reuters and Gannett ( my alma mater) justified to put out their own 'daily Mars news' ( Mars Today ).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Secrecy News -- 01/12/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:34:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:07:46 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/12/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 4 January 12, 2005 ** DHS: NO MORE NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS FOR UNCLASSIFIED ** GOSS V. GOSS ON INTELLIGENCE BUDGET DISCLOSURE ** DOD MANUAL ON MILITARY CHEM/BIO COMPOUNDS AND AGENTS DHS: NO MORE NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS FOR UNCLASSIFIED In an abrupt reversal, the Department of Homeland Security last week rescinded its controversial policy of requiring employees to sign non-disclosure agreements in order to gain access to unclassified information that is marked "for official use only" or "sensitive but unclassified." The non-disclosure agreements, first reported by Secrecy News last November 8, drew opposition from employees' unions and others because, for example, they granted the government extraordinary permission to "conduct inspections at any time or place for the purpose of ensuring compliance." The revised DHS policy on sensitive but unclassified information eliminates the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) requirement. Such agreements are only rarely used by other agencies for unclassified information. The change was reported yesterday by Eileen Sullivan in Federal Times (www.federaltimes.com). "Those NDA's previously signed by DHS employees... will no longer be valid," according to a January 11 transmittal memo from DHS Under Secretary Janet Hale. "DHS will take reasonable steps to retrieve these documents and destroy them." See: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dhs20050111.pdf A copy of "Safeguarding Sensitive But Unclassified (For Official Use Only) Information," DHS Management Directive 11042.1, revised January 6, 2005, is posted here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dhs-sbu-rev.pdf The DHS move does not resolve the challenges posed by the poorly defined information control category "sensitive but unclassified." But it is nevertheless a hopeful sign. It represents an increasingly unusual ability to review existing policies in the light of changed circumstances and to revise them accordingly. By way of contrast, the CIA's crippling inability to rethink inherited security policies keeps the Agency in litigation seeking to uphold the secrecy of half-century old budget totals. GOSS V. GOSS ON INTELLIGENCE BUDGET DISCLOSURE For the first time during the tenure of Porter J. Goss as Director of Central Intelligence, the CIA last month refused to disclose the total intelligence budget for the current fiscal year. That was no surprise. But Mr. Goss is also the first DCI to have previously been an advocate of regular annual disclosure of the intelligence budget. As a member of the 1996 Aspin-Brown Commission on the Roles and Capabilities of the United States Intelligence Community, Mr. Goss personally endorsed intelligence budget disclosure as a way of increasing accountability. "The Commission recommends that at the beginning of each congressional budget cycle, the President or a designee disclose the total amount of money appropriated for intelligence activities for the current fiscal year (to include NFIP, JMIP, and TIARA) and the total amount being requested for the next fiscal year," the Commission's final report stated (Recommendation 14-2). "The Commission believes this can be done in manner that does not raise a significant security concern.... A number of foreign governments, including the British and Australian, have disclosed their intelligence budgets to the public without adverse effect. The Commission believes it can be done here as well." See: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/int018.html#disc Although the bipartisan Commission report included dissenting views on other topics, there was unanimity on the recommendation for budget disclosure, as there would be once again in the case of the 9/11 Commission last year. But that was then. Today, DCI Goss' words are seen to be weightless and inconsequential. Now that he is in a position to do something about the budget secrecy that he previously decried, no one expects him to do so. "We trust you can appreciate the necessity of an intelligence agency to protect its budget," wrote CIA Information and Privacy Coordinator Scott Koch on December 28, denying a request for disclosure of the 2005 intelligence budget total. DOD MANUAL ON MILITARY CHEM/BIO COMPOUNDS AND AGENTS The numerous and diverse chemical and biological materials that U.S. military forces might encounter on the battlefield are catalogued and described in a new manual issued this week by the Department of Defense. "The threat or use of CB weapons is a possible condition of future warfare and could occur in the early stages of war to disrupt United States (US) operations and logistics," the manual states. "In many of the regions where the US is likely to deploy forces, potential adversaries may use CB weapons. Potential adversaries may seek to counter US conventional military superiority using less expensive and more attainable, asymmetrical means. To meet this challenge, US forces must be properly trained and equipped to operate effectively and decisively in the face of NBC attacks." See "Potential Military Chemical/Biological Agents and Compounds," U.S. Army Field Manual 3-11.9, January 2005 (318 pages, 5.5 MB PDF file): http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-11-9.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Diamond UFO Over Maritimes Highway From: Marc LeBlanc <frisbeedude2003.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:04:00 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:14:06 -0500 Subject: Diamond UFO Over Maritimes Highway Hello all! Let me tell you what happened to us this summer past (Aug. 2004). I was in a van with several passengers and driving along from Moncton N.B. to Halifax N.S., Canada, about 2am traffic was sparse and the only unusual thing up until that point was how my C.B. (citizen band two-way radio) was acting very strangely. I had had this CB for several years, but until this night it had never done this before, or since. When I turned on the CB the volume was many, many decibels louder than it had ever been, even from the lowest position on the volume dial, it was too loud to listen to comfortably. I tapped it and everything but no matter what, the volume was much too high, again, even on it's lowest setting. This, I thought strange, but paid it little attention thinking I would just have to get it fixed at some point. I turned it off and continued along our journey, not noticing the brightly lit craft flying just above and ahead of us. My friend in the passenger�s seat next to me, pointing towards the windshield asked me "what's that?" Looking up, I noticed a brightly lit 'diamond' shaped craft with many rows of light, spinning around it's circumference, the lights were multi coloured, there were blue, red, white, [purple (I think?)], green and they rotated in layers or rows of lights while there was one section facing us where the lights were not moving in relation to the craft and arranged in diagonal columns from the bottom centre to about the 2 o'clock position (in relation to the craft as it was visible by it's configuration of lights). At first I was sure it must be nothing more than the reflection in the window of some lit novelty item. Perhaps it was a cell- phone or something flashing, I figured it had to be in the van because it's position was not changing in relation to the van. I looked around trying to solve this curious mystery but found nothing that could have created a reflection in the windshield. The source of these lights was in the sky, not the van. Thinking this was rather curious I fixed my gaze upon the lights and searched my memory banks for anything that I might have ever seen that looked anything like this object in the sky - nothing. I was sure this was the first time I had ever seen anything like this at all! What I thought most interesting, although the object appeared to be less than a hundred feet from the ground, it had not changed it's position in relation to us in the slightest. It was traveling at the same tragectory and velocity as us, only up in the air. After a few moments, it became obvious, this was something very strange indeed. At that moment I (shamefully) started YELLING at full voice in this small van hopping to awaken the passenger in the middle aisle and draw everyone�s attention to this most strange object flying along with us in the sky. (I say 'flying along with us' and have used the term 'following us' to describe it because there were no other vehicles in close proximity for them (it) to have been following, (we were somewhat singled out). This co-travelling lasted a short while before (shortly after my loud screaming) this thing took off ahead of us. I mean TOOK OFF! In a half of a second to a full second but surely no more than two, it was about a several kilometres ahead of us and then appeared to hover about 30-50 feet above an over pass in the distance. It took us a couple of minutes to reach said overpass (3-5mins @ 110 +/- km/h ). This craft did not accelerate by any means gradually, it was almost instant, one moment 110 km/h, next, what must have been much, much faster, fast enough to cover the distance that took us 3-5 mins. to cover in a second or two, - no - less than two seconds or very close anyway. Once it reached the overpass, it stayed in position for a few seconds then rose sharply maybe another couple hundred feet in the air and then stayed there for a moment before jetting across a few hundred meters at about a 25 degree angle of decent. Stopped for a brief moment and jetted across at a similar angle in the opposite direction bringing it back to just below it's original point of where it was hovering near the overpass. It then rose sharply and paused and descended below the tree line. We were sure it had landed and rushed towards the overpass, again taking us several minutes to get there. By the time we got there, we came to a clearing and thinking we might just meet something very interesting, I gathered what I thought might be interesting offerings and got out to investigate. Only two of us got out of the van, the others too nervous to get out. (downright scared I think they were) At this point we lost it... we saw it go down below the tree line but could not find it again. The others in the van were too nervous to continue and wanted to go home so we got back in the van and continued our trip to Halifax, dumbfounded! Now, every time I look in the sky, I am looking for this object, wondering if I will ever see it again, not knowing what to think if I do. This incident has changed my life. I think it has offered a much larger perspective to my little brain. I am now looking for a picture of this craft to see if others might shed some light on this thing. If my pitiful description makes any sense to anyone, or if you have ever seen a similar object or even if you see a picture of something that resembles my description, would you please let me know, I'd love to know more about this. Thank you for reading my account, it was quite an experience, I say. Oh... p.s. The CB has never acted up like that since, oh... it was ok after this whole incident, like it was broken for a while
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:56:12 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:16:47 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Rogerson >From: Neil Morris <neil.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:18:31 +0000 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? >>From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >>Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >>I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >>entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >>list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >>why?). >UpDates Archive search's a good place: >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/feb/m29-008.shtml The classic little green man, the Mekon, villain of the Dan Dare cartoons in the British Comic, The Eagle first appeared in the late Autumn/Fall of 1950 - see: http://www.dandare.org/dan/aliens/mekon/mekon.htm You will see he was the classic large headed, frail bodied alien, and bears some resemblance to some of the aliens portrayed in Hal Crawford's drawings in the late 60's, early 70's. I am sure that there would have been a number of US servicemen based over here who would have sneaked a glance at their British girlfriends younger brothers' comics from time to time. If the Mekon was inspired by the phrase little green man rather
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 UFO Falls in La Antigua Mexico From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:39:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:28:10 -0500 Subject: UFO Falls in La Antigua Mexico INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 12, 2005 SOURCE: http://www.notiver.com.mx/html/06local.html DATE: 01.11.05 MEXICO: UFO FALLS IN LA ANTIGUA (VERACRUZ) Locals say: "It was a fireball" The sighting of an aerolith or Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) over La Antigua caused great expectation and uncertainty among local residents. The object fell at sunset, leaving a luminous wake. According to preliminary reports collected by NOTIVER, around 18:00 hours yesterday, several persons witnessed the event, which could be seen unaided. At the barracks of the Public Safety Office of Ciudad Cardel, duty personnel received dozens of phone calls who believed it was an aircraft in flames, falling to the ground. Others believed that the object was meteorite-shaped, since it left a wake as it fell to earth. A bright light was seen as it fell in the vicinity of La Antigua. Personnel of the SSPE, aboard their vehicles, surveyed the region, but until yesterday no reports of either aerial or terrestrial accidents had been received, nor of the possible explosion of a tank car. However, the sighting was a cause for alarm against those who saw it, since the light appeared to descend out of the darkness from a point in space, only to fall somewhere on the earth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication - From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:23:20 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:30:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication - >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:05:32 -0700 >Subject: Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication >Problems in Extraterrestrial Communication >Douglas Raybeck >Anthropology Department >Hamilton College >Clinton, NY 13323 >CONTACT IX >March 6-8, 1992 >Palo Alto, CA <snip> >It is a truism of information theory that for communication to >occur, there must be some commonality, some sharing between >sender and receiver. The commonality may derive from perception, >from cognition, from experience, but there must be a common >reference point upon which to build shared meaning. In the >absence of such a mutual point, all messages are unique and no >information can be exchanged, since there is no means to decode >it. This situation, or something very much like it, may very >well obtain when we first encounter extraterrestrial >intelligence. <snip> Raybeck's argument is that ET's will be so alien that they won't be able to communicate with humans, because supposedly they have no "commonality of experience." But he shoots down his entire argument in the following paragraph (below). The external world of reality, the universe, is a "commonality of experience" that ET's (if they exist) would share with humans. >Others have argued that our ability to create symbols requires >the construction of internal representations of the external >world (Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974). This aptitude, in turn, >involves associating information from various sensory modalities >(taste, touch,sight, sound) in order to construct these >representations of external stimuli(Ardila and Ostrosky-Solis >1989, Jerison 1990, Marin 1982). There is a neuron-rich area of >the left hemisphere located in the folds of the Sylvan fissure >that seems to be the site where various sensory information is >cross-connected (Geschwind 1990, Laughlin and D'Aquili 1974). >Termed the inferior parietal lobule (IPL), this structure seems >to be an association area of association areas. Information >entering the IPL from one sensory modality can be cross- >referenced to other modalities. Theoretically this would permit >the IPL to promote the construction of internal representations >of the external world. Thus, the IPL seems to be deeply >implicated in such curious events as synesthesia, where the >information of one modality is registered as though it came from >another (e.g. That sound is very bright.) However, the IPL is >also the probable source of our mundane, yet very special >ability to create symbols and to process cognitive distinctions. What the above discourse means is that the human brain recreates the external real world inside its neural "wiring," converting sensory information about the universe into "internal representations" inside the brain of the world outside the brain. If there are ET's elsewhere in the same universe, they would know that the same physical laws and principles govern it everywhere (despite the fact we can create antimatter in the lab we cannot find any antimatter galaxies or worlds made of it). For ET's to survive in the same universe as humans they would have to have neural-type systems that recreate the outside world internally, just like the human brain does, and thus there would
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: 'Little Green Men'? From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:39:13 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:33:17 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: "UFO Updates" <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >list knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >why?). I did a review of what I found using an electronic search of the NY Times and Wall Street Journal a year ago on UpDates. http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/feb/m29-008.shtml The earliest use of "little green men" that I found was in a book review in 1902 in the NY Times of a children's fairy tale. Just the other day I stumbled across a instance of the use of "little green men" specifically applied to a flying saucer sighting from 1950.I was rummaging through the new Project Blue Book archive (a fantastic research tool -- thanks to all the people who put this together). Go to their search page and punch in key words "June 1950 Kansas." http://bluebookarchive.org/search.aspx This was a multi-witness sighting on the night of June 29/30, 1950 of a large saucer hovering over a farmer's field near Kingman, Kansas. The Blue Book report is on pp. 1347-1354 of this scanned roll of microfilm, most of it reprints of articles from two Witchita newspapers. The primary witness, a minister and former WWII pilot, said he saw a dome on top, but then, saying he feared ridicule, added the following caveat in a Wichita Eagle story from June 30 (p. 1351): "Right now, before anyone starts spreading screwy stories about us," the minister continued, "I want to say that we didn't see anyting alive on that thing. There were absolutely no little green men with egg on their whiskers or any other assorted do- bobbies." Obviously "little green men" (not to mention "do-bobbies") was already firmly established in the vernacular when this witness used the term. My suspicion is that "little green men" as a derisive term for space aliens arose in the 1930's or 1940's as a response to the Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers comic strips plus other Sci-Fi
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:45:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:38:42 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST >Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >All: >I've spent the past couple of days watching two guys I have a >great deal of respect for, Stan Friedman and Dick Hall, go at >each other over the Flatwoods Monster case and, in particular, >Frank Feschino's new book and the question of whether Feschino >makes claims of some great aerial battle between UFOs and the US >Air Force on September 12, 1952. Well, I've read the book (more >on that in a bit), and here's the scoop. <snip> It is good to hear from someone who has read the book. I see that the above section has been substantially edited from the early version I read before preparing my Foreword and Epilog. I will agree that this is a creatively generated possible scenario based on a host of articles dealing with individual reports at many locations in the East. Frank is an artist who connected the dots and not a scientist or an historian. He does detail a lost F-94 and the governments efforts to cover it up. I have personally heard at least 6 accounts of aircraft disappearing when sent up after UFOs. If I have heard of six (usually quietly after my lectures), than I think it is safe to say there have been many more. For those who think the government is incapable of covering up the loss of aircraft (or at least of lying to families of 166 dead military crew members.) I would point to William E. Burrows book "By Any Means Necessary: America's Secret Air War in the Cold War". He supposedly documents the destruction in secrecy of 16 US reconaissance aircraft over a 20 year period. There were also Soviet aircraft destroyed by the US in secrecy as well. In 1952, a massive year for UFO sightings, the F-94s had new capabilities and there were new radar systems both on the ground and in the air. There was also great concern about a Soviet attack while the Korean War was on. The magic meteor explanation has no support from the multitude of individual sighting reports which Frank has collected. Dick Hall is correct in saying that there have been plenty of bright rapidly moving bolides observed by people who had no idea what they were observing. This doesn't fit the dozens of observations reported in the book. Yes, it would have been nice to have footnotes. The book would have taken a great deal longer to get published by Quarrier. Frank has a huge map and very impressive data connecting the dots with times and directions. The publisher felt it would be too confusing with the small print required. I would also like to have seen an index, and my name after the Foreword, though it is on the cover as having written the foreword. I still don't much approve of people attacking a book without having read it nor acknowledging the vast effort that went into in the way of data collection. Even if one quarrels with the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:52:11 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:49:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman Susan Swiatek who has been active in ufology for many years in the Washington, DC, area and hosted the MUFON 1999 Symposium in D.C. ----- From: Susan Swiatek <SSwiatek.nul> To: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: January 11, 2005 4:25:21 PM EST Subject: Re: Fw: UFO UpDate: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman Stan Please post for me on UFO UpDates. Thanks! Sue --- Gang I did not respond to this "thread" mainly because I don't have the time to discuss how many aliens can dance upon the head of a pin. Dick has always been critical of Dr. Leir's credentials and work. But Dr. Leir is a credentialed podiatrist, and the time he spent arranging all those surgery theatres to extract various foreign bodies is laudable. He never tried to do surgery that he was not qualified to perform. So he had to find doctors willing to help him out for _free_, (not an easy task). Leir is a bit of an egotist and he may not be made 'in my image' or 'Dick's image' but so what? The real problem with the Leir situation is that there are no $$$ to get these foreign bodies properly analyzed. At least Leir is trying to do something - but he's not perfect. We all need to be just a bit more tolerant of one another. Leir is not an M.D., but neither is a nurse. Does that mean a nurse isn't qualified to give you a shot or take your blood pressure? Of course not. A nurse operates in the medical field in the legally prescribed arena that suits the position. Dr. Leir operates legally (as far as we know) in the field of podiatry that suits his expertise and education. Give the guy a break. His book is quite entertaining and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:06:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:28:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:23:41 +0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> >>>Stan and Dick, >>>I found it bothersome to see the initial disagreement over the >>>Flatwoods monster case turn into a protracted personal spat >>>between both of you. Stan, as Dick cites, the author of the >>>book states in his blurb that United States military aircraft >>>engaged in dogfights with UFOs over the Atlantic Ocean and that >>>they downed some of our airplanes. This was also the same time >>>frame as the alleged UFO sightings over Washington, D.C. >>Josh, >>I would agree that the discussion or flailing away between >>myself and Dick Hall has gotten out of hand. I think we probably >>agree on many aspects of ufology. I have referenced his "The UFO >>Evidence" (and shown a slide of the cover) at over 600 lectures. >>I have a copy of the book in front of me. The authors blurb on >>the inside front and back jacket certainly isn't what you claim. >>Neither the foreword nor the introduction make the claims. Just >>what is the source of the supposed "Author's blurb"? >Stan, >Answer: The bookseller's web site! >>The events of interest took place on September 12. The >>Washington DC sightings were in July. That summer was indeed a >>very busy UFO time and indeed there were more sightingsover DC >>on Sept. 12. ><snip> >>>There are meteorological records showing that a meteorite >>>horizontally traversed several states (including West Virginia) >>>from east to west. >>Metorology deals with weather not meteors. The Meteor group at >>Harvard has no record of prominent meteors. Yes, there were >>loads of newspaper articles which settled for the notion that >>what was seen all over the East were meteors despite the >>relatively slow speeds, the following of rivers, the abrupt >> turns, and testimony from many witnesses that what was seen was >>not a meteor. >I refer Stan and the List to the American meteor Society web >site: >http://comets.amsmeteors.org/meteors/showers/gamma_aquarids.htm >l). There is a lesser known meteor shower, the Gamma Aquarids, >that occurs about Sept. 1-14. This write-up gives its history, >which has been erratic, and its typical rate of hourly activity >is not particularly high. >The author states, "...the possibility exists that this [meteor] >stream produces a periodic display rather than an annual one." >Photographic meteor surveys sometimes have shown no evidence of >it. >However, two photographic meteors from this stream were detected >by the Harvard Meteor Project on Sept. 11, 1952. >Furthermore, as an internet search readily shows, this meteor >stream has produced prominent fireball meteors in some years on >September 10 or September 11. The hypothesis that this meteor >shower likely explains 'UFO' reports of streaking lights (as >opposed to daylight discs or other clear-cut objects) remains a >viable one until proven otherwise. It also may have produced a >prominent fireball. The historical records are incomplete and >difficult to research. The main 'sighting' sure sounds like one. >Where are the real UFO reports for September 11-12? Dick, Couple of things. The real UFO reports for Sept. 12 are noted in the more than 70 newspaper articles referenced in the book and in the referenced Blue Book files, though difficult to read in the latter. The Harvard Meteor Project shows no fireballs for Sept. 12, 1952. Sky and Telescope's annual Review of prominent meteors for 1952 also doesn't list any for Sept. 12, 1952. The real UFO reports when plotted on a map as to direction and timing and scorching tree tops etc belie the meteor explanation. The witnesses in Flatwoods clearly described an object that slowly circled over the town before landing. The testimony (first heard by Frank) from Colonel Leavitt and Lee Stewart clearly forces us to deny the meteor explanation. The actions decribed by Frank do seem to show standard military tactics on the part of both the military aircraft and the UFOs. I do think it is strange that Josh wants hard evidence - firsthand eyewitness testimony is better than none - but
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:09:11 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:31:39 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - King >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST >Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >I've spent the past couple of days watching two guys I have a >great deal of respect for, Stan Friedman and Dick Hall, go at >each other over the Flatwoods Monster case and, in particular, >Frank Feschino's new book and the question of whether Feschino >makes claims of some great aerial battle between UFOs and the US >Air Force on September 12, 1952. Well, I've read the book (more >on that in a bit), and here's the scoop. >Dick is right - Feschino does indeed write about a great aerial >battle between UFOs and the USAF on September 12, 1952. In fact, >he devotes the better part of three chapters to it, and around >100 pages (of 337). To put the issue to rest definitively, and >for the edification of those who may not purchase the book >(again, more on that in a bit), I'll take the time to quote - at >length - from Chapter 18, at which point the story is well >underway: Hi Paul, After following the dialogue betwixt Stan and Dick, it now appears that we have all learned something. If credibility if of any value in Ufology, and I suspect that for many it's _all_ there is, then how does Stan Friedman respond to this post? Stan could easily have responded by saying that yes indeed, Frank included the aerial battle speculation, and that he <Stan> didn't necessarily agree with the speculation, but that there was very good research into the Flatwoods Monster event itself, and touted the hard work done by Frank on the non-speculative matters. This would be reasonable, as I have seen many books where Preface writers might choose to decry some parts while extolling others. Why didn't you just admit what was in the book, and dismiss what you felt was dismissible, and tout what you felt was toutable? Instead, we witnessed this odd 'assertion, deft pseudo-denial' exercise. There could not have been a more polar opposite example of debate to the thread on radar reflections involving Bruce, Brad, Martin, etc. on which I commented previously. Paul, I also hold these two gentlemen in high regard vis a vis the UFO debate. In the absence of any explanation for this meaningless and totally unnecessary waste of time however, it is difficult for me to envision a logical reason for Stan's position and comments. I'm confused, and I'm sure others are as well. What do you say, Stan? What gives?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:23:52 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:51:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - King >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 04:55:11 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? >>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:15:30 -0500 >>Subject: Leather As A Countermeasure? ><snip> >>I'd say it has to be _genuine_ leather, real biological stuff, >>in other words. We already know that biological things are about >>the only dependable detectors, so why not countermeasure? >>Anyone for trying out that old leather coat? >>Eleanor >= = = >This is a new one on me. Setting my tinfoil hat aside, I >speculate: >Suppose some alien monitoring device detects the leather >somehow, reacting to some special penetrating rays. >Maybe it would think it had only found a cow and leave you >alone. >Then again, maybe not..... List, Anything that might persuade tin-foil hat wearers to switch to stylish leather headgear gets my vote. Of course, expect ebay sales of vintage football helmets to spike.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:30:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:02:25 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Maccabee >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:43:24 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? <snip> >Below is a past UFO UpDates post on an article written by Philip >Klass which had a similar explanation for another well known UFO >sighting, Kenneth Arnold's UFO encounter of June 24, 1947. >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/apr/m07-014.shtml >What I find very interesting is that at the end of his article, >Philip Klass also concludes that fireballs were also the >explanation for two other lesser known but very important old >UFO sightings that baffled trained observers at the time; the >U.S.S. Supply UFO sighting of Feb. 28, 1904 (which Dr. Bruce >Maccabee spoke about at the MUFON Symposium in Dearborn, >Michigan recently)< Klass has no class... when it comes to meteors. His meteor explanation for the Kenneth Arnold sighting makes zero sense (meteors flying a horizontal trajectory for many tens of miles while at 9,000 ft?). The USS Supply sighting information is at:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:29:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:14:28 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Maccabee >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files >It must be true if the CIA said it <g> ----- >Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine >http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html >The Secret CIA UFO Files >by Jim Wilson >The Central Intelligence Agency says it has finally come clean >about UFOs. To absolutely no one's surprise, it knew more than >it ever let on. >"Over half of all UFO reports from the late 1950s through the >1960s were accounted for by manned reconnaissance flights," says >Gerald K. Haines, a historian for the National Reconnaissance >Office who studied secret CIA UFO files for an internal CIA >study that examined the spy agency's involvement in UFOs through >the 1990s. >Why lie about UFOs? "The Soviets could use UFO reports to touch >off mass hysteria and panic in the United States and overload t>he U.S. air warning system so that it could not distinguish r>eal targets from phantom UFOs," Haines says. <snip> I presume that this stupid article reports a recent "discovery" by Popular Mechanics of the 1997. My response back then applies equally now: "CIA's UFO Explanation is Preposterous." see: http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Query Ancient UFO Crash in Siberia? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:56:13 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:47:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Query Ancient UFO Crash in Siberia? - Rudiak >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:04:22 +0000 >Subject: Query Ancient UFO Crash in Siberia? >Hello List >Busy recently so may have missed something. Has there been any >check on this story: >http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/installation1.html >concerning "unbreakable metal remains" and "radiation sickness" >etc? Don't know about this story, but it is very similar to the fascinating story told by Ted Phillips at the 2004 Ozark UFO Conference of a black, crescent-shaped object buried 2 miles inside a mountain in the Tatra Mountains, Slovakia: http://www.ufoarea.com/misc_tatra_cave.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:42:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:53:08 -0500 Subject: Re: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - >From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:30:02 -0800 >Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-10-05 <snip> >Kaufman County, Texas Object Video Taped Around Small Plane >Date: October 30, 2004 >Time: Daytime sighting >Hi Brian, >I'm going to attempt to send you three clips of a small plane I >taped on 10-30-2004, one at a time in WMV format. On this one >taping, there's two UFOs that interact with the plane and one, >(diamond shaped) that fly's by. I've slowed the clips down so >you may not be able to play them, I don't know. On #3 clip, is a >large orb, (nearly transparent), that comes from the bottom of >the screen and plainly comes up behind and then over the plane, >then comes back down, very impressive. The diameter of the orb >appears to be at least half the size of the plane that I would >guess to be about forty feet long. If you get this clip and can >open it, I've got several that I know you would want to see that >I will send you. I'm sending you this e-mail first, and then #3 >clip, let me know what happens. >Thank you to the witness for the report, photos and video footage. >View all three video clips at: >http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2249 <snip> Hi Brian! If I can apply my own "Hall"istic logic, since the UFO in these pictures is more out-of-focus than the small plane and the UFO's size remains relatively unchanged in the video frames when the small plane is very close and when it is very far, then the UFO would not be anywhere "around" the small plane. Based on these facts and not just the witness's assumptions, the UFO could easily be explained as one or more bugs flying close to the video camera. Even birds in the sky between the witness and the small plane have not been ruled out. Did the witness try to contact the nearest airport (eg. Terrell Municipal Airport to the north of Kaufman) to speak to the pilot of this small plane that seems to be flying curcuits? If the witness is correct in guessing that this UFO was about half the size of the small plane and closely buzzing it, the pilot and any passengers or instructor onboard would certainly have noticed it. During my training as a student pilot, I too had more than one close encounter - with other planes - while flying circuits so I was always on the lookout for such hazards. I am sure the small plane pilot would have been too. As for other UFO videos taken by the same witness, including one of a similar looking UFO buzzing a jet airliner a few days after the UFO that buzzed the small plane, I am not at all surprised. As an observer of the sky and an amateur astronomer who has also made frequently use of video/digital cameras, I too have captured many similar looking UFO images. I challenge others to try taking their own videos of the sky or even to check through their old digital pictures and I am sure they will find many more such "UFOs" too. Many of the recent UFO cases have just one witness and often consists of an unexplained blur in the pictures taken with their video/digital camera equipment - and usually noticed after the fact. With the many dozens of such uninvestigated and dubious UFO reports and many non-UFO stories being brought to our attention by HBCC Research, Filer's Files, etc. every week, can we fault the news media when they write that flying saucers are a thing of the past since few credible cases are being reported now. Instead of informing the public about the reality of the UFO phenomenon, the deluge of dubious UFO and related stories has become counter- productive by turning people's interest off the subject! Out of curiousity, just how many of those on the UFO UpDates who are still very interested in UFOs just quickly skim through or
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Crop Circle Art Exhibit For Asian Disaster Relief From: Paul Anderson - CCCRN News <cccrnnews.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:42:16 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:03:27 -0500 Subject: Crop Circle Art Exhibit For Asian Disaster Relief CCCRN NEWS E-News from the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network January 12, 2005 http://www.cccrn.ca _____________________________ For those in the Saskatoon/Southern Saskatchewan or nearby areas: CROP CIRCLE ART EXHIBIT FOR ASIAN DISASTER RELIEF 'Art Exhibition: 'Abstraction of Crop Circles' by John Chin' Artecho Gallery, Saskatoon, SK January 14-28, 2005 Donations of any amount accepted towards the Asian Disaster Relief Fund. The Canadian Red Cross will be there to assist. Includes a screening of the highly acclaimed crop circle documentary Star Dreams by Canadian film-maker Robert Nichol, and auctioning of art exhibits by Ba Hang Tran, Chris Moffat and John Chin. 100% of the proceeds of the donations and auction go toward the Relief Fund. 110-255 2nd Avenue, North Saskatoon, SK Opening 5:00 pm (January 14), 10:00 am-5:00 pm (Monday-Saturday), 12:00 pm-3:00 pm (Sunday) For further information: 306.221.7583, http://tinyurl.com/3jaer (John Chin Gallery) _____________________________ CCCRN News is the e-news service of the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network, providing e-mail updates with the latest news and reports on the crop circle phenomenon in Canada, as well as other information on CCCRN-related
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:55:17 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:06:10 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Balaskas >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:16:07 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:43:24 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? <snip> >>>An absolutely classic bolide meteor, with a high probability of >>>meteorite falls. No mystery at all. The only mystery to me is >>>that so many people are unaware of fireball meteors. <snip> >>No mystery at all? Only a debunker would be so quick to dismiss >>it as such without further investigation! <snip> >Guilt by association, eh? If I suggest the very obvious, far >most likely hypothesis for what was seen whcih Phil Klass >happens to have misapplied in the past, then I am a debunker? >Well, I have been called all sorts of things, most recently >'ignorant,' but I have never been called a debunker! Richard, Your explanation for the news story which dealt with the unusual lights in the sky seen by hundreds over a wide region that Frank Warren shared with us on UFO UpDates was not simply a suggestion (although I do agree with you, and Larry Hatch, that your explanation is a "very obvious" one), it was an absolute and final 'proclamation without investigation' answer - a reply one would expect from a debunker but something I never expected to hear from you. I did not call you a debunker or associate you with Philip Klass. Sorry. >>Similar such sightings by multiple witnesses over large regions >>have been reported many times in the past and most can >>reasonably be explained as bolide meteors or fireballs (or re- >>entry space debris), but is this the correct explanation for all >>of them? >Yes, until someone presents well-documented data that doesn't so >precisely fit the fireball meteor model. How do I know? I have >investigated hundreds of fireball meteor reports and used to >exchange information with the President of the American meteor >Society, who was a Board Member of NICAP. Until we know for sure, then maybe it is best not to comment at all. I also had the honour of meeting the late Dr. Peter Millman who was Canada's top expert on meteors. Although Peter was a self professed UFO skeptic, he did look after and investigate many cases in NRC's non-meteoritic (i.e. UFO) files. >>Below is a past UFO UpDates post on an article written by Philip >>Klass which had a similar explanation for another well known UFO >>sighting, Kenneth Arnold's UFO encounter of June 24, 1947. >>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/apr/m07-014.shtml >>What I find very interesting is that at the end of his article, >>Philip Klass also concludes that fireballs were also the >>explanation for two other lesser known but very important old >>UFO sightings that baffled trained observers at the time; the >>U.S.S. Supply UFO sighting of Feb. 28, 1904 (which Dr. Bruce >>Maccabee spoke about at the MUFON Symposium in Dearborn, >>Michigan recently) and my favourite, the Feb. 9, 1913 ongoing >>precession of tadpole- shaped "fireballs" that was reported in >>the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (which >>Chris Rutkowski has written about in the past). >>Philip Klass concludes his article saying "If a similar event >>were to occur today it might cause some observers who had seen >>the Independence Day movie to panic, fearing it was a UFO/ET >>invasion.". Although this may be an understanable motive for >>Philip Klass and other debunkers to dismiss all such fireball- >>like UFO reports as simply fireballs, it can never be >>scientifically or morally justified when it is intended to >>supress the truth. >What relevance does this Klass material have to the present >case? None whatsoever, except to provide clumsy and ill-advised >fodder for an ad hominem attack on me. If you interpreted my post as an ad hominem attack on you, a person I respect very much and whose interests, opinions and philosophies I share (okay, maybe most, especially since my training is in natural philosophy or physics and although my religious beliefs are Orthodox, they might be too New Age to you and my other friends), rest assured it was not. Since UFO UpDates is an important open forum in helping all of us advance our understanding and knowledge of the UFO phenomenon, as someone who is considered the Father of Ufology
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 USAF vs. UFOs Sept 1952 From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:0:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:24:39 -0500 Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Sept 1952 I am having a little trouble locating jet fighter squadrons stationed at NAS Willow Grove and Michel AFB in 1952. Also, while NAS New York was the home of several Naval and Marine air squadrons after WWII, it would be interesting to know which one's flew air defense missions in 1952. Thanks for your help. Jan Aldrich
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:32:56 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:56:03 -0600 >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:06:53 +0000 (GMT) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? ><snip> >>What George carlin fails to mention is that if folk believe God >>to exist then they must believe Extra Terrestrials exist because >>God and Jesus etc. would be in Heaven and therefore ET anyway. >Not at all Mr. Stevenson. Apples and Oranges or, in this case, >the "clearly demonstrated" compared with the "taken on faith." >The latter must subscribe to a physics beyond our understanding >and the former doesn't have to obey any physics at all. >>So, anyone who is Religious must know ET exists. >Not at all. In fact, ET, when referred to at all in Christian >fundamentalism, is a minion of Satan. >>Any belief in any God infers belief in ET therefore its all good >>press for Ufology. >I think not, Mr. Stevenson. Solving the UFO problem has not >been served by regressives in any manner I can perceive, and has >been moved along in the small manner that it has only by >progressive attitudes and acts of individual courage. Pithy >cynicism finds an ultimate barrier that can be broken through, >eventually, and the 'affect' can be pretty humbling when you >think you have all your feces consolidated in one convenient >bag. I always remind myself of the impossible amounts of space >and time and surface area involved in just the universe that we >_know_ to keep a respectful perspective. What do _you_ do? Hi Mr Lehmberg and Listers Usually the points you outline occur when these points are raised and have many times in the past. You are also specific in dealing with the subject from a Biblical point or two where as it is also applicable to other Faiths on a general principal. Faith in any God or god brings that god to life within the mentality of the believer and is therefore of great use to the individual at least. Many believers in the Bible do in fact take it to be literal history and a true account therefore at least Jesus would have been/is real and not mearly a mental construct toward belief and faith. Where you make a mistake is the lead you give me to point out that if God and Jesus are ET and the Bible says that ET are Satanic..... Mearly laying on one's back looking at the Stars on a clear night is sufficient for most to know without a shadow of a doubt their own misiscurity which is thir true place in the Universe rather than the sometimes grossly inflated self worth. The Pork Chops, of course figurativly speaking, would be, may-be, the happyness ET could bring if Biblical principal (ET being satanic) is overcome. I presume you know, as I do, ET to be a real lifeform somewhat disconcerted by some Human belief that they are satanic. Also, from the ET standpoint, I suppose that some ET belief would place us in a similar position based upon their observation of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:26:39 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:35:37 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Hatch >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:15:49 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >>Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>It must be true if the CIA said it <g> >>Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine >>http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html >>The Secret CIA UFO Files by Jim Wilson >>The Central Intelligence Agency says it has finally come clean >>about UFOs. To absolutely no one's surprise, it knew more than >>it ever let on. >>"Over half of all UFO reports from the late 1950s through the >>1960s were accounted for by manned reconnaissance flights," says >>Gerald K. Haines, a historian for the National Reconnaissance >>Office who studied secret CIA UFO files for an internal CIA ><snip> >The problems is that the statistics don't support Haine's >allegations, with a higher number of reports at times when there >no test flights taking place, but I'm more curious as to why >this is being promoted now on the Popular Mechanics web site >when this is a very old article the the CIA released around >1995. This is not a new story. Hi Steve, Terry: Bruce Maccabee shot that stuff to pieces years ago: http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/nov/m09-009.shtml I have no idea why Popular Mechanics would want to drag it all
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:10:33 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST >Subject: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15041 >Gee, wouldn't it have been neato if they'd just have twisted >that satellite camera a wee bit more just to put that 'Face on >Mars' thingie to rest? >Yet this is a pic of a canyon from the same region of the >debated Cydonia region. >Whether you're a believer or not, you've got to hand it to the >engineers and overall teamwork of the Mars missions of last >year. >There's so much news coming in from Mars that we should see the >Associated Press, Reuters and Gannett ( my alma mater) justified >to put out their own 'daily Mars news' ( Mars Today ). Nice picture. One thing puzzles me, the longitude: 33.2 N, 10.1W. No problem with the latitude, Mars' rotation establishes a north and south pole. Longitude is different. 10.1 West from _what_? There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. Does anybody know? BTW, With _two_ moons, the Martian calendar must be an unholy
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:14:51 -0500 Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? If so, would this be for refueling purposes(fuel cell recharge)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 13 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:04:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:17:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Lehmberg >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:52:11 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >From: Susan Swiatek <SSwiatek.nul> >To: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >Date: January 11, 2005 4:25:21 PM EST >Subject: Re: Fw: UFO UpDate: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >Stan >Please post for me on UFO UpDates. Thanks! >Sue >--- >Gang >I did not respond to this "thread" mainly because I don't have >the time to discuss how many aliens can dance upon the head of a >pin. <snip> Wow... this is the kind of unsolicited feedback you can't pay for and feedback that gives one pause at the same time that it is being informative _apart_ from the subject that it addresses.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:50:37 -0500 Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting Okay, I've been reading the battle here about the "Flatwoods Monster" case. All arguing aside, the first thing I'm going to do is actually order and read the book. I recall the story vaguely from some references years ago but didn't know it had become such an event of note. I personally feel we need more Frank Fechinos out there doing the ground work. If more citizens took a proactive stance we'd get more valuable data. If their data is flawed we'll find out. If it's solid data then we should applaud and validate them for it. This is a battle of the people. Our governments won't cooperate so it's up to us to do the work. Regard how many great inventions and advances in social and technical arenas were done by average Joes and Janes instead of stiff shirt, ivory tower know-it-alls. For Mr. Fraschino to get this far with such an amount of data is a tribute to him. UFOlogy can be quite an expensive endeavor. Time consuming too. I would love to spend more time investigating but I learned a long time ago to budget wisely. Just phone calls alone can rack up quite an expense but with new 'telephony' technologies it's making it more affordable! Just check out www.skype.com for instance. That's a big money saver for phone calling worldwide. I can now chat with folks for pennies. The free program at www.icq.com is a blessing too. Add to that discounts on air flight and bargain houses for video and computer equipment and it's better nowadays. If you get the free news magazine www.computeruser.com you can find awesome deals on computer equipment and services. Cutting those budgets down and getting out there in the field like Mr. Fraschino did is what it's all about. Perhaps we need to whip up a site with a 'tools for the UFOlogist' thingie with links and tips. Say, does Mr. Friedman have a special deal to us UFO UpDates Listers for ordering the book from him? :)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 The X-Fileys? From: Chris Parr <chrissyparr.nul> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:13:47 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:54:41 -0500 Subject: The X-Fileys? Source: The Sunday Sun - UK http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/sundaysun/news/tm_objectid=15060815%26method= full%26siteid=50081%26headline=the%2dx%2dfileys%2d-name_page.html 01-09-05 The X-Fileys? By Sarah Robertson A seaside town recently named as Britain's top UFO spot is to host a special conference on the massive increase in flying saucers visiting the area. The popular North Yorkshire resort of Filey has witnessed around 50 sightings of unexplained flying phenomena in the past 12 months. Enthusiasts at the British UFO Hunters study group, a network of people who investigate and record reports of alien visits, said such a surge in sightings hadn't been seen for 20 years and is a sign "something special" is going on there. Now more than 80 members from all over the country are attending a meeting this Saturday at a local hotel to investigate the rise in unusual aerial activity. Chris Parr, 39, founder and coordinator of the group, said they had already carried out extensive research on the matter, using documentary evidence and video material recorded in Filey. "We have called a meeting to find out the truth," he said. "This is the first time in 20 years we have seen such a rise in UFO activity. "There seems to be a parallel between Filey and Warminster, which back in the 1960s experienced a UFO increase. "This `flap' only happens every 20 to 40 years and is a sign of something special going on in the skies. I think it could be the start of an awakening in mankind." The incidents included lights and strange shapes witnessed in the sky. One woman even claimed she had found a piece of alien spacecraft in her back garden. "We were really excited about this, but it turned out to be a fridge magnet," laughed Chris. He added: "We regularly conduct an underground assessment of all UFO sightings and are significantly way ahead of the British military and their understanding of unusual aerial phenomena. "In our UFO reports, places such as Fife, Selby and the Derbyshire Peak District figured highly, yet the most prominent UFO hot spot for 2004 was Filey, which received the largest number of individual UFO report forms, and figures were enhanced by a significant volume of video footage from this area. "The video evidence has been analysed by an image enhancement specialist who confirmed that the Filey objects captured on film did not meet the specification and characteristics of any known aircraft. "Filey is also a coastal town and these types of areas can be devoid of light pollution, which assists in a clear observation of the night sky. "This increases the chance of a UFO sighting with quality and content." Filey based investigator Russ Kellett, 41, who has spent the past 15 years researching flying saucers, said the "huge" amount of UFO footage that he and others had recorded of anomalous aerial objects was proof that aliens were visiting the region.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 To Amuse Or Not To Amuse From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:09:57 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:56:26 -0500 Subject: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse Isaac Koi was amused by a post of mine that appeared here. I'm genuinely pleased to have given him a smile (and have told him so privately). But let's try to get something straight..... UFO study is not an attraction for the X, Y, or even Z generations. (That's my experience with younger folks.) Aaron Sakulich actually reflects the general sentiment about UFOs (and related phenomena) by those who haven't lived through the ups-and-downs of "flying saucer" history. Some excoriate Sakulich because he assails their sacred cow: UFOlogy. But he's not the problem. It's the fossilized mind-set of some who have made UFOs their "raison d'etre" for being. The icons of UFO study (Friedman, Hall, Clark, Maccabee, et al.) are not the problem either. These guys have pursued the mystery with diligence and good motivations. They truly want to know what the mystery is, what it consists of. Then there are those who come to the UFO table with a chip on their shoulders. They want to winnow out those who don't see eye-to-eye with their viewpoints; some of those viewpoints are not too bad actually. Science, theology, psychology, politics etc. are fraught with the disposal of those who disagee with the "mainstream" of the time: Bruno, Galileo, JFK, even Jesus. Then when their truth become obvious, mankind apologizes for the disposition of these persons. How does this impact UFOs or UFO Updaters? We, here, should not be so quick to dismiss, out of hand, the obtuse views of some who post here. Nor should we chastise those (Sakulich, for instance) who see UFOlogy as a joke. Sometimes it is. There are past UFO incidents which deserve further scrutiny. I'm not sure why, since even if they are deemed to be real or consequential, what can we do with that information? We can show cover-ups by the government and military in particular, but to what avail? Who will take the brunt of our disclosure(s)? It's time to move on, to seek new paradigms of study and/or investigation; to look at the problem with fresh eyes and minds. Is that too much to ask or seek? Sure, some here make their living selling the detritus of UFO history. God bless 'em. And some need to earn enough to sustain their vocation, so they are released from opprobrium also. But the rest of us should go forward, seeking new ways to view the UFO conundrum, undeterred by those with their feet firmly planted in the confused and confusing past. This group (which includes the ever evolving "oldsters" such as Friedman, Maccabee, Clark, Conners! and others) consists of the Kings, Lehmbergs, Heberts, Groffs, and a few others. They should band together to study the issue, without the slings and arrows of those who don't want ripples in their concretized stream. And perhaps I can suggest, upcoming, a vehicle for doing just that; a well-financed mechanism, using select individuals and state-of-the-art methodologies.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 5:31:40 -1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:58:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:06:32 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:23:41 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >Dick, >Couple of things. >The real UFO reports for Sept. 12 are noted in the more than 70 >newspaper articles referenced in the book and in the referenced >Blue Book files, though difficult to read in the latter. >The Harvard Meteor Project shows no fireballs for Sept. 12, >1952. Sky and Telescope's annual Review of prominent meteors for >1952 also doesn't list any for Sept. 12, 1952. >The real UFO reports when plotted on a map as to direction and >timing and scorching tree tops etc belie the meteor explanation. >The witnesses in Flatwoods clearly described an object that >slowly circled over the town before landing. >The testimony (first heard by Frank) from Colonel Leavitt and >Lee Stewart clearly forces us to deny the meteor explanation. >The actions decribed by Frank do seem to show standard military >tactics on the part of both the military aircraft and the UFOs. >I do think it is strange that Josh wants hard evidence - >firsthand eyewitness testimony is better than none - but >provides no evidence for the meteor. Is there a crater? Are >their pieces of meteoric wreckage? Was there a sonic boom? How >about a seismographic record of meteor impact? Stan, I'm not saying I agree with Joe Nickell but you should read his statements on the meteors in the Skeptical Inquirer investigation of the "Flatwoods Monster":
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:48:02 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:01:17 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:15:49 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >>Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>It must be true if the CIA said it <g> >>----- >>Source: Popular Mechanics Magazine >>http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1282426.html >>The Secret CIA UFO Files >>by Jim Wilson >The problems is that the statistics don't support Haine's >allegations, with a higher number of reports at times when there >no test flights taking place, but I'm more curious as to why >this is being promoted now on the Popular Mechanics web site >when this is a very old article the the CIA released around >1995. This is not a new story. Steven, It was in 1997.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:53:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:03:25 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Groff >From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >Subject: 'Little Green Men'? >I was looking at the byline for tonight's rerun of The X-Files >entitled "Little Green Men" and I was wondering if anyone on the >List knows who coined the phrase or where it was first used (and >why?). Thanks to all who responded. I guess we may never know who coined the phrase. I remember in elementary school we use to play a kind of 'rumor' game where we would all sit in a circle and the teacher would whisper a phrase in the ear of one student and that student would pass it on to the next and he/she would pass it on to the next until it came back around to the original student. The rule was that you had to whisper plainly enough for the next student to hear it but you were not allowed to repeat it. By the time the phrase made its way around it would be almost entirely different than the original phrase. I wonder if this might have happened with the phrase "Little Gray(Grey?) Men". Pure conjecture on my part.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:09:20 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:07:42 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:45:26 -0400 >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST >>Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>All: >>I've spent the past couple of days watching two guys I have a >>great deal of respect for, Stan Friedman and Dick Hall, go at >>each other over the Flatwoods Monster case and, in particular, >>Frank Feschino's new book and the question of whether Feschino >>makes claims of some great aerial battle between UFOs and the US >>Air Force on September 12, 1952. Well, I've read the book (more >>on that in a bit), and here's the scoop. >It is good to hear from someone who has read the book. I see >that the above section has been substantially edited from the >early version I read before preparing my Foreword and Epilog. I >will agree that this is a creatively generated possible scenario >based on a host of articles dealing with individual reports at >many locations in the East. Frank is an artist who connected the >dots and not a scientist or an historian. He does detail a lost >F-94 and the governments efforts to cover it up. I have >personally heard at least 6 accounts of aircraft disappearing >when sent up after UFOs. If I have heard of six (usually quietly >after my lectures), than I think it is safe to say there have >been many more. For those who think the government is incapable >of covering up the loss of aircraft (or at least of lying to >families of 166 dead military crew members.) I would point to >William E. Burrows book "By Any Means Necessary: America's >Secret Air War in the Cold War". He supposedly documents the >destruction in secrecy of 16 US reconaissance aircraft over a >20 year period. There were also Soviet aircraft destroyed by the >US in secrecy as well. As I pointed out once before, reconaiissance planes on secret missions over Asia or the Soviet Union can be kept secret; massive losses of fighter planes based on American soil cannot. Also, basing such a far-fetched `theory' on newspaper stories hardly qualifies as anything scientifically meaningful. <snip> >I still don't much approve of people attacking a book without >having read it nor acknowledging the vast effort that went into >in the way of data collection. Even if one quarrels with the >interpretation, it is the data >that matters. Stan, your picture should go in the dictionary to illustrate the word 'chutzpah' Apparently I knew more about what was in the book you have been promoting without my reading it than you did even though you wrote the Foreword. I had the facts straight; you didn't. I did some research, you based your view on an early draft without actually looking between the pages of the published book. Who is basing his remarks on ignorance now? I was very curious to see hoiw you would react, and kept silent.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:25:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:13:23 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - King >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:45:26 -0400 >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST >>Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>All: >>I've spent the past couple of days watching two guys I have a >>great deal of respect for, Stan Friedman and Dick Hall, go at >>each other over the Flatwoods Monster case and, in particular, >>Frank Feschino's new book and the question of whether Feschino >>makes claims of some great aerial battle between UFOs and the US >>Air Force on September 12, 1952. Well, I've read the book (more >>on that in a bit), and here's the scoop. ><snip> >It is good to hear from someone who has read the book. I see >that the above section has been substantially edited from the >early version I read before preparing my Foreword and Epilog. <snip> Stan, you are stating that you have not read the book yourself. Then your accusations of ignorance on Dick's part are rather hypocritical, no? Odd that Dick knew more about the contents of the book than you did. >I will agree that this is a creatively generated possible scenario >based on a host of articles dealing with individual reports at >many locations in the East. <snip> This sounds a lot like 'Weapons of mass destruction-related program activities' to me. Where is the evidence that dozens of military craft were downed? Where are the relatives of these missing airmen who all vanished mysteriously in Sept. of 1952? Collecting newspaper articles about supposed fireball flying saucers does not constitute evidence, particularly when said articles are mere reports of what someone says they saw. <snip> >I have personally heard at least 6 accounts of aircraft disappearing >when sent up after UFOs. If I have heard of six (usually quietly >after my lectures), than I think it is safe to say there have >been many more. <snip> Are these investigated, factual cases, or just what you were quietly told after a lecture? Do you presume these two to be the same thing? Based on your source, how can you state that 'it is safe to say there have been many more? And even if a number of military craft have disappeared after being sent to chase a UFO, where is the evidence that the UFO caused the loss of the craft? Considering that at least some UFOs are misidentified natural phenomena, isn't it much more likely that any losses could be ascribed to said misidentification, as with the Mantel case? When a helicopter goes down in Iraq, is it to be assumed that it was shot down in the absence of supporting evidence, simply because it might have been? >In 1952, a massive year for UFO sightings, the F-94s had new >capabilities and there were new radar systems both on the ground >and in the air. There was also great concern about a Soviet >attack while the Korean War was on. The magic meteor >explanation has no support from the multitude of individual >sighting reports which Frank has collected. Dick Hall is correct >in saying that there have been plenty of bright rapidly moving >bolides observed by people who had no idea what they were >observing. This doesn't fit the dozens of observations reported >in the book. What exactly is a 'magic meteor'? And if the people who saw them state emphatically that that is not what they saw, does that mean they are correct? Were these adamant 'non-meteor' reports investigated, or did Frank just cull the pro-UFO reports from the record and dismiss those that did not support his thesis? As you say, he's not a scientist, but an artist...with a vivid imagination apparently. >Yes, it would have been nice to have footnotes. The book would >have taken a great deal longer to get published by Quarried. >Frank has a huge map and very impressive data connecting the >dots with times and directions. The publisher felt it would be >too confusing with the small print required. Nice to have footnotes? How about nice to have credibility... nice to have supporting evidence... nice to address extraordinary claims with extraordinary investigation? No footnotes equals none of the above. No evidence equals artist sees payday in old folklore, and needs street creed, so finds it in Stan Friedman. And you defend the book without knowing its contents. Is there a monetary arrangement here? Sure smells funny. <snip> >I still don't much approve of people attacking a book without >having read it nor acknowledging the vast effort that went into > in the way of data collection. Even if one quarrels with the >interpretation, it is the data >that matters. Stan, by your own admission, data is sorely lacking in this book by an artist. Dick called you on it, and your response in no way refutes what Dick said. He didn't have to read the book to determine exactly what you have recounted here. He hit it on the head, and saved a few bucks. Now we find that you haven't read the book yourself. Illuminating in the extreme in light of your accusation of ignorance on Dick's part. Beyond this, your comments about the Harvard meteor data is shown to be incorrect, which explains many of the fireball reports of the time period. Your dismissal of this data is duplicitous at least. I think Dick Hall is owed an apology. And I don't agree with every pronouncement Dick makes. Thank you Paul, for clearing up this shameful exercise, and enlightening us when the person responsible for hyping the book could or would not. Thanks to you Dick, for calling a spade a spade, in the face of personal insult which has now proven to be unfounded.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:14:54 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:55:17 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:16:07 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:43:24 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >>>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:59:39 +0000 >>>>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>>>An absolutely classic bolide meteor, with a high probability of >>>>meteorite falls. No mystery at all. The only mystery to me is >>>>that so many people are unaware of fireball meteors. >>>No mystery at all? Only a debunker would be so quick to dismiss >>>it as such without further investigation! Nick, what can I say? Does not this call me a debunker, and the extensive follow-on citations clearly compare me to Klass? >>Guilt by association, eh? If I suggest the very obvious, far >>most likely hypothesis for what was seen whcih Phil Klass >>happens to have misapplied in the past, then I am a debunker? >>Well, I have been called all sorts of things, most recently >>'ignorant,' but I have never been called a debunker! >Richard, >Your explanation for the news story which dealt with the unusual >lights in the sky seen by hundreds over a wide region that Frank >Warren shared with us on UFO UpDates was not simply a suggestion >(although I do agree with you, and Larry Hatch, that your >explanation is a "very obvious" one), it was an absolute and >final 'proclamation without investigation' answer - a reply one >would expect from a debunker but something I never expected to >hear from you. >I did not call you a debunker or associate you with Philip >Klass. Sorry. Pretty hard to interpret it any other way. >>>Similar such sightings by multiple witnesses over large regions >>>have been reported many times in the past and most can >>>reasonably be explained as bolide meteors or fireballs (or re- >>>entry space debris), but is this the correct explanation for all >>>of them? >>Yes, until someone presents well-documented data that doesn't so >>precisely fit the fireball meteor model. How do I know? I have >>investigated hundreds of fireball meteor reports and used to >>exchange information with the President of the American meteor >>Society, who was a Board Member of NICAP. Note what I said here. People keep posting what appear to be classic fireball meteor reports on this site as if they were UFOs. I am trying to educate people about fireballs, and at least to cite evidence that contradicts that explanation. That's known as science. Unless there is something non-metoric about a report like this, why post it at all? >Until we know for sure, then maybe it is best not to comment at >all. I also had the honour of meeting the late Dr. Peter Millman >who was Canada's top expert on meteors. Although Peter was a >self professed UFO skeptic, he did look after and investigate >many cases in NRC's non-meteoritic (i.e. UFO) files. Peter Millman visited the NICAP office once, and was very impressed when I showed him our files and demonstrated to him how carefully we checked reports first for natural explanations. Too bad that discipline appears to have been lost. <snip> >If you interpreted my post as an ad hominem attack on you, a >person I respect very much and whose interests, opinions and >philosophies I share (okay, maybe most, especially since my >training is in natural philosophy or physics and although my >religious beliefs are Orthodox, they might be too New Age to you >and my other friends), rest assured it was not. I'm very tolerant of alternative religious beliefs, as long as the advocates don't try to force their views on me, or on scientific process. >Since UFO UpDates is an important open forum in helping all of >us advance our understanding and knowledge of the UFO >phenomenon, as someone who is considered the Father of Ufology >by some, participants (including myself) should not feel >intimidated if they have different views on the subject. Geez, maybe you should consult my cats. I yell at them and they simply ignore me. Logical arguiments shouldn't be intimidating; they should be considered, debated, discussed. I am not proclaiming, I am simply presenting logical arguments.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Isn't It Strange? From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:18:19 -0500 Subject: Isn't It Strange? Has anyone noticed, really noticed, how cavalier some people are when it comes to sighting UFOs or investigating them? A UFO enthusiast here recounted in a recent post that he couldn't fit in a talk with a member of an Asian parliament who had seen a UFO because he (the "enthusiast") was pressured for time and travel. And then he neglected to look at some photos of UFOs he had received on that trip from another person - letting a long period of time go by before checking the pictures out. Also, stories presented here of people seeing something truly strange in the sky but going back to bed or leaving the area before the UFO leaves? And what about the family who watched a large craft in their neighbor's yard but didn't call the neighbors or even mention it to them afterward - the parents having the children hit the sack - even before the UFO left their neighbor's yard? Should I go on? When a remarkable event takes place, normal people will take hold of it, and not let it go, no matter how tired they become nor how protracted the event is - that is, normal people. And what UFO investitigator puts a roll of film or UFO photos in a drawer, forgetting about them for several weeks or months? And also neglects to revise his/her travel schedule so he/she can talk with a credible person about a purported UFO sighting?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:09:59 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:20:49 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:26:39 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files <snip> >Bruce Maccabee shot that stuff to pieces years ago: >http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/nov/m09-009.shtml >I have no idea why Popular Mechanics would want to drag it all >out again now. No idea? How about because they can and because it works. Tell a lie often and loudly enough in a mainstream four color rag and it will _become_ the truth as if by magic. Who owns CSICOPathic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:34:53 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:24:53 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:06:12 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:56:03 -0600 >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? <snip> >Usually the points you outline occur when these points are >raised and have many times in the past. You are also specific in >dealing with the subject from a Biblical point or two where as >it is also applicable to other Faiths on a general principal. >Faith in any God or god brings that god to life within the >mentality of the believer and is therefore of great use to the >individual at least. >Many believers in the Bible do in fact take it to be literal >history and a true account therefore at least Jesus would have >been/is real and not mearly a mental construct toward belief and >faith. >Where you make a mistake is the lead you give me to point out >that if God and Jesus are ET and the Bible says that ET are >Satanic..... >Mearly laying on one's back looking at the Stars on a clear >night is sufficient for most to know without a shadow of a doubt >their own misiscurity which is thir true place in the Universe >rather than the sometimes grossly inflated self worth. The Pork >Chops, of course figurativly speaking, would be, may-be, the >happyness ET could bring if Biblical principal (ET being >satanic) is overcome. >I presume you know, as I do, ET to be a real lifeform somewhat >disconcerted by some Human belief that they are satanic. Also, >from the ET standpoint, I suppose that some ET belief would >place us in a similar position based upon their observation of >Humans activities and thoughts. Is this why ET remains unproven? An adroit and practiced explication, Mr. Stevenson. But, an effort to draw responses from it with regard to answering my points is a little like stacking smoke or squeezing air. What about a flawed comparison between beings required to follow rules and a conjectured being required to follow no rules at all? What about religious persons (Christian specifically, in this case only) in no way accepting as their deity that which they identity as the enemy of their deity? Is it regressives or progressives, do you think, who provide for aggregate human advancement? What do _you_ do to keep from being inappropriately cynical,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:42:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:26:59 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Groff >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST >>Subject: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15041 >>Gee, wouldn't it have been neato if they'd just have twisted >>that satellite camera a wee bit more just to put that 'Face on >>Mars' thingie to rest? >>Yet this is a pic of a canyon from the same region of the >>debated Cydonia region. >>Whether you're a believer or not, you've got to hand it to the >>engineers and overall teamwork of the Mars missions of last >>year. >>There's so much news coming in from Mars that we should see the >>Associated Press, Reuters and Gannett ( my alma mater) justified >>to put out their own 'daily Mars news' ( Mars Today ). >Nice picture. One thing puzzles me, the longitude: 33.2 N, >10.1W. >No problem with the latitude, Mars' rotation establishes a north >and south pole. >Longitude is different. 10.1 West from _what_? >There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space >scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it >that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. Hi Larry, The USGS has a Mars image viewer at: http://webgis.wr.usgs.gov/website/mars%5Fhtml/viewer.htm In it they have a spot called "Tharsis" designated as 0 deg. longitude. Why? I don't know. Load the map and use the zoom tool on the center point of the map. You will have to zoom it a few times before the name
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:48:06 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:29:34 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Rudiak >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:56:12 +0000 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? >The classic little green man, the Mekon, villain of the Dan Dare >cartoons in the British Comic, The Eagle first appeared in the >late Autumn/Fall of 1950 - see: >http://www.dandare.org/dan/aliens/mekon/mekon.htm >You will see he was the classic large headed, frail bodied >alien, and bears some resemblance to some of the aliens >portrayed in Hal Crawford's drawings in the late 60's, early >70's. I am sure that there would have been a number of US >servicemen based over here who would have sneaked a glance at >their British girlfriends younger brothers' comics from time to >time. >If the Mekon was inspired by the phrase little green man rather >than the other way round it must have been well know before >1950. Please see my earlier post this week - Little Green Men, showing the use of LGM by a saucer eyewitness in June of 1950, before the Mekon character first appeared a few months later.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:51:47 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:32:30 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - King >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST >>Subject: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15041 <snip> >Nice picture. One thing puzzles me, the longitude: 33.2 N, >10.1W. >No problem with the latitude, Mars' rotation establishes a north >and south pole. >Longitude is different. 10.1 West from _what_? >There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space >scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it >that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. Hi Larry,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:16:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:34:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >If so, would this be for refueling purposes(fuel cell recharge) >or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >activity - if this is at all possible? Hi Maurice, While I have no statistics of the sort you seek, I believe that a prevailing theory to explain UFO sightings near nuclear installations... including reactors, weapons, etc... is that any visiting ET might be very interested in our most destructive technologies, for purposes of self-preservation or perhaps to protect us from ourselves, or maybe just curiosity. Since we have no hard data on which to base this theory, we can only point to cases where such observation or intervention occur. I remember a case where nuclear warhead-tipped missiles were sequentially disarmed and brought off-line during a sighting. They were restored and found fully functional afterward, so presumably ET did not find grounds to blow them up or render them inert ongoingly. If this case was truly an ET event, it seems that ET has no trouble *turning off* our most fearsome weapons, and therefore would have no trouble defending themselves against our WMD. Your question regarding portals seems simplistic. If nuclear activity was required for ET to travel, we would not have UFO reports from 7 decades ago, much less from centuries ago. Oh, unless the Sumerians, or Egyptians had nuclear technology we have forgotten about since. Likewise, for ET to require nuclear installations for refueling, their travels would have been necessarily limited until very recently, at least where Earth is concerned. I think the *security/safety/curiosity* theory holds more water, but we're still talking about degrees of porosity at this point. No one has put forth an unassailable thesis on this issue, since we need to know what UFOs are before we can assign motives with any confidence. But with all the talk of UFO sightings in or near nuclear installations, it would be interesting to know what the breakdown of sightings actually reveals. I suspect that the incidence of sightings near such installations is no more than chance or concentrations elsewhere. But that is suspicion alone. I do find it interesting that the current wave of UFO interest began in the same time frame *within a few years* as our initial forays into nuclear *atomic?*science. I generally don't believe in coincidence. I recognize that it happens, but in most cases it is coincidence in perception alone.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:35:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall >From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >If so, would this be for refueling purposes(fuel cell recharge) >or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >activity - if this is at all possible? Maurice, You seem to be going from no data that you are aware of, to far- out theories if there is data. In fact, some very good data exists. See: www.nicap.org for Nuclear Connection Project. But 'refueling' and 'portals'...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:20:12 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:37:12 -0500 Subject: Re: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:42:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings - 01-10-05 >Many of the recent UFO cases have just one witness and often >consists of an unexplained blur in the pictures taken with their >video/digital camera equipment - and usually noticed after the >fact. With the many dozens of such uninvestigated and dubious UFO >reports and many non-UFO stories being brought to our attention >by HBCC Research, Filer's Files, etc. every week, can we fault >the news media when they write that flying saucers are a thing of >the past since few credible cases are being reported now. Instead >of informing the public about the reality of the UFO phenomenon, >the deluge of dubious UFO and related stories has become counter- >productive by turning people's interest off the subject! You bet! >Out of curiousity, just how many of those on the UFO UpDates who >are still very interested in UFOs just quickly skim through or >even delete posts containing uninvestigated new or old never >investigated UFO reports?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Allan From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:02:30 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:38:53 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Allan >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST <snip> >There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space >scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it >that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. The Mars meridian, i.e. the line of zero longitude, runs through a crater named Airy (after George Biddell Airy, Astronomer Royal 1835-81). I don't know who first designated this landmark as the Mars meridian, but Airy is situated about 5.2 degrees south of the equator. Olympus Mons is at 18.4 N, 133.1 W.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 RRRGroup's Blog From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:07:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:59:23 -0500 Subject: RRRGroup's Blog We've set up a blog available to select persons (many using UFO UpDates) where commentary can be posted, in normal missive style, immediately, 24/7 (a term we dislike very much by the way). Go to: http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com to add your comments or revile ours.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:56:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:00:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? - White >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:26:01 -0000 >Subject: Re: Leather As A Countermeasure? <snip> >>This is speculative at this point, but it seems there are three >>or four reports floating around, including, believe it or not, >>from UFO implant researcher and remover Dr. Roger Leir, that >>leather "can stop telepathic" stuff from aliens. <snip> >I know nothing about this topic at all and I'm in no position to >comment on the experiences you refer to, but it does occur to me >that leather is skin. Isn't this what we all have on our heads >anyway? Good point, however, our group, which experiences mind/body effects similar to those reported by UFO abductees, is rather interested in possible countermeasures. Conventional countermeasures to electromagnetic and acoustic signals do not work for everyone, and do not work except for very short periods of time. Most of the time they don't work at all. (We consider those short and limited scope successes as possibly decoying.) So if we hear three or four reports of success, using a common material, we pass them around for our group to try. I CC'd this to Errol at his personal email address mainly because of his interest in the paranormal in general. It pays to keep those
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 NASA Announces Spacewalk Preview Briefing & TV From: NASANews.nul Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 17:00:20 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:03:39 -0500 Subject: NASA Announces Spacewalk Preview Briefing & TV Allard Beutel Headquarters, Washington Jan. 13, 2005 (Phone: 202/358-4769) James Hartsfield Johnson Space Center, Houston (Phone: 281/483-5111) MEDIA ADVISORY: M05-004 NASA ANNOUNCES SPACEWALK PREVIEW BRIEFING & NASA TV COVERAGE The first spacewalk by the International Space Station (ISS) residents is the subject of a news conference Friday, Jan. 21, at 2 p.m. EST at the Johnson Space Center, Houston. The spacewalk (EVA) by Expedition 10 Commander and NASA Station Science Officer Leroy Chiao and Flight Engineer Salizhan Sharipov is scheduled for Jan. 26. Both the news conference and spacewalk will be broadcast live on NASA TV. On Jan. 21, ISS program officials will outline details of the EVA and a second spacewalk planned for the crew in late March. The briefing will include questions from media at participating NASA centers. Participants in the news conference: - Mark Geyer, ISS Manager for Integration and Operations - Derek Hassmann, Expedition 10 EVA Flight Director - Scott Bleisath, Expedition 10 Lead EVA Officer On Jan. 26, live coverage of the EVA begins on NASA TV at 1 a.m. EST. Chiao and Sharipov plan to exit the Pirs docking compartment airlock hatch and begin their work outside at about 2:25 a.m. EST. The EVA is expected to last about four and a half hours. This will be the first spacewalk by Chiao and Sharipov during their stay aboard the Station. They will wear Russian Orlan spacesuits and install a new work platform on the exterior of the Zvezda living quarters module. They also will hook up a small robotic experiment and install other scientific gear on the Station's exterior. NASA TV is available via satellite in the continental U.S. on AMC-6, Transponder 9C, C-Band, at 72 degrees west longitude. The frequency is 3880.0 MHz. Polarization is vertical, and audio is monaural at 6.80 MHz. In Alaska and Hawaii, NASA TV is available on AMC-7, Transponder 18C, C-Band, at 137 degrees west longitude. The frequency is 4060.0 MHz. Polarization is vertical, and audio is monaural at 6.80 MHz. Both the news conference and the spacewalk will be available live on the Internet at: http://www.nasa.gov/ntv For information about NASA and agency programs on the Internet, visit:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Additions & Updates @ The WHY? Files From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:48:11 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:06:44 -0500 Subject: Additions & Updates @ The WHY? Files There have been a number of additions and updates to The WHY? Files, including: An Abductee faces polygraph test on U.K. television. The result - he was being truthful! See: http://www.thewhyfiles.net/whatsnew.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:51:57 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:09:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Ledger >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:29:56 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >>Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files <snip> The article was laughable, and the SR-71 explanation for more that of .005 percent of all straight-line sightings, absurd. The dipsy-doodle maneuver had me on the edge of my seat. Some of us call that a dive and a pullup-the latter being advisable if you want to make that all-important landing later on. One can imagine this maneuver causing wonder among the witnesses, their hands clamped firmly over their ears, while trying not to be deafened by the scream of the SR-71's jets. To explain a hover in a SR-71 is as nonsensical as explaining how a forklift-or the proverbial grand piano -can hover. To claim that the SR-71 was some highly maneuverable UFO is beyond the stretch of one's imagination. The SR-71 was a dash aircraft, capable of Mach 3 to 3.5 at 80,000 feet. Its Pratt & Whitney J-58 engine provided low thrust [about 20%] until Mach 3 where the jet's intake suction effect kicked in providing 54 percent of the power and the bleed air from it's trailing mulitble-flow nacelles nozzles provided another 28 percent. You weren't going to dogfight with this airplane. You didn't have to, you just outran your enemy - if there was one. Since various records were set over the continental United States, at 80,000 feet it's safe to assume that some of the reported mystery explosions during that time came from these
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 San Francisco Remembrance Of John Mack This Sunday From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 17:43:58 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:11:30 -0500 Subject: San Francisco Remembrance Of John Mack This Sunday A reminder, the San Francisco Bay Area's Remembrance Celebration for Dr. John E. Mack is this weekend. As you may know it is free (suggested donation of $10 is welcomed) and at last a final line-up of speakers is set. Daniel Mack (one of John's three sons) is now one of the speakers. Details below; more info at: www.johnemackinstitute.org Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:00-4:30 PM Oakland Asian Cultural Center 388 Ninth Street Oakland, California PROGRAM Welcome by Sergio Lub Video Clip about Dr. John E. Mack Joseph P. Firmage Stanislav Grof, M.D., Ph.D. Daniel Mack Dominique Callimanopulos Music by Karen Rae Wilson James O'Dea Mark Comings Kathy Vaquilar Music by Breandain & Chris Langlois
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:42:23 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:12:40 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:06:12 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:56:03 -0600 >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:06:53 +0000 (GMT) >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >><snip> >>>What George Carlin fails to mention is that if folk believe God >>>to exist then they must believe Extra Terrestrials exist because >>>God and Jesus etc. would be in Heaven and therefore ET anyway. >>Not at all Mr. Stevenson. Apples and Oranges or, in this case, >>the "clearly demonstrated" compared with the "taken on faith." >>The latter must subscribe to a physics beyond our understanding >>and the former doesn't have to obey any physics at all. <snip> >Many believers in the Bible do in fact take it to be literal >history and a true account therefore at least Jesus would have >been/is real and not mearly a mental construct toward belief and >faith. Hi Colin and Alfred! I would like to remind everyone that unlike the informed opinions and accepted historical facts of past generations which were once very popular but have since been discarded and long forgotten, the Bible's truths have remarkably remained unchanged to this day dispite thousands of years of literary attacks and scientific criticism. The challenges by the self proclaimed wise of this and future generations will be no different since the Bible - an ET document that unfortunately continues to be overlooked even by ufologists - was inspired by Holy Wisdom and recorded by actual eyewitnesses. From my training in the sciences, I am aware of just how little we truly understand and know for certain about the universe we are all a part of. Especially humbling, but very exciting, is the deluge of new discoveries and unexpected surprises that challenge our intellect and force us to re-examine our current beliefs. In science many things are "taken on faith" too. Maybe man never did walk on the Moon (a belief held by some, not me), but I was surprised to read in many different newspapers and magazines this past Christmas a new "truth" - Jesus never existed as a historical person! Just like the those who proclaim that UFOs are not real, those that participated in this disinformation campaign also ignored actual physical evidence and findings that prove otherwise! By promoting these false stories about such an important person (and ET figure) for all of mankind, they blind us to the real truth about our special
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:12:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch >From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Does the List have any statistics or info with >regard to the appearance of UFOs close or near >to nuclear reactors? >If so, would this be for refueling purposes >(fuel cell recharge) or because portals are created >in these areas by the reactor activity - if this is >at all possible? Hello Maurice: Francis Ridge and others did a study of possible UFO interest in nuclear facilities: http://www.nicap.org/ncp/ncp-ridge1.htm Personally, I think the connection is tenuous. UFOs are seen in all sorts of places. Nobody knows the purposes of UFOs seen near nuclear facilities. I strongly doubt they have any need for our fuels or energy, they seem to do just fine with their own resources. As for 'portals', that smacks of late-nite radio guests, the kind forever selling dodgy books, CDs and tapes. To me, portals is a new-age buzzword, a term that sounds impressive to the pigeons, but with little if any definite meaning. UFOs are seen anywhere there are witnesses willing to report them, in all kinds of places and more often than not away from nuclear facilities. The maps on these menus will show where many UFOs have been reported: http://www.larryhatch.net/MAPSMENU.html http://www.larryhatch.net/REGMAPS.html http://www.larryhatch.net/THEMEMAPS.html Look at southern Nevada (NV) on this map: http://www.larryhatch.net/SWSTATES.html One of the emptiest places is the former(?) nuclear test range NNW of Las Vegas. Las Vegas itself is much busier.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: Diamond UFO Over Maritimes Highway - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:43:05 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:14:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Diamond UFO Over Maritimes Highway - Hatch >From: Marc LeBlanc <frisbeedude2003.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:04:00 -0500 (EST) >Subject: Diamond UFO Over Maritimes Highway >Hello all! >Let me tell you what happened to us this summer past (Aug. >2004). I was in a van with several passengers and driving along >from Moncton N.B. to Halifax N.S., Canada, about 2am traffic was >sparse and the only unusual thing up until that point was how my >C.B. (citizen band two-way radio) was acting very strangely. I >had had this CB for several years, but until this night it had >never done this before, or since. >When I turned on the CB the volume was many, many decibels >louder than it had ever been, even from the lowest position on >the volume dial, it was too loud to listen to comfortably. I >tapped it and everything but no matter what, the volume was much >too high, again, even on it's lowest setting. This, I thought >strange, but paid it little attention thinking I would just have >to get it fixed at some point. I turned it off and continued >along our journey, not noticing the brightly lit craft flying >just above and ahead of us. <snip> Hi Marc: This is a very interesting account! Can you nail down some of the data more precisely? 1) Date: Is there some way to get the precise or approx. date in August 2004? Maybe you have some receipts (fuel?), a letter, or other records that give the day. Maybe others in the van remember? 2) Location: Which highway were you on (route #). What was the last town you passed thru before the event, and the next one afterwards? That overpass would help. Can you recall any signs indicating place names or highway numbers there at the overpass? 3) What would you say the duration of the entire set of events was, from UFO first seen to last seen? 4) The CB radio was strangely loud. What exactly did you hear so loudly? Was is just static, the usual CB chatter or something else? Sorry for all the questions.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 14 Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:25:09 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:11:23 -0500 Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? - Boone >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:39:13 -0800 >Subject: Re: 'Little Green Men'? >>From: Terry Groff <terry.nul> >>To: "UFO Updates" <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:16:39 -0600 >>Subject: 'Little Green Men'? <snip> If I may add some links to references to 'green' folk. Primarily from mythology. I grew up around and have many friends, relatives of Celtic descent and sure enough stories of green skinned people pop up. Even stories about little green folks from Greek and ancient Egyptian and Ethiopian legend. Here are a few links I found on the web: http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/celt/tfm/tfm107.htm http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewarticle.asp?AuthorID=1215&id=13535 http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Crater/5091/greenkids.html One might favor that the early sci-fi, comics writers and artists borrowed from these ancient tales as grist-for-the-mill in their stories. Just a thought.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Top Scientists Validate ETH From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:01:21 -0500 Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH SOURCE: Space.Com http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html 01-14- 2005 ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood By Leonard David Senior Space Writer Decades ago, it was physicist Enrico Fermi who pondered the issue of extraterrestrial civilizations with fellow theorists over lunch, generating the famous quip: "Where are they?" That question later became central to debates about the cosmological census count of other star folk and possible extraterrestrial (ET) visitors from afar. Fermi's brooding on the topic was later labeled "Fermi's paradox". It is a well-traveled tale from the 1950's when the scientist broached the subject in discussions with colleagues in Los Alamos, New Mexico. Thoughts regarding the probability of earthlike planets, the rise of highly advanced civilizations "out there", and interstellar travel - these remain fodder for trying to respond to Fermi's paradox even today. Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial visitors might just be found there. The researchers make their proposal in the January/February 2005 issue of the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS). Curious situation Pick up any good science magazine and you're sure to see the latest in head-scratching ideas about superstring theory, wormholes, or the stretching of spacetime itself. Meanwhile, extrasolar planetary detection is on the verge of becoming mundane. "We are in the curious situation today that our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation, yet any possible evidence of such lurking in the UFO phenomenon is scoffed at within our scientific community," contends astrophysicist Bernard Haisch. Haisch along with physicists James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold Puthoff make their case in the JBIS article: "Inflation- Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation". The scientists point to two key discoveries made by Australian astronomers and reported last year that there is a "galactic habitable zone" in our Milky Way Galaxy. And more importantly that Earth's own star, the Sun, is relatively young in comparison to the average star in this zone - by as much as a billion years. Therefore, the researchers explain in their JBIS article that an average alien civilization would be far more advanced and have long since discovered Earth. Additionally, other research work on the supposition underlying the Big Bang - known as the theory of inflation - shores up the prospect, they advise, that our world is immersed in a much larger extraterrestrial civilization. Point-to-point distances Given billion-year advanced physics, might not buzzing around the galaxy be possible? Even today superstring theory hypothesizes other dimensions... which could be habitable Universes adjacent to our own, the researchers speculate. It might even be possible to get around the speed of light limit by moving in and out of these dimensions. "What we have done is somewhat of a breakthrough," Haisch told SPACE.com. "We have pulled together various recent discoveries and theoretical issues that collectively point to the strong probability that we should be in the midst of one or more huge extraterrestrial civilizations," he said. Haisch said that superstring dimensions and wormhole and spacetime stretching possibilities address the "can't get here from there" objection often argued in view of the interstellar, point-to-point distances involved. Also, diffusion models predict that even a single civilization could spread across the Galaxy in a tiny fraction of the age of the Galaxy - even at sub-light speeds, he said. ET signature in the data Can the scientific community bring itself to consider any evidence coming from mysterious sightings of strange things by the public? In large measure, the scientific community seemingly has eyed ET visitation as far from being serious stuff to cogitate over. Why so? "The dismissal has several causes, all reinforcing each other," Haisch responded. "Most of the observations are probably misinterpretations, delusions and hoaxes. I have seen people get confused by Venus or even Sirius when it is flashing colors low in the sky under the right conditions. Having been turned off by this, most scientists never bother to look any further, and so are simply blissfully ignorant that there may be more to it," he said. Deardorff, the lead author of the JBIS article, points out in a press statement: "It would take some humility for the scientific community to suspend its judgment and take at least some of the high quality reports seriously enough to investigate=E2=80=A6but I hope we can bring ourselves to do that." According to Haisch, there is a motivation not just for scientific tolerance of the UFO issue, but a strong scientific prediction that there ought to be some genuine ET signature in the data. "This potentially changes the relationship of the UFO phenomenon
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 A Very Deep Breath! From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:50:18 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:03:13 -0500 Subject: A Very Deep Breath! Never did I go beyond dreams in my youth that one day humanity would send people to the moon, probes that explore Mars and Titan... even our first probes now leaving our solar system into deep space. It is the beginning of small steps into considering ourselves children of the Universe. Wake up America! We need to build colonies on the moon and then head for Mars. Machines cannot completely give the human element
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Malin On Mars Face In '95 From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:46:07 -0700 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:08:07 -0500 Subject: Malin On Mars Face In '95 Source: http://barsoom.msss.com/education/facepage/face_discussion.html 09-16-95 OBSERVATIONS OF THE "FACE ON MARS" AND SIMILAR FEATURES BY THE MARS GLOBAL SURVEYOR ORBITER CAMERA Michael C. Malin Principal Investigator Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera There is some interest concerning whether or not the Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera (MOC) will observe the "Face on Mars" and other features in the Cydonia region on Mars. This page will describe why there is interest and what the MOC plans are for photographing the features described below. BACKGROUND For those not familiar with the topic, several Viking images show features on the surface of Mars that, in the eyes of some people, resemble "faces," "pyramids," and other such "artifacts." The most famous of these is the "Face on Mars" and associated features "The City," "The Fortress," "The Cliff," "The Tholus," and "The D&M Pyramid." A fairly substantial "cottage" industry has sprung up around these features, with several books having been written about them, newsletters published, public presentations, press conferences, and, of course, "supermarket tabloid" published reports. The basic premise of these people is that the features are artificial, and are messages to us from alien beings. Their tack is to say, "These should be rephotographed by Mars Global Surveyor, since with high resolution we should be able to prove that they are artificial. If they are in fact artificial, this would rank as one of the greatest discoveries in history and thus every effort should be made to acquire images." Evidence cited as presently "proving" these are unnatural landforms include measurements of angles and distances that define "precise" mathematical relationships. One of the most popular is that "The D&M Pyramid" is located at 40.868 degrees North Latitude, relative to the control network established by Merton Davies (the RAND scientist who has been more or less singularly responsible for establishing the longitude/latitude grids on the planets) to an accuracy (actually, a precision) of order 0.017 degrees. They point out that 40.868 equals arctan (e / pi); alternatively, one of the advocates notes that the ratio of the surface area of a tetrahedron to its circumscribing sphere is 2.72069 (e = 2.71828), which, if substituted for e in the above arctan equation gives 40.893 degrees, which is both within the physical perimeter of the "Pyramid" and within the above stated precision. Other mathematical relationships abound. The advocates of this view argue that "no scientific study of these features has been conducted under NASA auspices" and that NASA and the conservative science community are conspiring to keep the "real" story from the American public. The conventional view is that this is all nonsense. The Cydonia region lies on the boundary between ancient upland topography and low-lying plains, with the isolated hills representing remnants of the uplands that once covered the low-lying area. The features seen in these mesas and buttes (to bring terrestrial terminology from the desert southwest to bear on the problem) result from differential weathering and erosion of layers within the rock materials. The area is of considerable importance to geologists because it does provide insight into the sub-surface of Mars, and to its surface processes. The measurement of angles and distances seems so much numerology, especially when one understands the actual limitations in the control network (of order 5-10 km, or 0.1-0.2 degrees) and the imprecision of our corrections of the images (neglecting, for example, topography when reprojecting data for maps) on which people are trying to measure precise angles and distances. For example, using the latest Mars Digital Image Mosaic and the U. S. Geological Survey control network, the aforementioned "Pyramid" is located at 40.67 N, 9.62W. Using the Viking spacecraft tracking and engineering telemetry, the position is 40.71 N, 9.99 W. The difference, 0.04 deg latitude and 0.37 deg longitude, represents nearly 17 km on the ground, or 7X the size of the Pyramid. These positions differ from the e/pi position by a similar number. Even given accurate data, however, most science does not depend solely on planimetric measurements, even when using photographs. There are many other attributes used to examine features, especially those suspected of being artificial, and the martian features do not display such attributes. No one in the planetary science community (at least to my knowledge) would waste their time doing "a scientific study" of the nature advocated by those who believe that the "Face on Mars" artificial. THINGS LIMITING MOC OBSERVATIONS Before discussing the observations MOC will attempt to make of "The Face" and other such features, some facts about the camera and its ability to look at specific locations are needed. - THE MOC IS BODY-FIXED TO THE SPACECRAFT It has no independent pointing capability. It makes pictures the same way a fax machine does (i.e., the scene is moved past the single line detector). - THE MOC HAS A LIMITED CROSS-TRACK FIELD OF VIEW (FOV) The MOC has a very small field of view (0.44 degrees), which is about 3 km from the 400 km orbital altitude. It typically takes very small images at very high resolution (lots of data). Anything wider than 3 km cannot be imaged in its entirety. - THE MOC HAS A LARGE BUT NOT "INFINITE" ALONG-TRACK FIELD OF VIEW The MOC's downtrack field of view is limited by the amount of data that will fit in its buffer (about 10 MB). If one uses the entire buffer (which is not likely to be completely empty unless it's planned to be) and 2:1 realtime predictive compression, this translates to a downtrack image length of about 15 km. The camera has been designed to be able to average pixels together to synthesize poorer resolution, which frees up data. Under the best case buffer availability, an 8X summed image would be 3 km wide (but only 256 pixels across) by about 78,000 pixels long which, at 12 m/pxl (8 X 1.5) would be over 800 km long. One of the big uncertainties in taking pictures of specific places on Mars is the uncertainty in when the spacecraft will pass over that place: the timing uncertainty of 40-120 seconds translates to 120 to 360 km uncertainty in position. - THE SPACECRAFT HAS LIMITED POINTING CONTROL The spacecraft uses infra-red horizon sensors for in-orbit pointing control. Owing to variations in the IR flux of the horizon with latitude, season, surface topography, atmospheric dust content, cloudiness, and other meteorological and climatological conditions, the control capability is about 10 mrad (0.6 degrees = 4 km), which is larger than the MOC field of view. - THERE WILL BE A SUBSTANTIAL UNCERTAINTY IN THE PREDICTED INERTIAL POSITION OF THE SPACECRAFT (AND HENCE, THE CAMERA) The position of the spacecraft is determined by radio tracking for 8 hours (roughly 4.5 hours of actually seeing the spacecraft) a day, and by computing the position of the Earth, Mars, and the spacecraft in an inertial coordinate system. It takes a few days to do this, and to use it to determine where the spacecraft will be a few days later. By that time, gravity perturbations, atmospheric drag, and autonomous momentum unloadings will have changed the orbit. Error studies suggest that the uncertainty seven days after the end of a given period of tracking can be represented as (at best)a 40 second uncertainty in the time the spacecraft will be at a specific point in its orbit. This translates (at the orbital rate of the spacecraft projected on the ground of 3 km/s) to 120 km downtrack and (because Mars rotates at 0.24 km/s at the equator) 9.6 km crosstrack. At 40 degrees latitude, the crosstrack uncertainty is 7.4 km, over twice the size of the MOC field of view. At some times in the mission, when the orbit geometry is unfavorable, predictions will be worse. - THE NON-INERTIAL POSITION OF THE SPACECRAFT WILL ALSO BE UNCERTAIN The position of the spacecraft is determined inertially. As noted above, the position of the longitude/latitude grid is also uncertain to about 5-10 km. - THE SPACING OF ORBITS WILL BE UNCERTAIN If, in spite of the preceding, orbits were equally spaced, then the average spacing of orbits at the equator for the 687 day mission would be about 2.5 km, which means that each spot on the equator would fall within the MOC field of view in (possibly) two images. In fact, the repeat distance is just over 3.1 km, again assuming equal spacing, and it is more than likely that each spot on the equator will only be seen once. At 40 degrees latitude, the spacing is roughly 2.4 km, and any location will be seen, at most, twice. Given Items 1-6 (above), it is most likely that some places will be overflown twice, and others not at all, and that our ability to predict this is very limited. The MOC team is attempting to address some of these issues with, for example, optical navigation. This could reduce the spacecraft position uncertainty by perhaps a factor of five or more. An attempt will be made to generate a new control grid with higher precision (perhaps as good as 1 km). But nothing can be done about the orbit spacing or the pointing control or the width of the MOC field of view. Thus, hitting anything as small as a specific 3 km piece of the planet is going to be very difficult. This discussion doesn't address the variability of the martian atmosphere, which is very dynamic. Given the occurrence of dust storms during some seasons, and polar clouds during others, there is no guarantee that, even when the spacecraft flies over a specific area, the ground will actually be visible. PLANS FOR OBSERVING THE "FACE ON MARS" Despite providing a number of people involved with the "private" studies of the "Face of Mars" with exactly the same information presented above, there appears to be a continuing view that MOC will purposefully avoid taking pictures of the "Face" and other features. Much of their focus is on "conspiracies" they feel exist to keep information from the public. This, of course, isn't the case: if an image of the "Face" is acquired, it will most definitely be released. The "Face on Mars," "City," "Fortress," "Cliff," "Tholus," "D&M Pyramid," etc. are in the MOC target database. Image acquisitions will be scheduled each time the spacecraft is predicted to pass over each target. This is done automatically. Given the factors noted above, however, there is no certainty that the images will actually include the features of interest. BOTTOM LINE It is planned to try to acquire images of the "Face" and other features in Cydonia. Contrary to what some people have said and written, this has been the plan for some time. This plan was not established in response to outside pressure; rather, there are two reasons for acquiring these images. First, given the interest in the general public about the "Face," it is appropriate to acquire such images for public relations purposes, especially since the public interest has been
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Geologists & Astronomers Rush To Locate Meteor From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:34:12 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:26:50 -0500 Subject: Geologists & Astronomers Rush To Locate Meteor Source: The Sun Network - Tamil Nadu, India http://www.sunnetwork.org/news/science/science.asp?id=5834 01-14-05 Geologists, astronomers rush to locate meteor debris Mumbai, Jan 13 - Geologists and amateur astronomers rushed to Vavoshi near Pen in Raigad district on Wednesday morning where pieces of a meteor-like object were reported to have fallen on Tuesday night. A meteor-like object allegedly hit Vavoshi village near here in Raigad district on Tuesday night around 2030 hrs. Bright light was seen and deafening noise was heard at places including Vavoshi, Rasaini, Khalapur, Khopoli, Pen, Panvel, Chirner. The Astronomical Study and Research Centre, Pen chairman and director Sandeep Jhadav said it appears to be an explosion caused due to collision of an asteroid with earth's surface and the impact was felt over a radius of 50 km. "We are trying to follow up the matter," he said.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:26:19 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:29:12 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST >>Subject: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15041 >Nice picture. One thing puzzles me, the longitude: 33.2 N, >10.1W. >No problem with the latitude, Mars' rotation establishes a north >and south pole.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Town's History B52 Crash To UFO Visits From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:20:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:20:35 -0500 Subject: Town's History B52 Crash To UFO Visits Source: The Rockingham News - Rockingham, New Hampshire http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/rock/01142005/news/59171.htm 01-14-05 Town's History: B52 Crash To UFO visits By Jessica Taylor FREMONT - If you think that you know the town of Fremont fairly well, maybe there are a few historical facts you have not heard. Did you know ... - On Aug. 10, 1959, one of the most historic events in the town of Fremont took place when a B-52 stratofortress bomber crashed into Spruce Swamp? The plane was on a routine training mission from Chicopee, Mass., when its air speed indicator and altimeter failed, which led to more serious malfunctions. The plane was attempting to make an emergency landing at Goose Bay, the only landing option not affected by foggy weather conditions. However the plane crashed before it could make the landing, narrowly missing the Jalbert home at 721 Main St. The U.S. Air Force reported that it was the first B-52 plane crash in U.S. history where the entire crew survived. Seven of the eight crewmen parachuted to safety, landing in Candia. The captain, being the last to jump, landed in Walter Quimby=92s yard located at 85 North Road in Fremont. Debris from the crash covered a quarter-mile of densely wooded Fremont swampland. The crash site was aired on Boston=92s WBZ-TV and received extensive nationwide newspaper coverage. - There was a four or five-week period between the months of September and October of 1965 where many Fremont residents reported frequent UFO sightings near the Northeast grid power lines along Main Street (Route 107)? It is reported that hundreds of people would park along the roadside during the evening hours in hopes of spotting a UFO. One Fremont resident who preferred to remain anonymous stated, "There were so many people down by the power lines some nights that it looked like a beach party!" Most reports were consistent in describing a round or oval hovering object with very bright white lights that could move both back and forth as well as up and down and all without making a sound. The UFOs would allegedly disappear without any warning and then just as suddenly, reappear moments later. Several eyewitnesses reported that they saw a plane chasing the UFO on one or two occasions, but each time the UFO easily outmaneuvered the plane. Fremont residents have continued to report UFO sighting in the last 32 years along other sections of Route 107 and also along Sandown, Abbott, Red Brook, South, Beede and North roads. The most recent reported sighting was in 1993.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:09:29 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:43:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:16:49 EST >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:36:36 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:39:47 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >The original post to UpDates on Dec. 11, 2004, stated the >following, directly quoting Feschino himself about his book. All >the headlines are about the "Military Engagement" and "the day >in 1952 when Air Force took on UFOs" and then most of the story >revolves around the "UFO air battle" that purportedly resulted >in "more than a dozen U.S. Air Force jet fighters ... destroyed >by flying saucers on a single day in 1952": >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/dec/m11-010.shtml I'm not taking sides here on whether there was a big shoot shoot-out with the saucers that ultimately resulted in the Flatwoods monster incident. But let us not forget in this debate, that a shoot-down order to USAF pilots _was_ issued in late July 1952, as admitted to by an Air Force spokesman: http://roswellproof.homestead.com/ShootDown_INS_72952.html According to Lt. Col. Moncel Monte, information officer, "The jet pilots are, and have been under orders to investigate unidentified objects and to shoot them down if they can't talk them down." Gen. Roger Ramey of Roswell incident infamy, now the Operations Officer for the Air Force and the one who would have been in charge of such interceptions, then issued the following doubletalk denial (probably at the big Washington press conference with Gen. Samford, July 29, 1952): "No orders have been issued to the Air Defense Command, or by the Air Defense Command, to its fighter units, to fire on unidentified aerial phenomena. The Air Force in compliance with its mission of air defense of the United States must assume the responsibility for investigation of any object or phenomenon in the air over the United States. Fighter units have been instructed to investigate any object observed or established as existing by radar tracks and to intercept any airborne object identified as hostile or showing hostile interest. This should not be interpreted to mean that Air Defense pilots have been instructed to fire haphazardly on anything that flies." [Quote in The UFO Encyclopedia by John Spencer] See: http://www.roswellproof.com/ramey_and_ufos.html There is, in fact, circumstantial evidence from Canadian radio engineer Wilbert's Smith statements, corroborated by Vice Admiral William Knowles, that at least one saucer was fired upon and a piece or pieces shot off during the Washington overflights of late July 1952. Smith claimed that a piece was sent to him (and the metallurgists working with him) for analysis. Knowles confirmed that Smith showed it to him. According to Knowles, "To the best of my recollection the object was shot down by a plane and was seen to fall in the yard of a farmer across the river in Virginia. Upon searching the area several pieces were found, one of which was turned over to Mr. Smith for independent research. On one of his trips down to see me he brought the piece along for inspection." http://www.roswellproof.com/debris8_misc.html The point here is that it is certainly conceivable that if we were shooting at them, they might start shooting back at us. It
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Secrecy News -- 01/14/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:28:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:47:33 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/14/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 5 January 14, 2005 ** INSPECTOR GENERAL RELEASES REVIEW OF SIBEL EDMONDS CASE ** GPO TIGHTENS POLICY ON INFORMATION WITHDRAWAL ** INSIDE STAR GATE ** GOSS: "WE OVERCLASSIFY VERY BADLY" INSPECTOR GENERAL RELEASES REVIEW OF SIBEL EDMONDS CASE The Department of Justice Office of Inspector General today released an unclassified summary of its review of allegations made by FBI contract linguist and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. With some qualification, the review found merit to her charges. While some of her complaints about misconduct in the FBI Translation Unit could not be substantiated, the IG report said, "we believe that many of her allegations were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services." See "A Review of the FBI's Actions in Connection With Allegations Raised By Contract Linguist Sibel Edmonds," Unclassified Summary, January 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/sedmonds.html The Justice Department blocked a lawsuit brought by Ms. Edmonds by invoking the "state secrets" privilege (SN, 05/18/04). In a pending appeal supported by the ACLU and other groups, Ms. Edmonds is challenging that use of the privilege. See her web site here: http://www.justacitizen.com/ GPO TIGHTENS POLICY ON INFORMATION WITHDRAWAL The Superintendent of Documents has issued a revised policy governing the withdrawal of information from Government Printing Office information dissemination programs. The policy defines a series of formal procedures that an agency must follow, making the removal of information from the public domain a rather burdensome process, as one would hope. See "Withdrawal of Federal Information Products from Information Dissemination Collection and Distribution Programs," Superintendent of Documents Policy Statement No. 72, 1/10/05 (thanks to MJR): http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/sod72.pdf INSIDE STAR GATE The pursuit of "remote viewing" or clairvoyance as a tool for intelligence collection, often regarded as a minor embarrassment in the modern history of U.S. intelligence, is the subject of a new memoir by one of the participants in the effort. The author, Paul H. Smith, is a retired Army intelligence officer and practitioner of remote viewing. He does not propose a theory, physical or metaphysical, to explain how the technique might work. But he insists that it does. Most if not all studies by non-believers appear to have found little substance to it. Smith provides a fairly readable account of the development of the initiative, known as Star Gate and other code names, and its sponsorship as an unacknowledged "black" program by the Army Intelligence and Security Command and the Defense Intelligence Agency through its termination by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1995. "Reading the Enemy's Mind: Inside Star Gate: America's Psychic Espionage Program" by Paul H. Smith, January 2005, is available here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312875150/002-5469307- 1289640 A summary account of Star Gate may be found here: http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/stargate.htm GOSS: "WE OVERCLASSIFY VERY BADLY" Director of Central Intelligence Porter J. Goss has the distinction of having been both an outspoken critic of excessive secrecy in government -- and a leading perpetrator of such secrecy. It was an error to refer to him in the previous issue of Secrecy News as simply an "advocate" of declassifying the intelligence budget total. Though he did endorse regular declassification of the annual intelligence appropriation and the annual budget request as a member of the 1996 Aspin-Brown Commission, he also voted against such declassification in 1997. And at his confirmation hearing last year, he said his "preference" was not to declassify the number. But in 2003, Mr. Goss told the 9-11 Commission that intelligence classification policy was "dysfunctional." "There's a lot of gratuitous classification going on," he said at a May 23, 2003 hearing of the Commission. "We overclassify very badly." See: There has been little visible change in classification policy since that time, particularly at the CIA. In the meantime, however, Mr. Goss has ceased to be an external overseer of intelligence classification policy and has become the senior figure responsible for that policy, and its excesses. Today, one would have to say: "He overclassifies very badly." Or perhaps the CIA would put it this way: "We overclassify very well." _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense - Koch From: Joachim Koch <koch.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:06:49 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:50:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense - Koch >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:05:32 -0700 >Subject: Problems In Extraterrestrial Communication >Leading the way with this nonsense is none other than >Richard C. Hoagland. He is the guy who has been touting >the idea that the "Face on Mars" is not just a big hill - >which is what it really is - but is instead a giant >statue surrounded by pyramids, a city, a fortress, etc. >You can imagine what I think of these claims, and if you >can't, I will gently remind you that the name of this >website is Bad Astronomy. Dear Terry, Reading emails to this List like yours makes me always wonder how naive one can remain by will in the presence of the ongoing activities of the ruling powers to hide the truth - which in fact is out there - and these powers know about it. Has one of the serious ufo researchers ever has expected to receive real data of the Cydonia region by the ruling powers? Do you remember the moment that was broadcast of the "official" research team (?) while the first pictures came in of the 'Face'? If I remember it correctly, they wore all caps (why that?) and they were shouting and shaking hands while the pictures of the 'Face' came in. Why did they do this? Who where they? Why were the so happy? By they way, is it know who was there in these moments? Was this the 'Scientific Staff'? Are you in the position to tell us that, beside the official revealed space missions, there was no other one, for example, towards the Planet Mars in order to alter certain surface structures? Are you not aware of the difficulties NASA had with the cameras on board of the probes? Hoagland reported that they refused to mount a movable camera to the probe. So to research a certain region on the surface of Mars (Cydonia)they claimed that they have to change the flight path of the probe in order to change the angle of the movable camera, if the would attached one to the probe. Are you aware of the Mission Reports of the two Russian 'Phobos' Missions? Have you ever had contact to the pioneers of American Remote Viewing about Mars? What do you think about the term 'Debunking'? Many greetings from Germany, Joachim Koch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 CI: Itemized 'Debunking' Tactics From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:47:59 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:28:10 -0500 Subject: CI: Itemized 'Debunking' Tactics Hi Everybody, Sorry that Cydonia updates have been relatively few and far-between lately. I've been busy with a multitude of projects, online and off, and plan on revising the Cydonian Imperative's "editorial" agenda in the near future. In the meantime, here's a list of all-too-common Face on Mars "debunking" tactics. Those of you who follow the Cydonia inquiry in the mainstream press will probably recognize at least a few of them. This piece is available on my all-purpose daily blog, Posthuman Blues, as well as the Cydonian Imperative blog: http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com http://cydonianimperative.blogspot.com Older material is archived here: http://www.mactonnies.com/cydonia.html In other news, I'll be in Sedona, AZ on Friday to deliver a presentation on Cydonia and planetary SETI. If you're in the area I'd love to see you. If you haven't read "After the Martian Apocalypse," my book on the Mars artifact controversy, I predict you'll enjoy it. It's widely available in bookstores as well as through Amazon.com. Ad astra, Mac Tonnies ---- I've prepared some itemized tips to help pseudoskeptics "debunk" the Face on Mars; I couldn't help but notice that this has become quite the fashion lately and, as always, I'm here to help. 1.) Always use the word "conspiracy" when referring to the Face, as if it's axiomatic that those interested in the feature's origin are drooling paranoids convinced of some kind of NASA cover-up. 2.) Never refer to any scientific, peer-reviewed studies suggesting that the Face might be something other than a natural formation. Tabloid newspapers and goofy New Age websites, however, are fair game. If space permits, quote them at length. 3.) Be sure to construct your argument so that there's no room for healthy suspension of premature conclusions. Write as if anyone interested in artifacts on Mars is a "true believer." No exceptions. 4.) Relentlessly brandish Richard Hoagland's most idiotic claims, taking pains to foster the notion that Hoagland somehow speaks on behalf of everyone interested in planetary SETI. 5.) Include unspecific, utterly irrelevant references to spoon- bending, crop circles, alien abduction, poltergeists, cattle mutilations, you-name-it. This helps to "set the tone." 6.) Be careful to make it seem as if the argument for artificiality on Mars hinges solely on the Face. If you must refer to related surface anomalies, be as unspecific as possible. 7.) If you use pictures, keep them small and difficult to decipher. Or follow the "Skeptical Inquirer's" lead and subject images to arbitrary Photoshop filtering. You know, for "effect." If at all possible, use outdated, incorrectly enhanced imagery. 8.) Tell your audience that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Don't elaborate. Don't discuss what, exactly, this maxim might entail when examined epistemologically. 9.) Employ mantric references to the "Man in the Moon," eggplants that resemble human heads, nachos graced with religious icons, the "Old Man in the Mountain," etc. 10.) Don't forget to include an obligatory quote by someone affiliated with NASA saying how cool it would be if the Face et al were indisputably artificial and how he/she is heart-broken that, regrettably, they're just rocks. 11.) Ignore the rather obvious point that candidate extraterrestrial archaeological ruins (thought by some to date back hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of years) will inevitably exhibit severe erosion, making snap judgment based on remote sensing effectively impossible. 12.) Quip that satellite imagery has yet to reveal such things as "suburbs," "strip-malls" and "lawn furniture." This serves as surprisingly heavy ammunition. 13.) Make at least one reference to the defunct "X-Files" television series. That's just to get you started. Send no money; I'm providing
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 03:18:36 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:29:49 -0500 Subject: UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page Ha! UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page! http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html Don't know if this story got through yesterday when I sent it but I also sent it to Matt Drudge and sure enough it's on his front page! I never thought I'ld see the day but it looks like things are turning around. Last year was a big kick for Ufology but this year let's tear the roof off the sucker.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 05:18:18 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:31:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Hatch >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >Okay, I've been reading the battle here about the "Flatwoods Monster" case. <snip> >Perhaps we need to whip up a site with a 'tools for the >UFologist' thingie with links and tips. Hi Terry: You might check out Terry Groff's UFO Tools pages for starters: http://terrygroff.com/ufotools/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 08:38:38 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:34:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:51:57 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:29:56 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:02:44 -0600 >>>Subject: The Secret CIA UFO Files ><snip> >The article was laughable, and the SR-71 explanation for more >that of .005 percent of all straight-line sightings, absurd. The >dipsy-doodle maneuver had me on the edge of my seat. Some of us >call that a dive and a pullup-the latter being advisable if you >want to make that all-important landing later on. One can >imagine this maneuver causing wonder among the witnesses, their >hands clamped firmly over their ears, while trying not to be >deafened by the scream of the SR-71's jets. > >To explain a hover in a SR-71 is as nonsensical as explaining >how a forklift-or the proverbial grand piano -can hover. To >claim that the SR-71 was some highly maneuverable UFO is beyond >the stretch of one's imagination. >The SR-71 was a dash aircraft, capable of Mach 3 to 3.5 at >80,000 feet. Its Pratt & Whitney J-58 engine provided low thrust >[about 20%] until Mach 3 where the jet's intake suction effect >kicked in providing 54 percent of the power and the bleed air >from it's trailing mulitble-flow nacelles nozzles provided >another 28 percent. You weren't going to dogfight with this >airplane. You didn't have to, you just outran your enemy - if >there was one. >Since various records were set over the continental United >States, at 80,000 feet it's safe to assume that some of the >reported mystery explosions during that time came from these >dashes, probably much subdued by the - 71's altitude of 80+ >grand and the rarefied air. On the subject of a ludicrous mainstream, where Popular Mechanics loosely describes the impossible flightpaths of silent UFOs to the classified hijinx of SR-71s! This is another demonstration and an excellent answer to the recent rehash of shopworn ufological debunkeries from P.M. - that the mainstream may actually has the factual verity of a bag of hammered dog dirt. Don't these people know how transparent their duplicity is?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:36:15 +0100 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:37:14 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Bourdais >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:09:59 -0600 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:26:39 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files ><snip> >>Bruce Maccabee shot that stuff to pieces years ago: >>http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html >>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/nov/m09-009.shtml >>I have no idea why Popular Mechanics would want to drag it all >>out again now. >No idea? How about because they can and because it works. Tell a lie often and loudly enough in a mainstream four color rag and it will _become_ the truth as if by magic. Who owns CSICOPathic PopMech _really_, I wonder..... Alfred, That's very well put. It is an old, fundamental truth. In France, there is a saying, pronounced at the time of the revolution, I believe, by the marquis de Sade: "Slander, slander, something will remain of it!" ("Calomniez, calomniez, il en restera toujours quelque chose!"). For Roswell, keep repeating that Major Marcel was an idiot who mistook balsa wood struts for debris from a flying saucer, and managed to convince Colonel Blanchard (a "loose cannon"), who, in turn, proudly announced the discovery to the world (and became later, nevertheless, a four star general). Don't you believe it? And the idiots who saw flying saucers in 1947 actually saw secret planes, such as the U2, first flown in 1955 - or maybe man made flying saucers, as some suggest!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:44:10 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:38:20 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Groff >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:02:30 -0000 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >>Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:08 EST ><snip> >>There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space >>scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it >>that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. >>The Mars meridian, i.e. the line of zero longitude, runs through >a crater named Airy (after George Biddell Airy, Astronomer Royal >1835-81). I don't know who first designated this landmark as the >Mars meridian, but Airy is situated about 5.2 degrees south of >the equator. >Olympus Mons is at 18.4 N, 133.1 W. >All longitudes on Mars are measured 0 to 360 westward, so there >is no eastward longitude. Hi Greg, Larry and I were both curious why they picked crater Airy-0 to mark the Martian Prime Meridian so I emailed the International Astronomical Union (IAU) and asked them.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:39:45 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Groff >From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:09:57 EST >Subject: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >Isaac Koi was amused by a post of mine that appeared here. I'm >genuinely pleased to have given him a smile (and have told him >so privately). >But let's try to get something straight..... >UFO study is not an attraction for the X, Y, or even Z >generations. (That's my experience with younger folks.) >Aaron Sakulich actually reflects the general sentiment about >UFOs (and related phenomena) by those who haven't lived through >the ups-and-downs of "flying saucer" history. >Some excoriate Sakulich because he assails their sacred cow: >UFOlogy. But he's not the problem. It's the fossilized mind-set >of some who have made UFOs their "raison d'etre" for being. Hi Rich, Actually I excoriate Sakulich because he tries to pass himself off as a skeptic when he is actually an uninformed pelicanist. A true skeptic will attempt to weigh evidence. He only spouts opinions and portrays them as truth. Since he has made certain claims, (ie. crop circles are all hoaxes, UFOs are either hoaxes or misidentifications), the burden of proving his statements
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:39:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:42:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? - >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:59:41 -0500 >Subject: Re: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:02:56 -0500 >>Subject: Mexican Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? >>INEXPLICATA >>The Journal of Hispanic Ufology >>January 11, 2005 >>Source: El Imparcial >>Date: 01-08-05, 20:27 hrs >>Mexico: Hill Vanishes After UFO Event? >>Change noted yesterday described as "strange" >>Scientists startled by peculiar phenomenon involving coastal hill. >>by Luis Gonzalez >>HERMOSILLO, Sonora(PH) -- More than half of a hill located on >>the Hermosillo coast apparently "vanished". The event was >>classified by Sonoran scientists as "strange and surprising" >The pictures looked to me like a mountain top mirage that >dissipated over the time of the photos. No solid part of the >mountain actually disappeared. Folks; There's a together young woman on my AlienViewGroup List who is in contact with some engineers who are working that area and she reports the following (Used with permission): ----- Alfred There are a few guys that I work with in Hermosillo as we speak. I have forwarded this email to one of the guys asking for comments. I will let you know if any additional information arrives. Hope ----- Alfred, The below is what my co-worker replied when I forwarded him the email regarding the vanishing hill. He's been in Hermosillo for months now. (He is being serious then a little funny as he is an engineer, and we all know how "those" people think...lol). Hope His reply: First, enough Mexicans could definitely achieve that feat. Secondly, there seems to be good enough conspiracies down here, already. Like just yesterday on the way to lunch we discussed this one area we pass. There is a tiny lake, that we have never seen get very high, even in some of the very bad rain showers here. Yet there is a dam and dry aqua-duct that runs from it. At the base of this is a water park which is also always dry, this is located in between two mountains. There is also always a lot of strange radio interference here. We figure that the UFO lands into the water park and then they drain the lake into it to cover it up until they finish moving it into a storage area at the base or below the nearest mountain. Also of note are two very large storage tanks located on the side of the mountain with no access roads or other nearby buildings. ----- Lehmberg: Wow... I guess there's nothing to the disappearance as far as he's concerned, huh? ----- Alfred, ...Guess not. I will ask another guy who is down there, also. However, I will have to telephone him. We have a 15 or so people down there in Hermosillo, and several locals (whom are working as contractors for us). I'll try to get "another" scoop. Hope ----- Alfred, Re: the Hermosillo incident - here is an additional response that I received from another one of my co-workers: Hope, I did not hear about this but then... I forget who was with me but late one night leaving the plant here we saw a bright green light shoot across the sky. I was too big too fast and went too far to be fireworks and there was no sound associated with it so it was not an airplane/jet or anything I've ever heard of. So as far fetched as that article may sound who knows... If you can send me more detail on where the article came from I could ask some of the locals about it. Billy ----- Lehmberg: Thanks Hope -- this is valuable stuff... The upshot seems to be that you know two people in the area of this alleged occurrence... and they are completely unaware of it ever happening. Is that accurate? This is beginning to sound like a garden variety foo-fah... eh? Can I pass this info on to others outside AVG? alienview.nul -:|:- ----- Alfred, Seems that way. And, sure, pass it along. My co-workers have been there working for months now. They will continue to be there for awhile. As for the last comment by Billy, let me just tell you he is an ex-military guy...I think he was in the Marines, and I am pretty sure he can identify a plane. Also, keep in mind that these guys are electrical engineers, so they are rather smart, if you know what I mean. Hope ----- Lehmberg: For my money, it seems a whole hill just disappearing in the local area would be an event commonly known by all the residents. The lack of even a rumor from persons living in that area would seem to indicate that the event never happened at all. Additionally, Hope, the young woman who performed this small research, has shown a degree of with-it-ness and consistency in the year she has regularly contributed to the AlienViewGroup
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:53:21 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:45:57 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:42:23 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? <snip> >Maybe man never did walk on the Moon (a belief held by some, >not me), but I was surprised to read in many different >newspapers and magazines this past Christmas a new "truth" - >Jesus never existed as a historical person! Just like the those >who proclaim that UFOs are not real, those that participated in >this disinformation campaign also ignored actual physical >evidence and findings that prove otherwise! By promoting these >false stories about such an important person (and ET figure) for >all of mankind, they blind us to the real truth about our >special place in the universe as children of a supreme creator - >Our Father in Heaven! Hi Nick, I don't want to get into an arguement re the beliefs of religion buffs but your surprise about claims that there is no proof of some prophet called Jesus other than that of the bible, hangs a bit strange on someone who works in the world of science and "proof". Like Moses and a host of other characters from the bible, there is no daily evidence of Jesus's existence. If there is I'd be glad to learn of it, off-List, however because this is
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: A Very Deep Breath! - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:28:41 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:47:35 -0500 Subject: Re: A Very Deep Breath! - Boone >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:50:18 -0700 >Subject: A Very Deep Breath! >Never did I go beyond dreams in my youth that one day humanity >would send people to the moon, probes that explore Mars and >Titan... even our first probes now leaving our solar system into >deep space. >It is the beginning of small steps into considering ourselves >children of the Universe. >Wake up America! We need to build colonies on the moon and then >head for Mars. Machines cannot completely give the human element >of exploration. Wendy, I share your enthusiasm but I'm disappointed in our space and science advances. Not to say they're not brilliant and adventurous, but when I was a kid growing up in the 60's I figured by the year 2000 we'd have flying cars, moving sidewalks, space stations bigger than Manhattan island, flying jet-packs, bubble domed cities, clothes with flaring epaulets and atomic symbol logos on every product. We do have picture phones. Unfortunately there's damning evidence they give us brain tumors. We do have flying cars but we can't get them into the mainstream market because we can't even pilot the regular cars without killing ourselves by the thousands. Not to mention we don't want crackhead gangsters zooming over us or terrorists dropping bombs on the local bingo game. We don't have talking dogs and cats but I'm suspecting they're working on it. With our luck the first words out of a pet translation device will be: " Hey, my butt's not stinky enough! Hurry up! Smell my butt! " Then we'll have to shut off the devices as company would be turned off. No moving sidewalks. That's a big disappointment. We do have a fast developing robotic industry though. So far they can walk, run, dance and make funny faces. I want one that I can reprogram to run amok and terrorize the unsuspecting populace. Medicine is strange. It's like in the old days medicine and doctors cured a fella. Nowadays the more medicines they come up with the more ill people get. Don't even get me started on visits to the hospitals! More folks I know in the past 6 years ended up dead for goin' to the hospital yet my great aunts and uncles who've never seen a doctor and still use root cellars and possum grease tonic are well into their late 90's and still rolling. We do however have these new fangled typewriters with tv sets attached to them so we can spy on each other and say bad things about this or that and hide in anonymity. Best invention since throwin' rocks at something. Our space probes are doing great. Everywhere they go they find more rocks and gases. Land sakes! You'ld figure the Almighty had a thing for rocks and gases seeing as that's all we seem to find. I guess when we settle down and can behave ourselves the powers that be will cut loose with all the new high-falootin' gizmos we've all dreamed about. Yet getting us humans to behave in a civilized manner has been the wrestling match we've waged since first foot hit hard soil. Maybe we're not meant to behave. Maybe the gorilla, known as the most powerful yet gentle of primates was supposed to evolve. Maybe we're the by product of some alien mischief makers who spiked the evolutionary punch for giggles and snots. One day I reckon when we've explored the whole known universe and catalogued the endless realm of rocks and gases, we'll find those responsible for upchucking the genetic pool and give them 'what for' and send them home to their parents for a good switchin'.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 11:47:16 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:51:54 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - King >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia <snip> Hi Larry, Found this site. Sorry I left it out earlier. http://www.esa.int/export/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM0VQV4QWD_2.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Little Green Men? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:08:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:53:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Green Men? - Reynolds This from the Google Scholar search area: Malingering uncommon psychiatric symptoms among defendants charged under California's "three strikes and you're out" law. Jaffe ME, Sharma KK. USC-Institute of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, USC School of Medicine, USA. This paper describes an epidemic of uncommon psychiatric symptoms among nine criminal defendants charged under California's new "Three Strikes and You're Out" law. The defendants were facing a minimum sentence of 25 years to life in prison. The defendants exhibited the following uncommon psychiatric symptoms: coprophagia (eating feces), eating cockroaches and many reported seeing little green men. ----- Now this doesn't explain the origin of the term "Little Green
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:14:47 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:55:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Groff >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Does the List have any statistics or info with >>regard to the appearance of UFOs close or near >>to nuclear reactors? >>If so, would this be for refueling purposes >>(fuel cell recharge) or because portals are created >>in these areas by the reactor activity - if this is >>at all possible? >Francis Ridge and others did a study of possible UFO interest in >nuclear facilities: >http://www.nicap.org/ncp/ncp-ridge1.htm >Personally, I think the connection is tenuous. UFOs are seen in >all sorts of places. >Nobody knows the purposes of UFOs seen near nuclear facilities. >I strongly doubt they have any need for our fuels or energy, >they seem to do just fine with their own resources. >As for 'portals', that smacks of late-nite radio guests, the >kind forever selling dodgy books, CDs and tapes. To me, portals >is a new-age buzzword, a term that sounds impressive to the >pigeons, but with little if any definite meaning. Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a recent paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory Implications For Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference recent Superstring and M-Brane theories which imply that other universes could be co-existing right beside ours. In the paper they say: "Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative possibility."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Isn't It Strange? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:21:10 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:57:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - King >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:30 -0500 >Subject: Isn't It Strange? >Has anyone noticed, really noticed, how cavalier some people >are when it comes to sighting UFOs or investigating them? >A UFO enthusiast here recounted in a recent post that he >couldn't fit in a talk with a member of an Asian parliament who >had seen a UFO because he (the "enthusiast") was pressured for >time and travel. >And then he neglected to look at some photos of UFOs he had >received on that trip from another person - letting a long >period of time go by before checking the pictures out. >Also, stories presented here of people seeing something truly >strange in the sky but going back to bed or leaving the area >before the UFO leaves? >And what about the family who watched a large craft in their >neighbor's yard but didn't call the neighbors or even mention it >to them afterward - the parents having the children hit the sack >- even before the UFO left their neighbor's yard? >Should I go on? >When a remarkable event takes place, normal people will take >hold of it, and not let it go, no matter how tired they become >nor how protracted the event is - that is, normal people. >And what UFO investitigator puts a roll of film or UFO photos in >a drawer, forgetting about them for several weeks or months? And >also neglects to revise his/her travel schedule so he/she can >talk with a credible person about a purported UFO sighting? >It's no wonder that media and others think the UFO community is >nuts. Hi Rich, While I don't subscribe to this hypothesis, in the interest of maintaining the 'strangeness' of UFO sightings, perhaps there is this possibility..... If ET comes to prowl around, and do not wish to be interrupted, but are forced by circumstance to lurk where detection is a possibility, perhaps they use telepathic messages to brush off the curious. I envision the scene in one of the Star Wars flicks, where Obi Wan tells a guard that 'these aren't the droids you are looking for... we should move along', to which the guard responds with rote mimicry, and dismisses them. Or the funky pocket memory eraser from MIB. Both provide a method for explaining why people can have outlandish experiences, and seemingly forget about them... until prompted through subsequent experience, hypnosis, seeing a similar photo later, or the like. One example of this is the photo of the red fireball/lens flare about which Bruce and debated. As a part of my case that the photo was not of ET nature, I noted that there was no mention of the photographer attempting to duplicate the event. I noted that if I saw something as odd as a red glowing fireball in my backyard, I'd be out back every day with my camera, if not setting up a webcam to monitor it 24/7. I mean, obviously Gulf Breeze became a mini-Mecca for folks with cameras based on those early sightings. Area 51, Roswell, these have attracted folks from far and wide on the off-chance of seeing something. Yet, as you say, often when a sighting is made it is soon forgotten, or moved off the front page very quickly. So perhaps there is an ingredient in some cases, whereby the occupants of the sighted craft are able to convince the witness that they had seen nothing unusual, or to push the thought to the bottom of the mental 'priority list'. As I said, I do not subscribe to such a thesis but I am hard- pressed to dismiss it in light of your observations and my own.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:50:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:59:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH> >SOURCE: Space.Com >http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >01-14- 2005 >ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >By Leonard David >Senior Space Writer >Decades ago, it was physicist Enrico Fermi who pondered the >issue of extraterrestrial civilizations with fellow theorists >over lunch, generating the famous quip: "Where are they?" That >question later became central to debates about the cosmological >census count of other star folk and possible extraterrestrial >(ET) visitors from afar. Last night Drudge put a link to Leonard's report on the drudgereport.com wab page which gets millions of hits each day.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:22:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:01:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting <snip> >Perhaps we need to whip up a site with a 'tools for the >Ufologist' thingie with links and tips. >Say, does Mr. Friedman have a special deal to us UFO UpDates >Listers for ordering the book from him? :) Hi Greg and List, An excellent idea, and I have taken the liberty of registering a domain... ufo-tools.net... to begin such a site. If you would all take just a moment and forward me a list of resources you have found of value, I'll categorize them and populate a site we can all bookmark and use. You may contact me privately if you prefer... kyleking.nul My thought is for 3 categories... Hardware, Software, and Information. Greg's computeruser.com would go in Hardware, Skype and ICQ belong in Software, and Brad and Jan's Blue Book project would go under Information, along with Brian Vike's and Peter Davenport's sites. I'll create subcategories under each if required. If everyone contributes a few links, we should have a reasonable and helpful list fairly quickly. I'll take all submissions, work them up over the weekend, and publish the "fetus" as it were, on Monday. Luckily this is a project that wont take much time to get up and running.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:42:52 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:02:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >SOURCE: Space.Com >http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >01-14- 2005 >ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >By Leonard David >Senior Space Writer <snip> >"This potentially changes the relationship of the UFO phenomenon >to science in a significant way. It takes away the =E2=80=98not >invented here' prejudice, pointing out that a =E2=80=98yes' to ET >visitation is exactly what side our current physics and >astrophysics theories would come down on as the most likely >situation," Haisch concluded. Hi Greg, So are we seeing the beginnings of the 'convergence' we have all been advocating? Perhaps there is an issue of timing or perspective. Phones with integrated video have been around since the 60s, and yet they didn't become a market success until they cut the cord, and put the camera on the side of the phone opposite the one holding it. <g> My hope is that the more we make discoveries that reveal how much we are in the dark, the more UFO research and data will come to light, and the more seriously it will be taken.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:57 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >Note what I said here. People keep posting what appear to be >classic fireball meteor reports on this site as if they were >UFOs. I am trying to educate people about fireballs, and at >least to cite evidence that contradicts that explanation. That's >known as science. Unless there is something non-metoric about a >report like this, why post it at all? Dick, You must realise by now that on this List there are many people who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must *always* be maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is either: a) A Government stooge b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or c) Phil Klass
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Little Men In Green? From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:48:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:05:16 -0500 Subject: Little Men In Green? 689. The Fairies William Allingham (1824=961889) UP the airy mountain, Down the rushy glen, We daren=92t go a-hunting
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:08:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:08:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 5:31:40 -1000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:06:32 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>Couple of things. >>The real UFO reports for Sept. 12 are noted in the more than 70 >>newspaper articles referenced in the book and in the referenced >>Blue Book files, though difficult to read in the latter. >>The Harvard Meteor Project shows no fireballs for Sept. 12, >>1952. Sky and Telescope's annual Review of prominent meteors for >>1952 also doesn't list any for Sept. 12, 1952. >>The real UFO reports when plotted on a map as to direction and >>timing and scorching tree tops etc belie the meteor explanation. >>The witnesses in Flatwoods clearly described an object that >>slowly circled over the town before landing. >>The testimony (first heard by Frank) from Colonel Leavitt and >>Lee Stewart clearly forces us to deny the meteor explanation. >>The actions decribed by Frank do seem to show standard military >>tactics on the part of both the military aircraft and the UFOs. >>I do think it is strange that Josh wants hard evidence - >>firsthand eyewitness testimony is better than none - but >>provides no evidence for the meteor. Is there a crater? Are >>their pieces of meteoric wreckage? Was there a sonic boom? How >>about a seismographic record of meteor impact? >I'm not saying I agree with Joe Nickell but you should read his >statements on the meteors in the Skeptical Inquirer >investigation of the "Flatwoods Monster": >http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/i-files.html Thanks, Josh, but of course I had read the piece sometime ago and re-read it. I discussed Nickell's totally inadequate "investigation" in both my Foreword and Epilogue to the book and in the illustrated piece on my website: www.stanfriedman.com Check it out. Paul Kimball didn't mention my Nickell comments though he has read the book. Nickell was in Flatwoods, but didn't talk to any of the witnesses nor visit the actual location of the event . He did talk to a then 95 year old Johnny Lockhard , who went to the wrong location and saw nothing.. some witness. I noted the reasons the meteor explanation didn't stand up. Those who are interested in what really happened in Flatwoods probably should read the book. It was a fascinating event though it took Frank a very long time and an enormous effort to sort out the facts after winning the confidence of those involved. Just for kicks, here is a quote from the foreword: "Richard Hall, a prominent UFO researcher for several decades and author of the seminal "The UFO Evidence" also wrote a detailed paper
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: Hopalong Cassidy and Little Green Men - From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:19:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:14:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Hopalong Cassidy and Little Green Men - The Hopalong cassidy Show of December 20th, 1950 was entitled, Six Little Men Who Were Green, with a synopsis referring to "little green men." Here's the site to check for yourselves:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:25:02 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:17:05 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:25:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:45:26 -0400 >>Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:48:26 EST >>>Subject: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall <snip> >Thank you Paul, for clearing up this shameful exercise, and >enlightening us when the person responsible for hyping the book >could or would not. Kyle: No problem. However, I feel obliged to point out that - Feschino's flights of fancy about air battles aside - there are elements of the book that are interesting, and worth having a look at, particularly the bits that relate to what happened on the ground that evening in Flatwoods. The chapters on the actual interaction with the 'monster' (whatever it may have been) are based on actual interviews with the parties involved; they are fairly well written, and are worth reading. I find it hard to believe that a barn owl could have squirted oil, as Kathleen May claims on p. 29, for example: "I was close enough that it [the monster] squirted oil all over my uniform". Further, what was the National Guard doing out there if there was simply a mundane explanation for the event - account of Colonel Leavitt, pp. 52 - 60? None of this means what happened was extraterrestrial, but the traditional Nickell-onian explanations seem to be as short of the truth as Feschino's aerial battle scenarios are beyond it. I suspect that's what originally attracted Stan Friedman to the story. Like many in the field, Feschino's problems seem to lie in interpretation of data and information, not in the accumulation thereof.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: o Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:18:46 -0500 Subject: Re: o Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:09:57 EST >>Subject: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>Some excoriate Sakulich because he assails their sacred cow: >>Ufology. But he's not the problem. It's the fossilized mind-set >>of some who have made UFOs their "raison d'etre" for being. >Actually I excoriate Sakulich because he tries to pass himself >off as a skeptic when he is actually an uninformed pelicanist. A >true skeptic will attempt to weigh evidence. He only spouts >opinions and portrays them as truth. Since he has made certain >claims, (ie. crop circles are all hoaxes, UFOs are either hoaxes >or misidentifications), the burden of proving his statements >falls on him and he provides little or no evidence at all, only >uninformed conjecture. Terry: I like that Sakulich guy. He has a plethora of writings on lots of things at the triangle.org site. In America, where the First Amendment reigns (usually), people get to say or write almost anything they want to. Sakulich isn't vulgar; he's not unintelligent, and he takes the tack that most people I know take: that UFOs are nothing more than a figment of someone's distorted imagination or a bizarre mis- representation of normal things in the sky (or on the ground). I've seen things, and know they're strange; UFOs or something akin, but I don't get crazy with people such as Sakulich because he would say I'm nutz. I hope he sees something someday that he can't explain and has an epiphany of his own. Now a guy like Phil Klass is a bad guy. He knows better. Aaron Sakulich is a UFO atheist (maybe an agnostic). But he's not a concretized bastard about UFOs (or crop circles). He's a skeptical writer, with panache. You gotta give him that. UFOs exist. Sakulich doesn't think so. He's a tyro when it comes to "flying saucers" and UFOs, the term, eludes him. But he's a good read. It's like dealing with the Death as the Knight does in Bergman's Seventh Seal. Will Sakulich convince intelligent people that no such thing as UFOs exist? Or will he, indirectly, send them out to see for themselves just exactly what the UFO thing is all about?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 15 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:16:02 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:20:39 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:53:21 -0400 >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:42:23 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? Hi, Nick and Don, >>Maybe man never did walk on the Moon (a belief held by some, >>not me), but I was surprised to read in many different >>newspapers and magazines this past Christmas a new "truth" - >>Jesus never existed as a historical person! Just like the those >>who proclaim that UFOs are not real, those that participated in >>this disinformation campaign also ignored actual physical >>evidence and findings that prove otherwise! By promoting these >>false stories about such an important person (and ET figure) for >>all of mankind, they blind us to the real truth about our >>special place in the universe as children of a supreme creator - >>Our Father in Heaven! >I don't want to get into an arguement re the beliefs of religion >buffs but your surprise about claims that there is no proof of >some prophet called Jesus other than that of the bible, hangs a >bit strange on someone who works in the world of science and >"proof". Like Moses and a host of other characters from the >bible, there is no daily evidence of Jesus's existence. If there >is I'd be glad to learn of it, off-List, however because this is >not the place for the discussion of religion or creationism, >etc. I have a longstanding, nonexpert interest in the historical origins of Christianity and a small library of books on the subject. Today there is no mainstream scholar who argues that Jesus did not exist as a historical personality. The view that Jesus is purely mythological has been relegated to the fringes. The debate is not over his ontological status but over the meaning of his ministry, his historical and political context, relationship to Judaic traditions vs. Greek philosophical doctrines (not to mention other family members), and (of course) divinity. The last of these is a matter of faith and thus unprovable, but the rest is the focus of a great deal of scholarly inquiry by Christian and non- Christian historians. Three fairly recent books may be of interest to those who issue to pursue the matter: Philip Jenkins's Hidden Gospels (2001); Bart D. Ehrman's Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (1999); and Robert E. Van Voorst's Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence (2000).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 06:20:48 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:27:29 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:02:30 -0000 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >>Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia <snip> >>There's no Greenwich Observatory on Mars. What do space >>scientists use for a benchmark? Don't tell me Cydonia. Is it >>that huge volcano Olympus Mons or something else?. >The Mars meridian, i.e. the line of zero longitude, runs >through a crater named Airy (after George Biddell Airy, >Astronomer Royal 1835-81). I don't know who first designated >this landmark as the Mars meridian, but Airy is situated about >5.2 degrees south of the equator. >Olympus Mons is at 18.4 N, 133.1 W. >All longitudes on Mars are measured 0 to 360 westward, so there >is no eastward longitude. Hi CDA: I could have Googled all that up, but preferred to toss the question out on the list. Thanks for your input! 0-360 westward only! I make maps, but I didn't know that. It makes sense really. In my UFO maps, I use positive numbers for west longitude, negative for east. The math is greatly simplified that way although most others use the opposite signs ( positive = east ). This, like my assumption of signed longitude itself displays a certain Earthbound chauvinism on my part, one I readily admit. Now we have 2 or maybe 3 places named for the benchmark (prime meridian) of Mars. I presume they line up OK. My next questions are: Why this or that particular spot, instead of something more obvious and compelling? (No, I don't mean the nose of Cydonia.) Just who is it that decides all this? What is their authority to do so? Did they get a special commission or mandate from the UN? From the Dalai Lama or the Pope? I hope this doesn't sound too silly [burp!]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:29:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:35:56 -0500 Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files - Lehmberg >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:36:15 +0100 >Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:09:59 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:26:39 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: The Secret CIA UFO Files >><snip> >>>Bruce Maccabee shot that stuff to pieces years ago: >>>http://brumac.8k.com/cia_explaination.html >>>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/nov/m09-009.shtml >>>I have no idea why Popular Mechanics would want to drag it all >>>out again now. >>No idea? How about because they can and because it works. Tell >a lie often and loudly enough in a mainstream four color rag and >it will _become_ the truth as if by magic. Who owns CSICOPathic >PopMech _really_, I wonder..... >Alfred, >That's very well put. It is an old, fundamental truth. >In France, there is a saying, pronounced at the time of the >revolution, I believe, by the marquis de Sade: >"Slander, slander, something will remain of it!" ("Calomniez, >calomniez, il en restera toujours quelque chose!"). >For Roswell, keep repeating that Major Marcel was an idiot who >mistook balsa wood struts for debris from a flying saucer, and >managed to convince Colonel Blanchard (a "loose cannon"), who, >in turn, proudly announced the discovery to the world (and >became later, nevertheless, a four star general). Don't you >believe it? And the idiots who saw flying saucers in 1947 >actually saw secret planes, such as the U2, first flown in 1955 >- or maybe man made flying saucers, as some suggest! >But the reverse is also true. Let's keep opposing all that. Thanks for the note, Sir. And let me take this opportunity to say I _love_ the French and Frenchmen, a people among few in the western hemisphere with the stone to hold a mirror to the United States in these trying times. It's not _your_ fault we don't
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:35:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:23:36 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - King >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:09:57 EST >>Subject: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>Isaac Koi was amused by a post of mine that appeared here. I'm >>genuinely pleased to have given him a smile (and have told him >>so privately). >>But let's try to get something straight..... >>UFO study is not an attraction for the X, Y, or even Z >>generations. (That's my experience with younger folks.) >>Aaron Sakulich actually reflects the general sentiment about >>UFOs (and related phenomena) by those who haven't lived through >>the ups-and-downs of "flying saucer" history. >>Some excoriate Sakulich because he assails their sacred cow: >>Ufology. But he's not the problem. It's the fossilized mind-set >>of some who have made UFOs their "raison d'etre" for being. >Actually I excoriate Sakulich because he tries to pass himself >off as a skeptic when he is actually an uninformed pelicanist. A >true skeptic will attempt to weigh evidence. He only spouts >opinions and portrays them as truth. Since he has made certain >claims, (ie. crop circles are all hoaxes, UFOs are either hoaxes >or misidentifications), the burden of proving his statements >falls on him and he provides little or no evidence at all, only >uninformed conjecture. Hi Terry and Rich, I couldn't agree more, nor could I have stated it any more succinctly. Kudos!! By the way, I have referenced your excellent UFO Tools site on my similar fledgling effort at ufo-tools.net Should be working this afternoon. In the meantime, you can reach it at: http://kyleking.com/ufo-tools
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:41:41 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:25:12 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Lehmberg >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>Note what I said here. People keep posting what appear to be >>classic fireball meteor reports on this site as if they were >>UFOs. I am trying to educate people about fireballs, and at >>least to cite evidence that contradicts that explanation. That's >>known as science. Unless there is something non-metoric about a >>report like this, why post it at all? >Dick, >You must realise by now that on this List there are many people >who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any >circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must *always* be >maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is >either: >a) A Government stooge >b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or >c) Phil Klass It's no stretch to consider you one such, Sir, as a denialist is only interested in that 'investigation', of any flavor, coming down one way. A forgone conclusion is worse than no conclusion at all. Outside of that, I thought your comment was tediously
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:48:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:28:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Reynolds >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:21:10 -0600 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:30 -0500 >>Subject: Isn't It Strange? >>And what UFO investitigator puts a roll of film or UFO photos in >>a drawer, forgetting about them for several weeks or months? And >>also neglects to revise his/her travel schedule so he/she can >>talk with a credible person about a purported UFO sighting? >>It's no wonder that media and others think the UFO community is >>nuts. >While I don't subscribe to this hypothesis, in the interest of >maintaining the 'strangeness' of UFO sightings, perhaps there is >this possibility... >If ET comes to prowl around, and do not wish to be interrupted, >but are forced by circumstance to lurk where detection is a >possibility, perhaps they use telepathic messages to brush off >the curious. <snip> Kyle: To use a current cliche - you think outside the box, so I accept your interpretation as possible (possible!). But as a graduate student in psychology, I can think of a slew of other possible explanations for someone forgetting they have a roll of film or photos of UFOs which they eschew for a long period of time, maybe forever. And I can come up with a number of psychiatric reasons for those people who go to bed while a strange object is hovering over their house. But in all those kinds of cases, the people are acting abnormally; without human sense. They exhibit behavior which is bizarre and sometimes psychotic, certainly neurotic. Do the UFO occupants instill these neuroses in them? Perhaps. Or do these people typify the apathy which takes hold of many who find the meaning of their lives in mundane things: sleep, drink, hunting, sports, sex, whatever? And spectacular events don't enthuse them? If a UFO investigator doesn't re-arrange his trip to talk with a bonafide observer of a UFO event, and exacerbates that gaffe by putting a roll of film with UFO photos in a drawer for several weeks, I'm anxious to know what the heck is going on with that person. And when a family doesn't call their neighbor about a craft hovering over their backyard - and the account used the word "neighbor" - I want to know what the heck is wrong with that family. Sure the "little green men" made them do it, which is a possibility [sic]. But, come on. That kind of behavior is quirky to say the least, and I'd like to know why it is so prevalent in the story-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: What Was In The Sky? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:49:33 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:31:36 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - King >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>Note what I said here. People keep posting what appear to be >>classic fireball meteor reports on this site as if they were >>UFOs. I am trying to educate people about fireballs, and at >>least to cite evidence that contradicts that explanation. That's >>known as science. Unless there is something non-metoric about a >>report like this, why post it at all? >You must realise by now that on this List there are many people >who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any >circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must _always_ be >maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is >either: >a) A Government stooge >b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or >c) Phil Klass Hi John, Aha!! A trick question. C could as easily be 'All of the above'
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:50:52 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:33:31 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Hall >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>Note what I said here. People keep posting what appear to be >>classic fireball meteor reports on this site as if they were >>UFOs. I am trying to educate people about fireballs, and at >>least to cite evidence that contradicts that explanation. That's >>known as science. Unless there is something non-metoric about a >>report like this, why post it at all? >You must realise by now that on this List there are many people >who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any >circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must _always_ be >maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is >either: >a) A Government stooge >b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or >c) Phil Klass John, Many people? Maybe. Some people? Yes. I have no poll data that would refine the estimate any further. I think the people who try to convert every single reported, seemingly unusual aerial phenomenon into a `UFO' only contaminate the database that might (I think it does) point to a real, unique, unexplained phenomenon. It is methodologically abominable. Anyone who has systematically studied alleged UFO reports over the years (as many commentators on this list apparently have not) knows full well that stringent screening criteria are needed before declaring a case to be a UFO, `unexplained' despite thorough investigation ideally. Instead, the attitude seems to exist that a sighting that has all the characteristics of a fireball meteor(for example) is a `UFO' until proved otherwise. - Dick
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Little Men In Green? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:54:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:35:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - King >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:48:25 -0500 >Subject: Little Men In Green? >689. The Fairies >William Allingham (1824--1889) >UP the airy mountain, > Down the rushy glen, >We daren=92t go a-hunting > For fear of little men; >Wee folk, good folk, > Trooping all together; >Green jacket, red cap, > And white owl=92s feather Hi Rich, How odd that two separate threads on today's List... one on the origin of longitude on Mars and the other on the origin of the term "little green men" would meet in this old verse. Airy-0, the location of 0 degrees Longitude on Mars, and little men in green... fairies. Coincidence, or synchronicity? <chuckle>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: A Very Deep Breath! - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:06:19 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:37:23 -0500 Subject: Re: A Very Deep Breath! - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:28:41 EST >Subject: Re: A Very Deep Breath! >>From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:50:18 -0700 >>Subject: A Very Deep Breath! >>Never did I go beyond dreams in my youth that one day humanity >>would send people to the moon, probes that explore Mars and >>Titan... even our first probes now leaving our solar system into >>deep space. >>It is the beginning of small steps into considering ourselves >>children of the Universe. >>Wake up America! We need to build colonies on the moon and then >>head for Mars. Machines cannot completely give the human element >>of exploration. >I share your enthusiasm but I'm disappointed in our space and >science advances. <snip> >We don't have talking dogs and cats but I'm suspecting they're >working on it. With our luck the first words out of a pet >translation device will be: >" Hey, my butt's not stinky enough! Hurry up! Smell my butt! " >Then we'll have to shut off the devices as company would be >turned off. Hi Greg, Actually, there's this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1480010.stm >No moving sidewalks. That's a big disappointment. We do have a >fast developing robotic industry though. So far they can walk, >run, dance and make funny faces. I want one that I can reprogram >to run amok and terrorize the unsuspecting populace. There's a few examples of moving sidewalks. We have one at Intercontinental Airport here in Houston. And more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_sidewalk <snip> >One day I reckon when we've explored the whole known universe >and catalogued the endless realm of rocks and gases, we'll find >those responsible for upchucking the genetic pool and give them >'what for' and send them home to their parents for a good >switchin'. I'm not sure we'll ever explore the whole known universe. As soon as we think we know some of the universe, we annoyingly keep finding more universe to know. I'm ready with my 'what- fors' for those responsible, at any rate.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:11:58 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:39:36 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - Hall >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:25:02 EST >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:25:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall <snip> >>Thank you Paul, for clearing up this shameful exercise, and >>enlightening us when the person responsible for hyping the book >>could or would not. >Kyle: >No problem. However, I feel obliged to point out that - >Feschino's flights of fancy about air battles aside - there are >elements of the book that are interesting, and worth having a >look at, particularly the bits that relate to what happened on >the ground that evening in Flatwoods. This is a very fair and reasonable commentary, though I disagree on some particulars. The average citizen picking up this book is not going to be able to distinguish between the factual and the fantasy elements. >The chapters on the actual interaction with the 'monster' >(whatever it may have been) are based on actual interviews with >the parties involved; they are fairly well written, and are >worth reading. I would think that the case for a real 'monster' or anomalous event would be better and more objectively presented by someone other than the present author; perhaps Paul Kimball. >I find it hard to believe that a barn owl could have squirted >oil, as Kathleen May claims on p. 29, for example: "I was close >enough that it [the monster] squirted oil all over my uniform". >Further, what was the National Guard doing out there if there >was simply a mundane explanation for the event - account of >Colonel Leavitt, pp. 52 - 60? The National Guard would be there because of the prominence of the reported event as a possible military situation before anyone knew whether or not it was 'mundane.' >None of this means what happened was extraterrestrial, but the >traditional Nickell-onian explanations seem to be as short of >the truth as Feschino's aerial battle scenarios are beyond it. I >suspect that's what originally attracted Stan Friedman to the >story. How about Nickell-odian? >Like many in the field, Feschino's problems seem to lie in >interpretation of data and information, not in the accumulation >thereof. Yes, a pertinent observation. The tendency of 'ufooligists' to go far beyond their areas of knowledge or expertise is epidemic. We don't need an artist masquerading as a scientific or logical analyst. His wild-eyed speculations override anything worthwhile that he might be reporting. >Best regards, >Paul Kimball >www.redstarfilm.com Paul, If you think Flatwoods was something important and relevant to UFOs (which I don't), please apply your documentary
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:14:06 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:49:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Sparks >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:09:29 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:16:49 EST >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> My meteor data has gotten lost here, data which supports Dick Hall's point about the Gamma Aquarids. The radiant of that fireball-producing shower (most meteor showers do not produce bright fireballs) was low on the Eastern horizon in the evening of Sept 12, 1952, on the East Coast. >There is, in fact, circumstantial evidence from Canadian radio >engineer Wilbert's Smith statements, corroborated by Vice >Admiral William Knowles, that at least one saucer was fired upon >and a piece or pieces shot off during the Washington overflights >of late July 1952. Smith claimed that a piece was sent to him >(and the metallurgists working with him) for analysis. Knowles >confirmed that Smith showed it to him. >According to Knowles, "To the best of my recollection the object >was shot down by a plane and was seen to fall in the yard of a >farmer across the river in Virginia. Upon searching the area >several pieces were found, one of which was turned over to Mr. >Smith for independent research. On one of his trips down to see >me he brought the piece along for inspection." http://www.roswellproof.com/debris8_misc.html No one saw any object falling from the sky, no Navy jet interceptor has ever been identified and no intercept mission has ever been discovered. The object was found by CIA's USNR Lt Cdr Alvin E. Moore's neighbor hear his estate in the Herndon,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:18:56 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:53:01 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Groff >From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse <snip> >Terry: >I like that Sakulich guy. He has a plethora of writings on lots >of things at the triangle.org site. >In America, where the First Amendment reigns (usually), people >get to say or write almost anything they want to. >Sakulich isn't vulgar; he's not unintelligent, and he takes the >tack that most people I know take: that UFOs are nothing more >than a figment of someone's distorted imagination or a bizarre >mis- representation of normal things in the sky (or on the >ground). He has called people like me stupid and has urges us to get vasectomies so we can't propogate merely because we like and agree with Michael Moore. http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2004/05/28/EdOp/Michael.Moores.Works.A.Travesty. To.Documentaries-683519.shtml
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Malin On Mars Face In '95 - Koch From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:55:45 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Malin On Mars Face In '95 - Koch >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates-Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:46:07 -0700 >Subject: Malin On Mars Face In '95 >Source: http://barsoom.msss.com/education/facepage/face_discussion.html >09-16-95 >OBSERVATIONS OF THE "FACE ON MARS" AND SIMILAR FEATURES >BY THE MARS GLOBAL >SURVEYOR ORBITER CAMERA >Michael C. Malin >Principal Investigator >Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera >BOTTOM LINE >It is planned to try to acquire images of the "Face" and >other features in Cydonia. Contrary to what some people >have said and written, this has been the plan for some >time. This plan was not established in response to >outside pressure; rather, there are >two reasons for acquiring these images. First, given the >interest in the general public about the "Face," it is >appropriate to acquire such images for public relations >purposes, especially since the public interest has been >generated in no small way by the people who claim there >is a conspiracy at NASA to withhold information from the >public. Second, there are valid scientific reasons to >examine landforms in the area (which, after all, is why >the Viking spacecraft were >photographing the area in the first place). Dear Terry Thank you for providing this information. I remember that I have read it long time ago. It is what I was referring to in my previous email. Since a long time, I am a member of this List and whenever I open my email program, I sense a mixture of pride (because of being a member of this List), humbleness (because of being accepted by this List with all its far more experienced members) and exitement (because of all the new things I am learning each time I read all your contributions, dear List Members). On the other hand, the level of frustration about how the ruling powers are playing with us since decades has reached a degree that is has become unbearable. And this List with all its threads and interesting and profound contributions is a mirror how far this management to derise the simple and poor will of 'We the People' to learn more about the truth has advanced. Sooo... Planet Mars In the light of what happened to all the Mars missions and the data which where released to the public in the past and all the speculations and all our unanswered questions I hereby encourage, urge and invite you here in this List to take action for - our own Cydonia Mars Mission (CMM). Don't you think that the time has come to step forward to no longer waiting for what 'they' think what is worthwile being explored in OUR planetary system by probes 'they' have designed, which 'they' have under control and whose data 'they' can hide or alter according to 'their' codex or commands? We could - we can - do our own Cydonia Mars Mission with our own probes and cameras and control centers if we want it! What do we need? A Spiritual And Rational Concept This is easy to achieve because of the man/woman power within this list. We need a structure, a board, a committee and teams. Everything and everyone is available on this List. My serious proposal: Errol should act as the Director of the Cydonia Mars Mission. Money So let's raise funds. If we prepare a serious concept of the mission and provide it with all the good names here in this list it would cause an uproar among the public: look, all these well known names are taking action for a good and challenging goal: an independent research of the Cydonia region on Mars with their own probe. If each of us gives his name for the Mission and in his area starts to raise public interest for this honorable project - I think this could easily and in a short time reach millions of interested individuals all over the world. To make it more interesting for donators, we should create a non-profit organisation to make it tax-deductible. This would easily increase the amount of incoming money. The Space Craft Orbiter (Cydonia Mars Mission Orbiter (CMMO)), Lander (Cydonia Mars Mission Lander (CMML) and the Rover (Upuaut III). We all have connections to Universities. There are many interested and inventive students, assistants and professors who would be challenged to be part of our Cydonia Mars Mission. We only have to ask them to build the crafts. And the Rover? I have here in Germany a scientist who was banned by ruling powers in Egypt from his most exiting research in the 'Chufu'-Pyramid. His name is Dr. Gantenbrink. I would ask him to invent, construct and realize a Cydonia Mars Mission Rover which with the name 'Upuaut' should continue the success Gantenbrink had with his first mission here on Earth. A Rocket With the money we could rent a rocket of the European Space Agency (or space on board on of their rockets). Russia would be also a good possibility. A flight control center. We could participate in a professional project or could rent facilities of the existing Space Enterprises. Everything is possible. If we want to know the truth - we can reach it. Imagine, how a press release would look like with all the signatures of all the world wide known UFO researchers, what an amount of media interest we could raise if we in various and numerous press releases and lectures and interviews would explain our goals which in fact are challenging for the whole mankind. Sit back, close your eyes and try to see what implications are behind my proposal: Our own rover with our own camera right in Cydonia...! And the data only transmitted into our own computers. And the control over the publication of data in our hands only... We have the spirit and the abilities to realize this. Let's do it! Let's start it. We Are the People. And maybe this is just 'someone' out there is waiting for: that we start to take responsibility for ourselves as cosmic beings. Let's do it. It is achievable. Kind regards, Joachim Koch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:18:21 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:01:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:22:39 -0600 >Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >>Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting ><snip> >>Perhaps we need to whip up a site with a 'tools for the >>Ufologist' thingie with links and tips. >>Say, does Mr. Friedman have a special deal to us UFO UpDates >>Listers for ordering the book from him? :) I will announce tonight on Errol's radio program that those wanting a copy of the Hard Cover book "Braxton County Monster: Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed" by Frank Feschino, Jr.(350 pages, 70 illustrations) can have a copy from me for $33. US including shipping from me at POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958 or for $40. Canadian from me at 79 Pembroke Crescent, Fredericton, NB E3B 2V1. I will sign the foreword and Epilogue which I wrote.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Little Green Men? - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 20:36:32 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:02:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Green Men? - Boone >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:08:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: Little Green Men? >This from the Google Scholar search area: >Malingering uncommon psychiatric symptoms among defendants >charged under California's "three strikes and you're out" law. >Jaffe ME, Sharma KK. >USC-Institute of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, USC >School of Medicine, USA. >This paper describes an epidemic of uncommon psychiatric >symptoms among nine criminal defendants charged under >California's new "Three Strikes and You're Out" law. The >defendants were facing a minimum sentence of 25 years to life in >prison. The defendants exhibited the following uncommon >psychiatric symptoms: coprophagia (eating feces), eating >cockroaches and many reported seeing little green men. Okay, so it's gross-out time thanks to some headshrinkers. Any primatologist would recognize these so-called bizarre symptoms. They're called typical behavior of primates. Although seeing little green men kind of throws a curve ball but I've not had the chance to chat with any chimps and gorillas in several years. Hey, anybody know how Washoe is doing nowadays? Maybe we could
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:14:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:06:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >Okay, I've been reading the battle here about the "Flatwoods >Monster" case. >All arguing aside, the first thing I'm going to do is actually >order and read the book. I recall the story vaguely from some
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:41:53 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:11:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Goldstein >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:08:52 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 5:31:40 -1000 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:06:32 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>Couple of things. >>>The real UFO reports for Sept. 12 are noted in the more than 70 >>>newspaper articles referenced in the book and in the referenced >>>Blue Book files, though difficult to read in the latter. ><snip> >>I'm not saying I agree with Joe Nickell but you should read his >>statements on the meteors in the Skeptical Inquirer >>investigation of the "Flatwoods Monster": >>http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/i-files.html >Thanks, Josh, but of course I had read the piece sometime ago >and re-read it. I discussed Nickell's totally inadequate >"investigation" in both my Foreword and Epilogue to the book and >in the illustrated piece on my website: >www.stanfriedman.com >Check it out. Paul Kimball didn't mention my Nickell comments >though he has read the book. >Nickell was in Flatwoods, but didn't talk to any of the >witnesses nor visit the actual location of the event . He did >talk to a then 95 year old Johnny Lockhard , who went to the >wrong location and saw nothing.. some witness. I noted the >reasons the meteor explanation didn't stand up. >Those who are interested in what really happened in Flatwoods >probably should read the book. It was a fascinating event though >it took Frank a very long time and an enormous effort to sort >out the facts after winning the confidence of those involved. >Just for kicks, here is a quote from the foreword: "Richard >Hall, a prominent UFO researcher for several decades and author >of the seminal "The UFO Evidence" also wrote a detailed paper >on radar observations of UFOs in 1952." Paul didn't mention that >either. Hello Stan, When I first posted I stated that I had not read Frank Feschino's book but I questioned his claim in the publisher's blurb that a USAF - UFO dogfight had taken place and that some of our planes were downed. I had never heard of such incidents and I did not see any such claims in the Bluebook reports. Paul Kimball provided us with Frank's own words from the book. I had read your website and I read Joe Nickell's investigation. This case has been in my gray basket and I was not interested in proving or disproving it here on UFO UpDates. For me to come to any conclusion regarding this case I would have to examine the initial notes and reports of Donald Keyhoe, Ivan Sanderson, and Gray Barker. I would have to read the Flatwoods monster book and examine Frank's sources. I would have to fly to Flatwoods and reinterview the former National Guard officer and all the witnesses. If it is claimed that the Air Force kept any debris or any other evidence I would have to search military archives and file a FOIA request. Since I have not read the book I have no idea what Frank Feschino has done. At this time the case is in my gray basket. I appreciate the effort you have put into this case but unless I perform my own investigation I am out of the loop of discussing it. I am trained as a detective and I have the ability of performing a complete professional forensic investigation but I have no desire to do all the work that would be required. However, if someone would want to grease my palm with a lot of money I may
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:02:22 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:16:27 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:34:53 -0600 >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:06:12 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? <snip> >>I presume you know, as I do, ET to be a real lifeform somewhat >>disconcerted by some Human belief that they are satanic. Also, >>from the ET standpoint, I suppose that some ET belief would >>place us in a similar position based upon their observation of >>Humans activities and thoughts. Is this why ET remains unproven? >An adroit and practiced explication, Mr. Stevenson. But, an >effort to draw responses from it with regard to answering my >points is a little like stacking smoke or squeezing air. *A great deal of knowledge can be derived from the latter course of action/s especialy in regard to the lack of tenacity of the medium. >What about a flawed comparison between beings required to follow >rules and a conjectured being required to follow no rules at >all? Laws are Laws whether they be an ass or not. Therefore the matter of Earth Law is applicable rather than Religious Law. >What about religious persons (Christian specifically, in this >case only) in no way accepting as their deity that which they >identity as the enemy of their deity? Many Religions eccept this character of their God or god. >Is it regressives or progressives, do you think, who provide for >aggregate human advancement? Should this question not be about Humane advancement? >What do _you_ do to keep from being inappropriately cynical, >presuming, of course, that you are actually bereft of same? Anger helps to increase blood flow thus increasing intelligence due to greater availability of brain cell sustinence. This is an inbuilt natural response for self preservation with other functionality de-selected since the Stone age of Man and Women who also had Gods of the Air - see * above. Hope that helps to clarify our points but doesn't answer the question contained in the post subject line? So we can presume that 'ET will bring the Pork Chops' when some Humans do not kill them because they are thought of as demons by them. Then we can all sit down to a good lunch, although I prefer Lamb. "You can't make a Silk purse out of a Sows ear!" or is that possible these
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Stevenson From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:21:00 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:20:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Stevenson >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:05 +0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >>appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >>If so, would this be for refueling purposes(fuel cell recharge) >>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>activity - if this is at all possible? >You seem to be going from no data that you are aware of, to far- >out theories if there is data. In fact, some very good data >exists. See: >www.nicap.org >for Nuclear Connection Project. But 'refueling' and >'portals'... >where do they come from besides pure, ungrounded >speculation? >- Dick >"First, study the data!" - A Nony Mouse Hi Maurice and Dick An Internet search on Wilhelm Reich may reveal some additional information in regard to UFOs attracted to nuclear and other places of high DOR which are said to be dispelled by ORR Cannon etc. Although the practice is somewhat frowned upon by many
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 16 Apology To Dick Hall From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:25:17 -0500 Subject: Apology To Dick Hall Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my overly harsh comments. The material he took umbrage at was indeed in the book, even if not on the cover. As I noted in the Foreword, I have considered Dick an eminent UFO researcher and have appreciated the great contribution to Ufology he has made over a very long period of time. I indeed was too zealous about what I consider to be a very intriguing case... especially what happened in Flatwoods. Concerning Kyle King's remark about money, I can unequivocally state that I was paid no fee for my appearance at the 50th anniversary of the Flatwoods case and received no fee for providing the Foreword and Epilogue to the book. I am still very impressed by all the research Frank has done about the case. Certainly there is far more to the story than Joe Nickell's "barnyard owl". Frank may well have gone too far with his elaboration of the aircraft activities, but this should not detract from his massive and clearly defendable research
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:36:51 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:43:30 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:35:31 -0600 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >Hi Terry ...... >I couldn't agree more, nor could I have stated it any more >succinctly. Kudos!! >By the way, I have referenced your excellent UFO Tools site on >my similar fledgling effort at ufo-tools.net Should be working >this afternoon. In the meantime, you can reach it at: >http://kyleking.com/ufo-tools >Kyle
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Little Men In Green? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - Reynolds >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:54:00 -0600 >Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:48:25 -0500 >>Subject: Little Men In Green? >>689. The Fairies >>William Allingham (1824--1889) >>UP the airy mountain, >> Down the rushy glen, >>We daren=92t go a-hunting >> For fear of little men; >>Wee folk, good folk, >> Trooping all together; >>Green jacket, red cap, >> And white owl=92s feather >How odd that two separate threads on today's List... one on the >origin of longitude on Mars and the other on the origin of the >term "little green men" would meet in this old verse. >Airy-0, the location of 0 degrees Longitude on Mars, and little >men in green... fairies. >Coincidence, or synchronicity? <chuckle>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:05:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:47:08 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:18:56 -0600 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>Terry: >>I like that Sakulich guy. He has a plethora of writings on lots >>of things at the triangle.org site. >>In America, where the First Amendment reigns (usually), people >>get to say or write almost anything they want to. >>Sakulich isn't vulgar; he's not unintelligent, and he takes the >>tack that most people I know take: that UFOs are nothing more >>than a figment of someone's distorted imagination or a bizarre >>mis- representation of normal things in the sky (or on the >>ground). >He has called people like me stupid and has urges us to get >vasectomies so we can't propogate merely because we like and >agree with Michael Moore. >http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2004/05/28/EdOp/Michael.Moores.Works.A.Travesty .To.Documentaries-683519.shtml >I find nothing humorous or likeble about it at all. I do >consider it vulgar. Terry: Chacun son gout (everyone to his own taste). I'm thinking Sakulich didn't have you in mind specifically when he said people who like Micahel Moore are stupid.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:33:36 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:48:48 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:02:22 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:34:53 -0600 >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:06:12 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? ><snip> >>>I presume you know, as I do, ET to be a real lifeform somewhat >>>disconcerted by some Human belief that they are satanic. Also, >>>from the ET standpoint, I suppose that some ET belief would >>>place us in a similar position based upon their observation of >>>Humans activities and thoughts. Is this why ET remains unproven? >>An adroit and practiced explication, Mr. Stevenson. But, an >>effort to draw responses from it with regard to answering my >>points is a little like stacking smoke or squeezing air. >*A great deal of knowledge can be derived from the latter course >of action/s especialy in regard to the lack of tenacity of the >medium. Ok - but if you were here for dinner? I'd have to drown you in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:41:24 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:50:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Boone >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:18:21 -0400 >Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:22:39 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >>>Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >><snip> >>>Perhaps we need to whip up a site with a 'tools for the >>>Ufologist' thingie with links and tips. >>>Say, does Mr. Friedman have a special deal to us UFO UpDates >>>Listers for ordering the book from him? :) >I will announce tonight on Errol's radio program that those >wanting a copy of the Hard Cover book "Braxton County Monster: >Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed" by Frank Feschino, >Jr.(350 pages, 70 illustrations) can have a copy from me for >$33. US including shipping from me at POB 958, Houlton, ME >04730-0958 or for $40. Canadian from me at 79 Pembroke Crescent, >Fredericton, NB E3B 2V1. I will sign the foreword and Epilogue >which I wrote. >For another 10$ I will include "Crash at Corona" and my CD ROM >"UFOs:The Real Story" >Stan Friedman Oh I'm a happy camper! Even though I've already got "Corona" that you autographed at the 50th Anniversary of the Roswell Incident (which I have on videotape to boot! You asked me if I was related to Pat Boone), I'll fork over for another copy of "Corona"! Do we just say "Errol Sent Us" when we order? "Crash At Corona" hit me in two ways. It's more of a detective/police drama with tons of suspense, surprises and illumination. Real edge of your seat stuff. I let a skeptic pal of mine read it and he bolted up from his seat and blurted out, " What the hell is wrong with the press if they can't do a job reporting like this? " Next payday you've got my dough!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:45:12 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:52:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting - Boone >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:14:11 -0500 >Subject: Re: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:06:21 EST >>Subject: Flatwoods Monster And Ufology Budgeting >>Okay, I've been reading the battle here about the "Flatwoods >>Monster" case. >>All arguing aside, the first thing I'm going to do is actually >>order and read the book. I recall the story vaguely from some >>references years ago but didn't know it had become such an event >>of note. >If you find the case interesting after reading about it, look >into Mothman. There may be connections to the Flatwood monster, >it might interest you too. Aaron, that Mothman and Jersey Devil legends I ain't a-gonna go into. I grew up round them parts and they ain't the only critters of legend hauntin' folks up there. Now I know where Washington Irving got some of his ideas! There ain't no place scarier than NY and Jersey at night with no lights. If you want to test your mettle, roll on up to Sleepy Hollow during the Halloween festivals and drive out into the woods there at night. It'll scare the stripes off a polecat.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:50:34 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:53:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Boone >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >overly harsh comments. I don't mean to butt in here but if there were air battles at that time and casualties occured there's an old trick I've used for years to find out. I'll send the info to you Mr. Friedman so you can peruse it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:59:34 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:54:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >overly harsh comments. >The material he took umbrage at was indeed in the book, even if >not on the cover. As I noted in the Foreword, I have considered >Dick an eminent UFO researcher and have appreciated the great >contribution to Ufology he has made over a very long period of >time. I indeed was too zealous about what I consider to be a >very intriguing case... especially what happened in Flatwoods. Stan, Apology accepted. Now I hope we can move on constructively. We do, indeed, share a lot of views and opinions in common. And you certainly are an articulate spokesman for the 'cause'. >Concerning Kyle King's remark about money, I can unequivocally >state that I was paid no fee for my appearance at the 50th >anniversary of the Flatwoods case and received no fee for >providing the Foreword and Epilogue to the book. >I am still very impressed by all the research Frank has done >about the case. Certainly there is far more to the story than >Joe Nickell's "barnyard owl". Frank may well have gone too far >with his elaboration of the aircraft activities, but this should >not detract from his massive and clearly defendable research >that has indeed been well documented re the local events on >Sept. 12, 1952. I will reserve judgment about the adequacy of Feschino's research until I read the book (a friend is sending me a copy), but I can't help being skeptical in advance given his apparent tendencies toward extreme speculation. I will read the book carefully and submit a review here.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:17:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:06:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Reynolds >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >overly harsh comments. Stan Freidman: As always, the gentleman. Richard Hall is a Big Boy now, so I bet he didn't see your remarks as overly harsh, nor did many of the rest of us. The colloquy was spicy and interesting; something we do not often get in UFO circles.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:22:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:10:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:41:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:08:52 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >>Those who are interested in what really happened in Flatwoods >>probably should read the book. It was a fascinating event though >>it took Frank a very long time and an enormous effort to sort >>out the facts after winning the confidence of those involved. >>Just for kicks, here is a quote from the foreword: "Richard >>Hall, a prominent UFO researcher for several decades and author >>of the seminal "The UFO Evidence" also wrote a detailed paper >>on radar observations of UFOs in 1952." Paul didn't mention that >>either. >Hello Stan, >When I first posted I stated that I had not read Frank >Feschino's book but I questioned his claim in the publisher's >blurb that a USAF - UFO dogfight had taken place and that some >of our planes were downed. I had never heard of such incidents >and I did not see any such claims in the Bluebook reports. Paul >Kimball provided us with Frank's own words from the book. I had >read your website and I read Joe Nickell's investigation. This >case has been in my gray basket and I was not interested in >proving or disproving it here on UFO UpDates. >For me to come to any conclusion regarding this case I would >have to examine the initial notes and reports of Donald Keyhoe, >Ivan Sanderson, and Gray Barker. I would have to read the >Flatwoods monster book and examine Frank's sources. I would have >to fly to Flatwoods and reinterview the former National Guard >officer and all the witnesses. If it is claimed that the Air >Force kept any debris or any other evidence I would have to >search military archives and file a FOIA request. >Since I have not read the book I have no idea what Frank >Feschino has done. At this time the case is in my gray basket. I >appreciate the effort you have put into this case but unless I >perform my own investigation I am out of the loop of discussing >it. >I am trained as a detective and I have the ability of performing >a complete professional forensic investigation but I have no >desire to do all the work that would be required. However, if >someone would want to grease my palm with a lot of money I may >consider it <g>. Frank's book does include much of the info about the work of Keyhoe, Sanderson, Barker et al. Colonel Leavitt and A. Lee Stewart can't be reinterviewed, unless you have very special connections, because they are dead. Fortunately, after much effort, Frank was able to video tape them, before they died. I think the chnaces are zero of an FOIA request bringing anything solid about shots taken or given by UFOs. Remember... "the most classified subject in the USA" W.B. Smith was told. We can't get Roswell inside data either. Incidentally I learned the other day that the Truman Archives still include about 45,000 pages of classified material - as compared with 300,000 from the Eisenhower. Much presidential stuff does not even make it to Presidential Archives, but is passed on to the next administration. What I would very much like to see is other newspaper articles similar to the one provided by Dave Rudiak from the July 29, 1952, Seattle Post Intelligencer, page 1, saying the "Air Force
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings 01-16-05 From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:50:36 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:15:42 -0500 Subject: HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings 01-16-05 HBCC UFO Recently Reported Sightings Release Date: January 16 , 2005 Toa Alta, Puerto Rico In 1942 A Spacecraft Glowing Red From The Heat Date: July 1942 Time: Evening Number of witnesses: 3+ Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Disk/Mushroom. Full Description of event/sighting: My grandparents and my mother lived on a farm in Toa Alta, Puerto Rico just outside from the town. My grandparents were the caretakers of a farm that belong to a well to family of a famous literature/poet writer; which his books are still being used in the schools today. On or around July 1942 at approximately 10:00 p.m., my grandparents and mother heard an explosion and felt a sudden rise of heat. They ran to the window and saw what they thought was a meteorite, but what they really saw was a spacecraft glowing red from the heat at a distance at approx. 700 feet away, on a open field from the house They were afraid, and waited until the morning. When they went out to see the object there was white smoke coming out from the middle of it. The object was approx. 16 feet diameter the color was light gray metal with a marble like texture of design. In the center of the object was hallow were the white smoke was coming out. It seemed that something was missing from the center. My grand parents did not know what to do, so they waited until their friend who was an American Catholic Priest, who would visit them almost everyday around the same time approx. 11:00 a.m. or sometimes he would stay overnight. The priest told my grandparents not to go outside that he would take care of everything. He returned and waited with my grandparents, after a while the military came with trucks, they were from Fort Buchanan military base. The priest went outside and after sometime he returned with several military men at the door, the military men went to the kitchen spoke with my grandparents and the priest. Frankly I really don't know what was said at that point my mother was told to leave the room. After the military left with the object. the priest, my grandparents and my mother were talking about the incident. The American priest told them that they should never speak to anyone about what happened. That they should stay indoors at night because he did not know what happened to the occupants of the spacecraft. He said that they were very lucky that the object did not hit the house, they should thank god. He also said that the object was not from this world. The object did leave a black marking on the field of grass. Update: Some of my family members visited Toa Alta, PR recently and stated that the writer has past away, the farm is residential community, and that my grandmother stated before she pasted away that the spacecraft had being(s) not from earth. Thank you to the person for the interesting report. --------------------------- Over Long Island Sound Huge Bright Silent Light Splits In Two Date: August 1982 Time: Nighttime Number of witnesses: 2 Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Huge bright light. Full Description of event/sighting: I lived on the water and was sitting on the beach late one summer night with a friend. At some point, we became aware of a gigantic light (with no sound, only silence and the waves) filling our little bay, as if an incredibly huge spotlight (or gigantic ball of light) was shining on it - I say "became aware" because oddly enough, our awareness of this light - something so extraordinary as to warrant a seriously excited response I should think - elicited in us at first no response or comment, as if we saw this kind of thing everyday, and it was almost in passing that I finally asked my friend if she noticed this huge light shining in front of us. She said she did and we simply continued to sit there and stare at it. This huge light should have lit up the pier and the rocks on either side of it, but really didn't - it just lit up the water as if the light were somehow localized or focused on the water. I think I recall mentioning this odd "light behavior" to my friend while sitting on the beach and incredibly enough, I think she may have said something like, "It must be the sun" - which was a ridiculous thing to say when it's nighttime, and this out- of-character (in that it was absurd) comment from a girl who was an impressive student, high achiever and is now a doctor. I don't know if the light was there when we walked onto the beach and sat down (I don't remember doing that either), and have no memory of seeing the light emerge from the darkness - it was simply "there" by the time we "noticed" it and I thought to ask my friend if she too was seeing it. So after a time - it may have been 5 minutes or an hour or 3 hours (I just don't have any idea of the time), I said that it was odd that no one else was out on the beach looking at this (it was impossible not to see it if you were awake - it was that huge and the houses on the beach were right next to each other, with 10 houses directly facing the bay and the light). I decided to get up and go wake up my brother to show him, as the light was constant and didn't seem to be going anywhere, and it seemed to have been there a long time. So I walked up the beach, walked up the beach stairs to the top of our seawall and just as I reached the top, the light rose up, traveled to directly over my head, stayed there for a beat and then split into two smaller lights which then shot off in opposite directions. And that was that. It was gone. I walked back to the beach and my friend still sitting there and attempted to talk with her about it and she turned to me and said "I don't ever want to talk about this again." And she walked home down the beach. And we never mentioned it again. In fact, I never told anyone until about 10 years later. Not because I was worried about what anyone would think, but because it didn't (oddly enough again) seem "newsworthy" or "interesting," which, of course, it absolutely was. The following morning, no one else in our neighborhood mentioned it, either. Perhaps they didn't see it, or like me, didn't find it "newsworthy." Another odd thing is that my friend and I were only 14. Neither of us was allowed out on the beach (or anywhere) alone at midnight (my best guess as to time, as no one was awake in the neighborhood), and my friend's parents were especially strict. Her summer curfew was about 9:00 p.m. back then. I find it odd that we were even out there at that time, that neither of us were "missed" while we were out, that no one came looking for us, that neither of us got caught or got in trouble for being out of the house so late at night, and that no one else in our crowded little area saw this. From the light, to our reaction, to even our presence there on the beach, the whole thing could not be stranger. About 10 years later, I was riding in the car with my fiance, and was reading a book about UFO sightings. A description of a sighting in the book was almost identical to the experience I'd had and I read it to him and told him that I had witnessed something similar. We had been together for 7 years at that point and when he asked me why I'd never mentioned it before, I was truly puzzled and wondered myself why I hadn't mentioned it to him or anyone before that. In fact, I've considered filling out your form many times before and haven't, because I didn't think it was really of interest, but now that I have finally written it down, it does seem quite a strange and maybe even amazing event. Thank you to the witness for the report. --------------------------- South East Bloomington, Indiana Bright Orange Ball Hovering Date: Late 1990's Time: Between 11:00 p.m. -1:00 a.m. It was cloudy and cold out on this day. this footage was taken by John Tosti with his friend around the late 90's, John and his friend were traveling over to another friends house to have a get together with friends. As they topped a hill on Dillman Rd. John looked over the top of Bloomington and noticed a bright orange ball hovering near a cell/radio tower, they elected to turn around and give chase to get a better look at what this might be, as they got to a road named Moffet Ln. They noticed it hovering stationary, beside the tower, John jumped out of the car with his camera and tried to catch it on video as best as he could, but by the time he exited the vehicle with his video camera the object vanished from sight. The driver was watching the object as it disappeared and kept looking in the direction of the object, as john got back in the car the same object re-appeared higher in the sky and further east from its last position. The object started to move NE of where they were sitting, they gave chase to see if they could get closer to get a better look at the object as they pulled on to Snoddy Rd. the object was stationary directly in front of them, John turned his camera on and started to film the object, the driver started to flash his headlights at the object to see if he could get a response. As John was taping he seen an object with a strange shape, he really didn=92t know what he was witnessing, as he kept filming he noticed the object changing shape, John kept filming to document it, after a few minutes the object started to dim and move NE from Snoddy Rd. When John and his friend arrived at the get together, John hooked the camera up to the VCR to review what they had captured earlier. As him and his friends watched the footage they were amazed of what John and his friend had witnessed. A few weeks later a UFO researcher analyzed the video footage and came to the conclusion that this was not just one object but two objects, joining together to become one object (or docking). After close review of the video tape John agreed with the UFO researcher on his findings. This is the first time John has ever filmed two objects docking together in mid-air. There is more footage of this object that can soon be viewed on our site. "All Video is copyright to John Tosti" =A9 AAARC 2005 Thank you to John for sending along the photos, footage and report. Video clip South East Bloomington, Indiana Bright Orange Ball Hovering - Footage 2.55 mbs To view video clip: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2281 ------------------------ Frisco, Texas Dark Triangular Object ? Date: June 30, 2004 Time: 8:30 p.m. Number of objects: 1 Shape of objects: Triangle Full Description of event/sighting: I was taking pictures of a striking Texas sunset. I only saw the object after I transferred the photos to my computer. I took several shots just a few seconds apart. One shot does show a dark object below the clouds. When enlarged, it appears to reveal a triangle-shape. I neither saw nor heard anything odd at the time the photo was taken. I'd like to send it to you. The complete frame is 5 megapixels and shows a dark object in the sky below the orange clouds. Since I didn't see the object at the time, I didn't zoom directly on it, but I think it still is worth a look. I will also send two cropped versions that focus on the object. Thank you to the witness for the report and photo. To view photo: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2283 ---------------------------- Over Long Island Sound Numerous Objects Traveling In A Triangular Formation Date: August 2004 Time: 10:00 p.m. - 12:00 a.m. - 3 consecutive nights. Number of witnesses: 4 Number of objects: 40 +/- Shape of objects: Triangular Full Description of event/sighting: I am a business consultant with an MBA and at the time was on vacation, renting a beach house on the Connecticut shore. My 14-yr-old nephew and my 18 yr-old babysitter saw UFOs first. I arrived home with my 22 yr- old niece at about 10:30 pm on 8/25 and they were excited, having seen about 10 "sparkling" objects flying in the sky above Long Island Sound. As I spoke with them about it, several more appeared in the sky, and by midnight we had seen approximately 40 of them. They would fly from over the ocean to inland, all in the same direction, approx. SE to NE. Several of these objects would fly in triangle or trapezoid patterns and looked to deliberately fly close and then closely cross each other's flight paths. At times, they looked like they might crash. Two flew very low over our heads and we could see the bottom of one. It looked like a triangle with a light at each point. When the objects flew over, a low flying helicopter appeared and at first appeared to follow one of the objects, but then continued straight on its path, away from the object. During this 2 hour period, there was a very low "planet" sitting over the water. It was motionless, large, shiny and sparkled red, blue, green and white. At 11:50, it stopped sparkling, dimmed and flew off in the direction of the other objects. None of these objects made any noise - all were completely silent. The next night we sat out at 10:15 pm to see if we'd see them again and did. We saw approximately 30 "sparklers" flying in the same direction as the previous night and behaving the same way as had the others. We also sat out last night and saw approximately 10 "sparklers" - same MO. I contacted an Air Force office in New Haven (a number I received from 411) and they said there were no bases in CT, Montauk was not being used (closest military base to us, although it was closed decades ago), they were not flying over Madison, Ct and the objects "were not ours." We will sit out tonight to see if any more of these strange objects appear. Post Script: Also: On the second night, a large bright white object appeared low in the sky over the water, arced directly down towards the water and disappeared. Thank you to the witness for his report. ----------------------- Trail B.C. Oval Surrounded by Rings Of Light Date: December 22, 2004 Time: Approx: 7:25 p.m. The couple drove from Vancouver to Trail for Christmas with the fellows parents. My girlfriend and I were standing outside of my parents home close to the well's pump house which is approx 50 feet from the front side of their house. We was waiting for my parents to return from picking up my other family member for the holidays. As I turned around and faced the house, I noticed a brilliant light coming from south but traveling low and slow. As we watched an object flew over the home and over top of us. We saw two rings of light rotating around an oval shaped craft. The first ring was made up of a blue and yellow, and the second ring - white and reds. The light the object gave off lit up the entire area and it eventually descended out of sight behind the tree line and disappeared. We never saw it again. The craft traveled to slow for it to be an airplane and we heard no sound at all. The object may have been approx: 40-50 feet in diameter and it's altitude was approx: 300 above ground. My girlfriend was squishing my arm as she was so frightened. Needless to say, we had quite the story to tell my parents when they arrived back home. Thank you to the witness for his report. -------------------- Milam County Texas Another Witness To The Brilliant Object Filmed Date: January 6, 2005 Time: Approx: 6:30 p.m. Message: Hello, I was happy to see the photos on the Kaufman County, Texas Brilliant Object Caught On Film. Dated Jan. 6, 2005 at about 6:30 p.m. I am not sure where Kaufman County is but I'm in Milam County and I saw the same object. I was on my way to the barn to feed the cows and watched it as it moved across the sky towards in a southwestern direction. I didn't think it was going all that fast either. Was beginning to wonder if I was the only one to see it. Now that I have proof I can show my husband what I was watching. Additional information: Some details of the Jan 6, 2005 Kaufman County sighting here in Milam County. The object I watched was high-up but you could tell it was a good size rounded type of object with a silver shine. Behind it was a long blue-white flame and a trail of smoke behind the flame. I've seen comets and didn't strike me as a comet. More like a metal ball but sort of oblong like an egg. It just sort of appeared in the sky out of nowhere. I didn't see it coming towards me as one would a plane. So I guess the point of entry was slightly above the back of the pasture. Which makes Dallas area about right. That is about all I can add to my sighting. Last year my husband and I watched three silver round objects traveling the same path. That is one of the reasons I always tend to look to the sky on my way to the barn. The silver objects were in broad daylight. I'm not sure of the date on that sighting. One thing for sure I will be keeping up with your website. Keep up the great work. Thank you to the witness for the report. The sighting this witness is referring to can be found at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.phpname=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2272 -------------------------- Oregon City, Oregon Witness Confirms Sighting Date: January 11, 2005 Time: Approximately 7:35 a.m. Just wanted to confirm the Portland Oregon area sighting of 1/11/05. Was driving to work and just before reaching the parking lot I noticed the two objects in the eastern sky. My location was in Oregon City, Oregon, about where the Clackamas and Willamete rivers converge. Time was approximately 7:35 AM. Pulled into the parking lot and observed what ever it was for a few minutes. Two things that I observed that are slightly different than the photos you have. From where we (my fiancee was with me and saw it too) were watching, the higher of the 2 objects was more of a streak, not as round as the lower object. The lower object was moving slowly in a S/SE direction, while the upper object didn't appear to be moving at all. To us the objects seemed the wrong color and too large to be reflections of sunlight off of an aircraft. Hope this helps. Thank you to the witness for his report. The witness was confirming the Portland, Oregon sighting which can be read= here: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2277 --------------------------- Easterly, Texas Light passes Overhead Of Vehicle Date: January 13, 2005 Time: 7:00 -7:30 p.m. ? Message: I was traveling with my mom home one night not too long ago, on January 13, 2005; around 7-7:30 p.m. (not exactly sure). I was feeling an awkward feeling, and noticed a strange light in the sky. I watched it for a long time, and it never seemed to move. I pointed it out to my mom, and she said it probably was a plane or something. But when a plane flew right by it, I knew at that moment it wasn't a plane. We drove home, and the light seemed to get closer. In Texas, you see a lot of weird things, but around my area there are people who swear they see UFOs. Well, when the "light" got closer, I noticed it was not a plane, and pointed this out to my mom. She then told me it must be a helicopter. (She doesn't try to think of paranormal objects or happenings) I rolled down the window and watched it pass over us. It made no noise (we are in the country, so it would have been easy to hear it if it were a helicopter), and had flashing lights on the bottom of it. I don't know of any helicopter that has flashing lights all around the bottom, and this was close to the ground, so I know I would've heard something if it were a helicopter. I believe in paranormal, and sense that there is something out there, whether they are smarter than us or the government's doing, but there was something not right about that object. I know it wasn't anything that was normal. I could sense it. Additional Information: No problem. It was a clear night. When I first spotted it, I don't exactly remember where it was at, but I think it was south of where we were at (at that point), later on it passed almost directly over us, a little to the right, headed north, I believe. It wasn't moving very fast at all. In fact, when I first saw it, I didn't think it was moving at all. I know that when it passed us, that it was moving rather slowly. The feeling that I got from it was that it was looking for something. But hey, I have no clue what it even was, so how can I say what it was doing? I didn't notice anything unusual, maybe it did move to the side a little, but other than that, it just kept going. I really couldn't tell the shape, but if I had to pick one, it probably would be like an oval shape... not exactly round, but not exactly rectangle either... it was round I know for sure. When I first spotted it, it was pretty high, and as we got closer, I noticed it got closer to the ground. I couldn't see much of it, though, because it was already dark outside. No, there's no airport around where we live, they're all in the big cities. I don't know of any military places around here. I didn't see any aircraft around it, except the plane that passed by it when I first spotted it. The lights around it were a blue color. No clue on the altitude, though... it was close, but not too close. I saw the whole thing for maybe five minutes, if even that. Thank you to the witness for the report. Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 2189 email: hbccufo.nul Website: http://www.hbccufo.org HBCC UFO RESEARCH Newsletter At:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:19:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:18:40 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia - Hatch >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 11:47:16 -0600 >Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:34:59 -0800 >>Subject: Re: New Mars Image Of Canyon Near Cydonia ><snip> >Hi Larry, >Found this site. Sorry I left it out earlier. >http://www.esa.int/export/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM0VQV4QWD_2.html >Hope it helps. >Kyle Hi Kyle: Yes! Terry also sent me that URL. It answers my first question pretty much. It looks like 'Airy- 0' (within the larger crater Airy) was an arbitrary choice for zero longitude. That done, and with no real competition, it becomes a convention. I would have picked something more striking or notable.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:29:58 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:20:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:14:47 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>Nobody knows the purposes of UFOs seen near nuclear facilities. >>I strongly doubt they have any need for our fuels or energy, >>they seem to do just fine with their own resources. >>As for 'portals', that smacks of late-nite radio guests, the >>kind forever selling dodgy books, CDs and tapes. To me, portals >>is a new-age buzzword, a term that sounds impressive to the >>pigeons, but with little if any definite meaning. >Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a >recent paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce >Maccabee and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory >Implications For Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference >recent Superstring and M-Brane theories which imply that other >universes could be co-existing right beside ours. >In the paper they say: >"Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of >the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring >theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of >light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe >at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative >possibility." Ah, yes. Points well taken. However, in a universe where everything is moving with respect to everything else, I have high doubts about UFO 'portals' lingering in Bonnybridge Scotland say, or Lake Wewewawa, Wisconsin (which I just invented). I'd call it more new-age than Fortean. The forteans were literate at least, not as inclined to take their brains out and play with them.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: A Very Deep Breath! - Scheldroup From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:45:03 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:23:02 -0500 Subject: Re: A Very Deep Breath! - Scheldroup >From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:50:18 -0700 >Subject: A Very Deep Breath! >Never did I go beyond dreams in my youth that one day humanity >would send people to the moon, probes that explore Mars and >Titan... even our first probes now leaving our solar system into >deep space. >It is the beginning of small steps into considering ourselves >children of the Universe. >Wake up America! We need to build colonies on the moon and then >head for Mars. Machines cannot completely give the human element >of exploration. No More Frontiers From: The Great American Band-Wagon, A Study of Exaggerations by Charles Merz New York: Literary Guild, 1928. "This is a good life we lead. It has plenty of bath-tubs, open forums, good roads, laundries, high schools, and department stores, but by comparison with its own romantic past it is admittedly short on sheer adventure. There are no trails uncharted, no corners of the country unexplored, no valleys to be linked with highways. We have all that is best and biggest in grand opera, rapid transit, hospitals, wheat fields, skyscrapers, and extension courses, but this is not the country it used to be - not when all of us talk the same language, read the same news, and laugh at the same jokes in the same syndicated cartoons every morning. We have the fastest trains that run on tracks, but they take us through a series of Grand Union Stations. We are rich in ferries, but we have no
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <lfleming5.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:29:50 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:37:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense - Fleming >From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:06:49 +0100 >Subject: Re: Richard Hoagland's Nonsense - Koch <snip> >Dear Terry, >Reading emails to this List like yours makes me always wonder >how naive one can remain by will in the presence of the ongoing >activities of the ruling powers to hide the truth - which in >fact is out there - and these powers know about it. >Has one of the serious ufo researchers ever has expected to >receive real data of the Cydonia region by the ruling powers? I've been interested in the Face controversy for more than 7 years, so I might as well spout off here. NASA has now acquired at least four different images of the Face from the Mars Global Surveyor and at least one with the lower- resolution camera on their Odyssey spacecraft. As far as I can tell, all of these images are consistent with each other and show no evidence of tampering. But what NASA did do that was far less than honest was release various substandard "enhancements" to the news media, along with derisive and misleading comments by various scientists affiliated with NASA. The first of the degraded PR images, released in 1998, was subjected to absurdly excessive high-pass filtering, causing the Face landform to appear more like a depression in the ground than as a raised "knob," as NASA prefers to call it. It was so poor that John Holiman, CNN's science correspondent at the time, described it as "a blotchy white patch that may or may not be the Face." Another inferior enhancement that made the rounds in the newspapers and the Internet looked so difference from the first one that some people were misled into believing that NASA had taken two images of the Face from different angles. Another image was acquired in 2001. That time, NASA did release a reasonably good enhancement, but accompanied it with a misleading "3D perspective" view, supposedly to give people an idea of what the Face looked like in 3D - shown upside-down relative to the orientations of previous images that people were familiar with. At the time, there was insufficient data from MGS by which to construct any remotely reasonable 3D contour plot. The actual "raw" images are available to the public on government web sites, but anyone whose impression of the Face was formed by NASA's PR hype would be highly unlikely to bother downloading and looking at them. It wasn't a cover-up, but it was obviously an attempt to "market" a certain viewpoint to the public, much as has been done on countless other occasions by government before then and since - like, for instance, the excellent job the they did in selling the public on their dubious evidence for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in order to justify the war. Many people, some on this list, uncritically echo the opinion on the Face that NASA officials wanted them to adopt. They might stop and consider the question: if the MGS images of the Face are such
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:36:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:40:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH> >SOURCE: Space.Com >http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >01-14- 2005 >ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >By Leonard David >Senior Space Writer >Decades ago, it was physicist Enrico Fermi who pondered the >issue of extraterrestrial civilizations with fellow theorists >over lunch, generating the famous quip: "Where are they?" That >question later became central to debates about the cosmological >census count of other star folk and possible extraterrestrial >(ET) visitors from afar. Although several UFO sightings were listed in the original version of the article "Inflation Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation," the subject of Leonard David's article on Space.com, only one series of sightings made it past the reviewers pen: these are the sightings in New Zealand, December 31, 1978 which are unique for the simulataneous radar- visual-photographic events that occurred, with audio-tape recordings at the same time. You can read about these sightings now in the History of NZ
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:37:49 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:42:26 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:11:58 +0000 >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:25:02 EST >>Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall Dick: <snip> >>Like many in the field, Feschino's problems seem to lie in >>interpretation of data and information, not in the accumulation >>thereof. >Yes, a pertinent observation. The tendency of 'ufooligists' to >go far beyond their areas of knowledge or expertise is epidemic. >We don't need an artist masquerading as a scientific or logical >analyst. His wild-eyed speculations override anything worthwhile >that he might be reporting. The need for expertise is particularly true when interviewing people, whether they are actual witnesses (I say again, an overused term in ufology), or others who claim to have some second or third hand knowledge. A course in oral research methodology, or training in direct examination as a lawyer, is very useful; it certainly helps in avoiding the kinds of leading questions that are often found in transcripts of ufological interviews. Case in point? Feschino's book, and his interview of Colonel (then Captain) Leavitt. At pp. 56-57, Leavitt talks about gathering soil and other samples from the Flatwoods site, and sending them off to the Air Force in Washington (which seems perfectly natural to me). Then there was this exchange: "Feschino: And they never told you any of the results? Leavitt: No results. No. They never do. Feschino: Why do you think that? Do you think?... Leavitt: You think something's wrong? Feschino: Do you think they were trying to cover something up? Leavitt: [Caught off guard by the question, he answered] 'Maybe'" The problem? The question "Do you think they were trying to cover something up?" is a leading question, the kind that should never be asked of a witness because you can never be sure afterwards whether the answer is their real opinion, or something that is said as a result of the question itself planting the idea in their mind. Later, Feschino (at p. 60), records that Leavitt stated, "Something was a cover-up!" The question is - did he say that because he really believed it, or because Feschino's questioning led him to adopt that answer? We'll never know. Most of Feschino's interview with Leavitt contains questions like this, which call into question Leavitt's entire testimony. For example, at p. 60, Feschino asks: "Do you think it was an experimental craft, or do you think it came from someplace else?" Leavitt replies: "No. I think it came from somewhere else, personally." But, would Leavitt had provided that answer - which, when you place it in the context of the entire interview, and Feschino's Q & A, is clearly the one Feschino was looking for - if Feschino had asked the proper, simple, question, namely: "What do you think happened that night?" Perhaps. And then again, perhaps not. We'll never know. Thus, when people talk about the qualifications for ufological investigation, I would suggest that a minimum should be a university course in oral research methodology, or something similar, at least if you intend to interview people. Most universities will let people audit such courses, at least up here in Canada. Asking the right questions, however, is a fundamental part of investigation that should never be ignored. <snip> >Paul, If you think Flatwoods was something important and >relevant to UFOs (which I don't), please apply your documentary >skills and give us something far better than Feschino's badly >flawed pseudo-documentary/polemic. Sorry, Dick. While Flatwoods interests me, as a story if nothing else, and while West Virginia sounds like a cool place to visit, I've got Fern Belzil and Canadian animal mutilations on tap for 2005 (coming to Space: The Imagination Station in October '05). Northern Alberta, here I come.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:35:23 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:49:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:05 +0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >>appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >>If so, would this be for refueling purposes(fuel cell recharge) >>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>activity - if this is at all possible? >Maurice, >You seem to be going from no data that you are aware of, to far- >out theories if there is data. In fact, some very good data >exists. See: >www.nicap.org >for Nuclear Connection Project. But 'refueling' and 'portals'... >where do they come from besides pure, ungrounded speculation? >- Dick >"First, study the data!" - A Nony Mouse Mr. Hall, Thanks for the link, its appreciated. Yes my imagination does work overtime and yes it is speculation but not having too many resources to study I believe it could be a point of departure. In fact quite a few scientific discoveries were imagined before their actual invention if not all of them ,laser weapons in comics, etc.(I could be wrong), although we are still waiting for teleportation to materialize, suppose the oil first has to dry up. It is a question though. Are all scientific discoveries not just a question of believing hard enough to move a mountain ie can't we make anything happen given time and a inquiring mind? Are all future scientific discoveries not present as we speak, and the keys to them, merely waiting to be turned? I do trust my intuition its what I have been given.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:51:07 +0200 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:51:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:14:47 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a recent >paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee >and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory Implications For >Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference recent Superstring >and M-Brane theories which imply that other universes could be >co-existing right beside ours. >In the paper they say: >"Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of >the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring >theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of >light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe >at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative >possibility." >If anyone is interested I'd be glad to post this paper on the >DFW MUFON website in PDF format. It is very fascinating reading. Hi Terry,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Report Is Almost Too Good From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:53:54 -0500 Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good Hello: I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too good. The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and came via Loren Gross. A trio of musicians were northbound on US 395 from Southern California to Reno, NV. One Dick Drake (sounds like a typical stage name of the era) was seated in the middle of the front seat flanked by 2 sidemen. A string bass probably took up the entire back seat, though that is unstated (I used to do that). Anyhow, at 3:50 AM, a few minutes north of Big Pine, CA, putting them a few miles south of Bishop, CA, a huge 'flying saucer', width of a full city block, passed over at around 12,000' feet altitude (judged from Mt. Whitney which is 14,000 ft or so), going generally east or ENE toward the Nevada state line. Visible for its orange color (glow I presume, it was still dark) observers made out 2 rows of windows. There was no sound other than their car, no visible exhaust etc. Drake likened it to a Christmas tree ornament. The road was otherwise deserted. A search for Dick Drake led in circles. He was on his way for a band engagement at a club in Reno. One sideman played accordion, I doubt they made the annals of music history. My question is this: Would FATE magazine have invented a story like this, beginning to end, in 1961? The details are almost too good, precise date, time of day, location, altitude etc. I'm so used to imprecision for those data that I got suspicious, maybe overly so. There is also the possibility that FATE faithfully reproduced a bogus account from 'Dick Drake'. The location is interesting. With a generally west to east trajectory, the UFO would have come out of the loneliest roadless part of the southern Sierras, headed for equally deserted rough desert terrain north of the Nevada test site. I vaguely recall seeing this case before, but with the vital coordinates missing so I never indexed the sighting until now.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Authorities Investigating Mutilated Cattle From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:59:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:59:25 -0500 Subject: Authorities Investigating Mutilated Cattle Source: KRIS-TV - Corpus Christi, Texas http://www.kristv.com/Global/story.asp?s=2781571 01-07-05 Online Reporter: Aaron Drawhorn SANDIA - Authorities are investigating a case of livestock mutilation. An Orange Grove man made the discovery. He said from the looks of it the two cows died under some bizarre circumstances. Cattle deaths are like those of any other animal, but every once in awhile cattle carcasses are found with strange cuts and all their organs removed. Cattle mutilation is a worldwide mystery. James Lund and his nephew noticed a dead cow lying in a pasture while driving down a highway near Sandia this week. He didn't think much of it, but later on took a closer look and found two dead cattle. They weren't just dead - they were mutilated. "We noticed they had some really, really strange cuts on them," said Lund. The animals eyes, ears, tongue, udders, and reproductive organs both were missing. Their carcasses had large circles carved out with surgical precision. "It looked like it was cauterized as it was cut." He said both animals were in the same position about 150 yards apart. The Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association has said most of these peculiar deaths can be chalked up to possums, skunks and other varmints that pray on animals that die of natural causes. That's it. But others believe the circumstances surrounding theses deaths are so mysterious, it could be something else." "I'd say it was pretty weird. I've read about, I've heard about it on TV, about these weird mutilations of cattle, but I never thought I'd see one." Even the buzzards have been staying away from the cattle, a strange behavior that's been reported in other cases of cattle mutilations from around the world.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 50th Anniversary Celebration Of Area 51 From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:07:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:07:00 -0500 Subject: 50th Anniversary Celebration Of Area 51 Source: Area 51 Watch http://www.hometown.aol.com/area51watch/page1.html 01-15-05 The 50th Anniversary celebration of Area 51 on May 28, 2005 - the public is invited !! PRESS RELEASE - January 15, 2005 Marking the 50th Anniversary of "the operating base near Groom Lake" (official name of the popularly known Area 51 base), several celebrations will be held in the month of May, 2005. The construction of this sprawling complex in Nevada, the world's most well-known but misunderstood "secret base", began in the month of May of 1955. Needless to say, the "official" celebrations, closed to the public, will all be held at the base itself, including the Base Headquarters (or, officially, Building #269, according to the Security Manual of the base entitled DET 3 SP), the Administration Building (Bldg. #265), the Dining Hall (Bldg. #267) and at Building #170, which contains the officers' lounge/bar known as "Sam's Place", the gymnasium and the swimming pool. However, there will be other "private" celebrations at diverse aerospace facilities both in Nevada and in Southern California, including the Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, whose Detachment 3 operations are allegedly tied in with the Nevada base. Aside from these private gatherings, there will be several "public" festivities marking the Golden Anniversary of Area 51. On Saturday, May 28, 2005 the largest of these gatherings will be held adjacent to the eastern boundary of the base alongside Groom Lake Rd. and will be headed by Joerg Arnu, webmaster of Area 51 - The Dreamland Resort, the world's largest online source of information on Area 51. Several hundred supporters and "aficionados" of Area 51, including military aviation enthusiasts, are expected to celebrate outside the eastern boundary of the base with a camp- out, barbecue and live music entertainment along with various speakers. According to Arnu, May 28 was selected because it coincides with the Memorial Day weekend and thus it would be easier for the public to make it to the celebrations. The news media is expected to cover the event and the Bureau of Land Management is also expected to participate by helping in the coordination of parking and other logistics needed to make the event a success. For more info, go to: The 50th Anniversary celebration of Area 51 on May 28, 2005 - public invited !! For the past 16 years or so, Area 51 has been popularly and erroneously (and "conveniently", according to some theorists) associated with false rumors of "alien technology" and conspiracies. Norio Hayakawa ( Civilian Intelligence Network ), who, at once time was a proponent of such conspiracy theories but now an ardent supporter of the importance and necessity of this vital base for our national defense, states that "the operating base near Groom Lake" is a real complex which had never been a top secret base. (See the excellent article at the bottom by aerospace historian, Peter Merlin). According to Hayakawa, it only became a "secret base" to those who were taken in by paranoia mongers and through misinformation, resulting from false rumors which began in the late 80s and persisted throughout the mid 90s. Area 51 today is a vibrant aerospace R & D conglomerate test base, employing anywhere from 1800 to 2400 defense contractor employees, working in shifts on diversified projects. Some of the contractors include Raytheon, Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, TRW, E.G. & G. and General Atomics. One of the best recent color satellite photos of the base was taken on Thursday, July 24, 2003: Color Satelllite Photo of Area 51 taken on Thursday, July 24, 2003 Finally, perhaps the best history of Area 51 was recently compiled by Peter Merlin, an aerospace historian who resides near Edwards Air Force Base in California: Area 51 Was Never A Secret, Classified Base.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Titan 'Pipe'? From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:31:23 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:46:15 -0500 Subject: Titan 'Pipe'? Enlarged and slightly sharpenned original first image from Huygens on Titan shows a protruding pipe of 38mm (1.5 inch) dia 9mm (3 eights of an inch) wall thickness between 3 stones. Also on this picture are two, what looks like, triangular root clumps: http://www.colsweb.com/TitanPipe.gif 43 KB download size picture only. Subsequent massaging of the data by ESA shows a Horseshoe rather than a pipe at this location.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Peachy-Keen UFO Story From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:49:09 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:47:48 -0500 Subject: Peachy-Keen UFO Story Source: Yahoo News http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050117/344/fafeq.html 01-17-05 'UFO' Fruit Sales Out Of This World A flat peach first inspired by a Chinese emperor more than 4,000 years ago has seen its popularity take off once again by being marketed as a UFO. The saucer-shaped fruit - branded the UFO Peach because of its unusual appearance - is proving to be a hit and selling faster than its more conventional cousins, stores say.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:04:16 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:50:14 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Lehmberg >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:05:49 -0500 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:18:56 -0600 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>>From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse <snip> >>>Sakulich isn't vulgar; he's not unintelligent, and he takes the >>>tack that most people I know take: that UFOs are nothing more >>>than a figment of someone's distorted imagination or a bizarre >>>mis- representation of normal things in the sky (or on the >>>ground). >>He has called people like me stupid and has urges us to get >>vasectomies so we can't propogate merely because we like and >>agree with Michael Moore. >>http://www.thetriangle.org/news/2004/05/28/EdOp/Michael.Moores.Works.A.Travest y.To.Documentaries-683519.shtml >>I find nothing humorous or likeble about it at all. I do >>consider it vulgar. >Chacun son gout (everyone to his own taste). >I'm thinking Sakulich didn't have you in mind specifically when >he said people who like Micahel Moore are stupid. >Sakulich is certainly not humorous, but he isn't vulgar by >a long shot. (I know vulgarity, and Sakulich is no vulgarian.) Maybe not... But he is an effective apologist for programmed insentience, a thoughtless shill for the conventional ignorance, a ready proponent for intellectual complacency, and a loud soundingboard for a hijacked mainstream as corrupt and canted as an ENRON boardroom or a Bush 'kitchen cabine't. I'd sooner have the vulgarian than the klasskurtzian.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Little Men In Green? - Stevenson From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:34:14 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:52:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - Stevenson Probably the earliest 'Green Man' http://www.canterburygreenman.fsnet.co.uk/NewPage.htm The manuscript was made in Canterbury's scriptorium before year 1100 in the UK and probably has even earlier Pagan origin. The Green Man has leaves or Vines in association with a Male face and therefore is also associated with Nature or greenery. The connection between 'Green Man' and 'Little Green Men' is obviously connected with the very early Cannalli (water channels) seen through telescopes on Mars.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Pulling Teeth From: Greg BNoone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:41:47 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:53:45 -0500 Subject: Pulling Teeth It's like pulling teeth. Getting witnesses to bona fide UFO sightings of note to come forward. I've got dozens of people who were part of startling CEs but won't come forward. They'll email me back and forth or stop me on the street and gab about it but when you get them just short of coming before the microphone or showing their film/video footage they back off and cower. They're afraid of ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric condemnation. I've got 2 people right now who could verify some amazing incidents and they've got documents, phone records and photos plus names of other witnesses that there are records of them being at the incidents. Yet getting them to come forward is like pulling teeth. This is highly frustrating and I'm sure I'm not the only one. How do you pros get folks to gab? Money isn't the issue here. If it was that simple I'ld have people jawin' til the break of dawn. It's fear. Plain and simple. It's gotten so bad that I've had to turn down and turn away people who've had CEs from CE IIIs and CE IVs. I tell them right off the bat that if they're not willing to come forward, don't bother me with it. Even when I know they're telling the truth and they're falling apart from stress or injuries. I hate to do it but from where I sit from now on, if you want help then you better give help and fork over the information to help others. I hate to be cruel but I've about had it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:29 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:57:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Lehmberg >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:59:34 +0000 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >>Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >>Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >>imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >>County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >>Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >>overly harsh comments. >>The material he took umbrage at was indeed in the book, even if >>not on the cover. As I noted in the Foreword, I have considered >>Dick an eminent UFO researcher and have appreciated the great >>contribution to Ufology he has made over a very long period of >>time. I indeed was too zealous about what I consider to be a >>very intriguing case... especially what happened in Flatwoods. >Stan, Apology accepted. Now I hope we can move on >constructively. We do, indeed, share a lot of views and opinions >in common. And you certainly are an articulate spokesman for the >'cause'. >>Concerning Kyle King's remark about money, I can unequivocally >>state that I was paid no fee for my appearance at the 50th >>anniversary of the Flatwoods case and received no fee for >>providing the Foreword and Epilogue to the book. >>I am still very impressed by all the research Frank has done >>about the case. Certainly there is far more to the story than >>Joe Nickell's "barnyard owl". Frank may well have gone too far >>with his elaboration of the aircraft activities, but this should >>not detract from his massive and clearly defendable research >>that has indeed been well documented re the local events on >>Sept. 12, 1952. >I will reserve judgment about the adequacy of Feschino's >research until I read the book (a friend is sending me a copy), >but I can't help being skeptical in advance given his apparent >tendencies toward extreme speculation. I will read the book >carefully and submit a review here. Well done, Sir! It's a little like an errant crack in the ufological firmament healing up. <g> With regard to Mr. Feschino and his "tendencies toward extreme speculation" I have to beat an old drum. "Extreme speculation" may be a disease for some of us that we have only innocently contracted. When one begins to sense the easy duplicity of our governments and the egregious activities of its agencies further complemented by the failure of our institutions to address these duplicitous activities, it becomes _as_ possible to see things that aren't there as to be blind to those that are. Mr. Feschino likely does not create the "information void" that plagues us, Mr. Hall, that's the fault of our unelected leadership. I suspect (especially given Mr. Friedman's endorsement), he may be one of the few who is trying to fill that needless void; like yourself, Sir. I understand that speculation is not science, Mr. Hall, but it is certainly the precursor of it and the soil in which it grows or refines itself, I think. Moreover, one man's "extreme speculation" may be another's gainful inspiration. If Mr. Feschino will send me a review copy I'd like to write a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:00:03 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:01:16 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:33:36 -0600 >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:02:22 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops <snip> >>So we can presume that 'ET will bring the Pork Chops' >>when some Humans do not kill them because they are >>thought of as demons by them. Then we can all sit >>down to a good lunch, although I prefer Lamb. >Ok - but if you were here for dinner? I'd have to drown >you in the Broccoli water ..... Wow. I think Alfred might have found the original Pagan meaning
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:44:18 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:03:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hall >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too >good. >The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >came via Loren Gross. <snip> >Any ideas on the credibility factor? To the sage of Lake Weweewawa, Wisconsin, my question is this: What was the date of the sighting? I can check various listings
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:12:00 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:06:27 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Warren >From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse <snip> >>Actually I excoriate Sakulich because he tries to pass himself >>off as a skeptic when he is actually an uninformed pelicanist. A >>true skeptic will attempt to weigh evidence. He only spouts >>opinions and portrays them as truth. Since he has made certain >>claims, (ie. crop circles are all hoaxes, UFOs are either hoaxes >>or misidentifications), the burden of proving his statements >>falls on him and he provides little or no evidence at all, only >>uninformed conjecture. Rich, Terry, Et Al, >Terry: >I like that Sakulich guy. He has a plethora of writings on lots >of things at the triangle.org site. The emotion that he (Sakulich) evokes from me is one of sorrow. >In America, where the First Amendment reigns (usually), people >get to say or write almost anything they want to. In the aftermath of his rants, one sometimes wishes for exceptions to the law! >Sakulich isn't vulgar; he's not unintelligent, and he takes the >tack that most people I know take: that UFOs are nothing more >than a figment of someone's distorted imagination or a bizarre >mis- representation of normal things in the sky (or on the >ground). Rich, I have to respectfully disagree; he certainly has uttered vulgarities, and he continues to evidence his "narrow- mindedness" via his rantings along with his lack of proper research/investigation of the topics he chooses to write about=97not the mark of a "wise man." I find it interesting that the perception of UFOs from most of the people you know is just the opposite of my personal experience; most folks I engage the subject with, at the very least, feel that there is "definitely something to it," and do not count out ETH; surprisingly, this comes from the most ignorant on the subject. >I've seen things, and know they're strange; UFOs or something >akin, but I don't get crazy with people such as Sakulich because >he would say I'm nutz. I hope he sees something someday that he >can't explain and has an epiphany of his own. I don't feel that a UFO sighting would change Sakulich's views; his mind is made up, and he doesn't have time for the evidence=97even if he saw it with his own eyes! >Now a guy like Phil Klass is a bad guy. He knows better. Aaron >Sakulich is a UFO atheist (maybe an agnostic). But he's not a >concretized bastard about UFOs (or crop circles). He's a >skeptical writer, with panache. You gotta give him that. He can spell and form sentences, that I'll grant him, but beyond that, I think Terry depicts him well: uninformed, spouts opinions and portrays them as truth, i.e., conjecturist. >UFOs exist. Sakulich doesn't think so. He's a tyro when it comes >to "flying saucers" and UFOs, the term, eludes him. I think the same can be said for his writing skills. >But he's a good read. It's like dealing with the Death as the >Knight does in Bergman's Seventh Seal. Will Sakulich convince >intelligent people that no such thing as UFOs exist? Or will he, >indirectly, send them out to see for themselves just exactly >what the UFO thing is all about? >I think it's the latter..... Sakulich's twaddle is like a bad movie, thank god we can get up and leave!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Weber From: Bill Weber <wweber1.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:04:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:16:29 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Weber >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:04:16 -0600 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:05:49 -0500 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse <snp> >>Sakulich is certainly not humorous, but he isn't vulgar by >>a long shot. (I know vulgarity, and Sakulich is no vulgarian.) >Maybe not... >But he is an effective apologist for programmed insentience, a >thoughtless shill for the conventional ignorance, a ready >proponent for intellectual complacency, and a loud soundingboard >for a hijacked mainstream as corrupt and canted as an ENRON >boardroom or a Bush 'kitchen cabine't. >I'd sooner have the vulgarian than the klasskurtzian. >On reflection, maybe you would, too. <g> Hi, Alfred, I agree. After reading his piece in the student paper, I'll take
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Pulling Teeth - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:17:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:00:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Pulling Teeth - Lehmberg >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:41:47 EST >Subject: Pulling Teeth >It's like pulling teeth. >Getting witnesses to bona fide UFO sightings of note to come >forward. >I've got dozens of people who were part of startling CEs but >won't come forward. They'll email me back and forth or stop me >on the street and gab about it but when you get them just short >of coming before the microphone or showing their film/video >footage they back off and cower. >They're afraid of ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric >condemnation. >I've got 2 people right now who could verify some amazing >incidents and they've got documents, phone records and photos >plus names of other witnesses that there are records of them >being at the incidents. >Yet getting them to come forward is like pulling teeth. >This is highly frustrating and I'm sure I'm not the only one. >How do you pros get folks to gab? Money isn't the issue here. >If it was that simple I'ld have people jawin' til the break of >dawn. >It's fear. Plain and simple. >It's gotten so bad that I've had to turn down and turn away >people who've had CEs from CE IIIs and CE IVs. I tell them right >off the bat that if they're not willing to come forward, don't >bother me with it. Even when I know they're telling the truth >and they're falling apart from stress or injuries. >I hate to do it but from where I sit from now on, if you want >help then you better give help and fork over the information to >help others. >I hate to be cruel but I've about had it. "I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." -- Frank Herbert The irony of our condition is that if all of us were just a _little_ bit brave, none of us would have to be consummately brave. That's the way it usually is or has been, I suspect. We don't hang together so we hang separately... We make our own reality the propeller heads seem to be saying. We could have stopped every bad social thing, precluded our culture of ridicule and denial... could have avoided every cultural disaster that has ever happened to us, but good men and women, knowing better, did nothing. "It is by will alone that I set my mind in motion" -- Frank Herbert
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:19:18 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:07:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Boone >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >Hello: >I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too >good. >The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >came via Loren Gross. >A trio of musicians were northbound on US 395 from Southern >California to Reno, NV. One Dick Drake (sounds like a typical >stage name of the era) was seated in the middle of the front >seat flanked by 2 sidemen. A string bass probably took up the >entire back seat, though that is unstated (I used to do that). <snip> >A search for Dick Drake led in circles. He was on his way for a >band engagement at a club in Reno. One sideman played accordion, >I doubt they made the annals of music history. Hi Larry, If "Dick Drake" is the witness' real name then searching for it may or may not be a tough task. If he's truly a musician or was a musician somewhere there'll be a reference to him. If you put a range on him from amateur to professional that should narrow things down. If he was a professional there'll be legal documents with "Dick Drake" or "Richard Drake" on them. Playbills, fan sites, old timers fan references. If he's a Californian, he'd be listed in any number of references. He may have taught music or influence an up and coming band that made it big and thanked him. Demo recordings, contracts etc. would be in the main databases or he may have gone on to author books on music or some other profession. All depends on how valid the story and it's data are. If things go to worse you check the cemetary archives.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Little Men In Green? - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:23:11 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:11:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - Boone I found this reference from a Scott Corrales story from 2002. Any follow up on it? http://www.ncbuy.com/news/2002-06-10/1004229.html GENERAL ACHA, Argentina (Wireless Flash) -- Farmers near General Acha, Argentina, have suffered at least ten cattle mutilations since mid-May, and now some are blaming a "green dwarf" for the attacks. According to Pennsylvania-based UFO researcher Scott Corrales, some Argentinian locals say they're being visited by a short green figure described as either a midget or a dwarf. One grandmother claims the bizarre creature appeared twice in her garden but ran away before she could get her husband to wake up from his nap. There have been other sightings, but Corrales says the only
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:25:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:13:11 -0500 Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:00:03 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:33:36 -0600 >>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops? >>>From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:02:22 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Re: When Will The Aliens Bring The Pork Chops ><snip> >>>So we can presume that 'ET will bring the Pork Chops' >>>when some Humans do not kill them because they are >>>thought of as demons by them. Then we can all sit >>>down to a good lunch, although I prefer Lamb. >>Ok - but if you were here for dinner? I'd have to drown >>you in the Broccoli water ..... >Wow. I think Alfred might have found the original Pagan meaning >for 'the little green men from Mars' akack akack akack - slurp, >slurp! Good one Mr. Stevenson! Now I understand how you keep your seal
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:06:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:16:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Groff >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:29:58 -0800 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:14:47 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a >>recent paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce >>Maccabee and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory >>Implications For Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference >>recent Superstring and M-Brane theories which imply that other >>universes could be co-existing right beside ours. >>In the paper they say: >>"Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of >>the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring >>theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of >>light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe >>at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative >>possibility." >Ah, yes. Points well taken. >However, in a universe where everything is moving with respect >to everything else, I have high doubts about UFO 'portals' >lingering in Bonnybridge Scotland say, or Lake Wewewawa, >Wisconsin (which I just invented). >I'd call it more new-age than Fortean. The forteans were >literate at least, not as inclined to take their brains out and >play with them. <LOL> That literally made me laugh out loud. I suddenly had visions of someone sitting on the floor with their brains in one hand and a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:24:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:17:28 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Reynolds >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:12:00 -0800 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:03:18 -0500 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:21:57 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >I don't feel that a UFO sighting would change Sakulich's views; >his mind is made up, and he doesn't have time for the >evidence=97even if he saw it with his own eyes! >He can spell and form sentences, that I'll grant him, but beyond >that, I think Terry depicts him well: uninformed, spouts >opinions and portrays them as truth, i.e., conjecturist. >I think the same can be said for his writing skills. >Sakulich's twaddle is like a bad movie, thank god we can get up >and leave! Frank: But that's the point: we can take Sakulich or not. And I prefer to hear his side of things, the other viewpoints he presents. Sakulich is prolific, and ill-kempt as a writer in some minds, but for me he delivers a message which should not be discounted, even by die-hard UFO believers. If the UFO matter was settled, really settled - that they exist as something more than unidentified things in the sky - we would not be spending so much time discussing them here.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Colvin From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:30:06 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:12:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Colvin >From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:51:07 +0200 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:14:47 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:10:54 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a recent >>paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee >>and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory Implications For >>Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference recent Superstring >>and M-Brane theories which imply that other universes could be >>co-existing right beside ours. >>In the paper they say: >>"Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of >>the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring >>theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of >>light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe >>at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative >>possibility." >>If anyone is interested I'd be glad to post this paper on the >>DFW MUFON website in PDF format. It is very fascinating reading. >I am interested. Did UFO activity not increase in leaps and bounds as >our nuclear activity increased here on earth? I am just speculating. In FSR 49/1, Spring 2004, is an article The Flying Triangle Mystery: Don't Think Of A Black Triangle, which states "its
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:13:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:35:23 +0200 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:05 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >>>appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >>>If so, would this be for refueling purposes (fuel cell recharge) >>>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>>activity - if this is at all possible? <snip> >Are all scientific discoveries not >just a question of believing hard enough to move a mountain ie >can't we make anything happen given time and a inquiring mind? Maurice, Do you suppose that if you believe hard enough in nuclear reactors being interdimensional UFO portals, or some such, this will make it so? >Are all future scientific discoveries not present as we speak, >and the keys to them, merely waiting to be turned? I do trust my >intuition its what I have been given. Are you saying that UFO-portals over nuclear reactors is an absolute Platonic truth, out there waiting to be discovered, and that whereas we would naively associate "discovery" with processes of investigation and evidence, in this case we can dispense with such formalities and substitute your intuition? >Thanks for all the replies from the List. It's time to confirm or >deny my speculation. I'd be interested to know how you propose to do that? The answer to your original question is "Yes, there is some evidence of a statistical association between report frequency and nuclear facilities." See the sources that Richard Hall referenced in his reply to you. ~If~ this association is statistically significant, would it mean that there are larger numbers of actual UFOs in these areas, or that the probability of an extant report in the files is greater in these areas, per unit population? One explanation to eliminate before "portals" and "refuelling" would be a secondary correlation between the distribution of nuclear facilities and the numbers of vigilant observers, the security and official reporting structures, etc., associated with these and other high-tech and/or defence-related installations. I recall that the Battelle Special Report #14 found a correlation of just this kind back in 1953. (Perhaps someone with a copy to hand would verify this.) Can anyone think of a sensible statistical test that would test between Maurice's hypothesis and this one?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Authorities Investigating Mutilated Cattle - From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:47:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:14:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Authorities Investigating Mutilated Cattle - >Source: KRIS-TV - Corpus Christi, Texas >http://www.kristv.com/Global/story.asp?s=2781571 >01-07-05 >Online Reporter: Aaron Drawhorn >SANDIA - Authorities are investigating a case of livestock >mutilation. An Orange Grove man made the discovery. He said from >the looks of it the two cows died under some bizarre >circumstances. >Cattle deaths are like those of any other animal, but every once >in awhile cattle carcasses are found with strange cuts and all >their organs removed. Cattle mutilation is a worldwide mystery. Ken Cherry - Texas State MUFON Director - contacted me a week ago and is going to supply me with photos and a report of this event. Linda Milton Howe is involved and although there has been controversy surrounding some of her investigations she has done very good investigations of these types of events. I'll keep you posted. Terry Groff
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:10:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:17:55 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 03:18:36 EST >Subject: UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page >Ha! UFO/ET Study Makes Drudge Report Front Page! >http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >Don't know if this story got through yesterday when I sent it >but I also sent it to Matt Drudge and sure enough it's on his >front page! >I never thought I'ld see the day but it looks like things are >turning around. >Last year was a big kick for Ufology but this year let's tear >the roof off the sucker.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:18:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:20:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Groff >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:19:18 EST >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >>Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >>Hello: >>I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too >>good. >>The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >>came via Loren Gross. >>A trio of musicians were northbound on US 395 from Southern >>California to Reno, NV. One Dick Drake (sounds like a typical >>stage name of the era) was seated in the middle of the front >>seat flanked by 2 sidemen. A string bass probably took up the >>entire back seat, though that is unstated (I used to do that). ><snip> >>A search for Dick Drake led in circles. He was on his way for a >>band engagement at a club in Reno. One sideman played accordion, >>I doubt they made the annals of music history. >Hi Larry, >If "Dick Drake" is the witness' real name then searching for it >may or may not be a tough task. >If he's truly a musician or was a musician somewhere there'll be >a reference to him. If you put a range on him from amateur to >professional that should narrow things down. >If he was a professional there'll be legal documents with "Dick >Drake" or "Richard Drake" on them. Playbills, fan sites, old >timers fan references. Hi Greg, When I'm on stage I go by the name Terry Montgomery. Montgomery was my father's real name before the Groff's got guardianship of him. I have used that name for almost 20 years yet I have no legal documents with that name on it. All of my copyrights and ASCAP registrations are in my legal name of Groff. You are correct however that there may be playbill's and the like with the name Dick Drake but it is possible that there are no legal documents with that name, if it isn't his real name. If you do an internet search of my stage name along with the keyword "Blues" you will find a lot of references but since there wasn't much going on in the 60's InterNet-wise such a search would probably not reveal much about Mr. Drake if anything at all. Some useful keywords along with his name might be "Trio" and/or "Accordion". Maybe some original staff of Fate Magazine might have some info
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:19:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:21:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:42:52 -0600 >Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >>Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>SOURCE: Space.Com >>http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >>01-14- 2005 >>ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood> >>By Leonard David >>Senior Space Writer <snip> >>"This potentially changes the relationship of the UFO phenomenon >>to science in a significant way. It takes away the =E2=80=98not >>invented here' prejudice, pointing out that a =E2=80=98yes' to ET >>visitation is exactly what side our current physics and >>astrophysics theories would come down on as the most likely >>situation," Haisch concluded. >So are we seeing the beginnings of the 'convergence' we have all >been advocating? >Perhaps there is an issue of timing or perspective. >Phones with integrated video have been around since the 60s, and >yet they didn't become a market success until they cut the cord, >and put the camera on the side of the phone opposite the one >holding it. <g> >My hope is that the more we make discoveries that reveal how >much we are in the dark, the more UFO research and data will >come to light, and the more seriously it will be taken. >And kudos to Bruce and company for a refreshing paper! Thank you. Although it is true that our ability to publish this article in a refereed more-or-less manstream journal is a result of a convergence of accepted scientific knowledge and speculation about the universe and intelligent life in the universe, I expect that the attachment of UFO sightings to this convergence will result in a great "divergence" on the part of the generally skeptical scientific community. The speculation about the connection to UFO sightings stands on its own... as long as it is speculation.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:58:09 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:23:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - King >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:17:34 -0500 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >>Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >>Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >>imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >>County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >>Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >>overly harsh comments. >Stan Freidman: >As always, the gentleman. >Richard Hall is a Big Boy now, so I bet he didn't see your >remarks as overly harsh, nor did many of the rest of us. >The colloquy was spicy and interesting; something we do not >often get in UFO circles. >But it's always delightful to see two Grand Masters make nice. Hi Stan and Rich, Way to step up, Stan. You are a 'big boy', too. And thanks for addressing my 'compensation' comments.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:57:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:24:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Clark >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost >too good. >The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >came via Loren Gross.... >My question is this: Would FATE magazine have invented a story >like this, beginning to end, in 1961? The details are almost >too good, precise date, time of day, location, altitude etc. I'm >so used to imprecision for those data that I got suspicious, >maybe overly so. As a member of Fate's editorial staff for many years, I can state flatly that Fate would not "have invented a story like this." The Fullers, whose magazine Fate was, were persons of integrity, and they would _never_ have even contemplated making up a story for the edification of its readers. Frankly, my blood boils at the very question. Besides that, even if the Fullers were the sleazoids implied in the question, they would have had no reason to make up a story of a UFO sighting. Reports of UFOs and other anomalous phenomena came into the magazine's offices at a dizzying rate every single
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:13:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:29:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:48:56 -0500 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:21:10 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:39:30 -0500 >>>Subject: Isn't It Strange? >>>And what UFO investitigator puts a roll of film or UFO photos >>>in a drawer, forgetting about them for several weeks or months? >>>And also neglects to revise his/her travel schedule so he/she >>>can talk with a credible person about a purported UFO sighting? >>>It's no wonder that media and others think the UFO community >>>is nuts. >>While I don't subscribe to this hypothesis, in the interest of >>maintaining the 'strangeness' of UFO sightings, perhaps there is >>this possibility... >>If ET comes to prowl around, and do not wish to be >>interrupted, but are forced by circumstance to lurk where >>detection is a possibility, perhaps they use telepathic messages >>to brush off the curious. ><snip> >To use a current cliche - you think outside the box, so I >accept your interpretation as possible (possible!). >But as a graduate student in psychology, I can think of a slew >of other possible explanations for someone forgetting they have >a roll of film or photos of UFOs which they eschew for a long >period of time, maybe forever. >And I can come up with a number of psychiatric reasons for >those people who go to bed while a strange object is hovering >over their house. >But in all those kinds of cases, the people are acting >abnormally; without human sense. They exhibit behavior which is >bizarre and sometimes psychotic, certainly neurotic. >Do the UFO occupants instill these neuroses in them? Perhaps. >Or do these people typify the apathy which takes hold of many >who find the meaning of their lives in mundane things: sleep, >drink, hunting, sports, sex, whatever? And spectacular events >don't enthuse them? >If a UFO investigator doesn't re-arrange his trip to talk with >a bonafide observer of a UFO event, and exacerbates that gaffe >by putting a roll of film with UFO photos in a drawer for >several weeks, I'm anxious to know what the heck is going on >with that person. >And when a family doesn't call their neighbor about a craft >hovering over their backyard - and the account used the word >"neighbor" - I want to know what the heck is wrong with that >family. >Sure the "little green men" made them do it, which is a >possibility [sic]. >But, come on. That kind of behavior is quirky to say the least, >and I'd like to know why it is so prevalent in the story- >tellings about UFOs. Hi Rich and Kyle, I began noticing this odd behavior when I first started to investigate UFO sighting on my home turf. I think now that rather than this being neglect or disinterest on the part of the witnesses it is a symptom of the event. A structural engineer once contacted me after my first UFO book came out and described an upclose UFO sighting in broad daylight [August-7:00PM] which he, his wife and daughter observed over CHNS's radio transmitter near where I used to live. They were driving in their car at the time and pulled over to observe this football shaped, galvanized colored UFO about three hundred feet from the highway and 100 feet in the air. But he wasn't the only one. Another car pulled over and its occupants got out and watched the thing for about 10 minutes. I the meantime automobiles are zipping by them on the highway. He said it was fascinating to watch. Then he and his family got back into the car and went home. He called me to ask two things. Had I ever seen UFO reports of a similar object? And, could I tell him why he got in his car and went home and forgot about it. His second question was loaded with disbelief at his own actions. He could not believe that he didn't go over to the second vehicle and check out what he was seeing. Why he had not contacted ATC at Halifax International. Why he and his family did not discuss it among themselves during the drive home or subsequently. Why he had gone home while the thing was still hanging there in the sky and so close. I offered that in the scheme of things, maybe he had been told to go home. His answer, " Yes, that's what I think though I have no memory of that. But it disturbs me that this might have been so. One thing however. He did write up the occurrence in his daily journal. I've run into this type of behavior many times over the years and in fact I'm more inclined to be interested in these cases due to the fact that the general public is unaware of this odd behavior. When it's mentioned to me, usually in passing, I'm likely to put more stock in the report. These have shown up quite frequently in my investigations or in reports I've received. The supposition that the "occupants" of these phenomena are well ahead of us and pretty much know what our responses will be or know what we are thinking is not new to me. I've thought this might be the case for many years now. It explains a lot about why we seem to be always scrambling to keep up, why we can't just wait, unobserved, for them to show up for the really great film or pictures, laying in wait with radar and aircraft or a battery of scientists equipped with the best instruments [a la Close Encounters of the Third Kind], should it be the case. I'd be willing to bet that many investigators of the phenomenon on this list have run across this "ignore it" syndrome many times during their years of searching, researching and cataloguing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:32:07 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:32:12 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Ledger >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:29:53 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >You must realise by now that on this List there are many >people who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under >any circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must _always_ be >maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is >either: >a) A Government stooge >b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or >c) Phil Klass Hi John, I for one am more than happy to see these types of sightings [the usual "lights-in-the-sky" types as well] explained as naturally occurring fireballs, meteors or space junk or satellites and aircraft. Most are just cluttering up the skyscape, if you will, anyway. There are more than enough "bear- sized" sightings with meat on them to keep us going without being side tracked by squirrel tracks. Have at them. It's not an arguement for me. As for: "You must realise by now that on this List there are many people who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any circumstances whatsoever." There probably are some like that, John, but I haven't run into
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:54:03 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:33:22 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:50:52 +0000 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >Many people? Maybe. Some people? Yes. I have no poll data that >would refine the estimate any further. I think the people who >try to convert every single reported, seemingly unusual aerial >phenomenon into a `UFO' only contaminate the database that might >(I think it does) point to a real, unique, unexplained >phenomenon. It is methodologically abominable. >Anyone who has systematically studied alleged UFO reports over >the years (as many commentators on this list apparently have >not) knows full well that stringent screening criteria are >needed before declaring a case to be a UFO, `unexplained' >despite thorough investigation ideally. Instead, the attitude >seems to exist that a sighting that has all the characteristics >of a fireball meteor(for example) is a `UFO' until proved >otherwise. - Dick
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:48:40 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:34:50 -0500 Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? - Rimmer >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:41:41 -0600 >Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:54:57 +0000 >>Subject: Re: What Was In The Sky? >>Dick, >>You must realise by now that on this List there are many people >>who do not want _any_ UFO report to be explained under any >>circumstances whatsoever. The mystery must *always* be >>maintained, and anyone who presents an alternative view is >>either: >>a) A Government stooge >>b) Too stupid to understand The Truth, or >>c) Phil Klass >It's no stretch to consider you one such, Sir, as a denialist is >only interested in that 'investigation', of any flavor, coming >down one way.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Pulling Teeth - Velez From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:04:33 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:37:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Pulling Teeth - Velez >From: Greg BNoone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:41:47 EST >Subject: Pulling Teeth >It's like pulling teeth. >Getting witnesses to bona fide UFO sightings of note to come >forward. >I've got dozens of people who were part of startling CEs but >won't come forward. They'll email me back and forth or stop me >on the street and gab about it but when you get them just short >of coming before the microphone or showing their film/video >footage they back off and cower. >They're afraid of ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric >condemnation. >I've got 2 people right now who could verify some amazing >incidents and they've got documents, phone records and photos >plus names of other witnesses that there are records of them >being at the incidents. >Yet getting them to come forward is like pulling teeth. >This is highly frustrating and I'm sure I'm not the only one. >How do you pros get folks to gab? Money isn't the issue here. >If it was that simple I'ld have people jawin' til the break of >dawn. >It's fear. Plain and simple. >It's gotten so bad that I've had to turn down and turn away >people who've had CEs from CE IIIs and CE IVs. I tell them right >off the bat that if they're not willing to come forward, don't >bother me with it. Even when I know they're telling the truth >and they're falling apart from stress or injuries. >I hate to do it but from where I sit from now on, if you want >help then you better give help and fork over the information to >help others. >I hate to be cruel but I've about had it. Hello Greg, _You've_ had it? Oh, where to begin.... Speaking as a 'witness' I think you have some crust getting into a snit because a witness(s) has chosen not to expose themselves and their families to, (and I'll use your own words here) "ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric condemnation." Would you? I'll bet my house and car that -after careful consideration- you wouldn't. You obviously have no idea what it takes/means to come forward and report in public about anything related to UFOs. To my way of thinking, it's a sign of a witnesses' sanity, and a display of good horse/common sense to assiduously avoid the aforementioned set of circumstances and responses from what is basically; an ignorant, hurtful and insensitive public. It's one thing to report to an individual research person who has a proven track record and who can be trusted. But 'coming forward in public' is tantamount to committing 'social' hari- kari. You ask a lot of anyone who wishes to report to you that in addition to filing a report with you, they must also be willing to endure a walk through Hell. It was only after much tortured deliberation and consultation with family that I decided to 'come forward' in public - NOVA, Kidnapped By UFOs. It was the single biggest mistake I have ever made. If I had it to do over again, _no one_ would know my name or what has happened to myself and my family over the course of a lifetime. No one else should ever have to be subjected to the kind of intense ridicule that I and some of my family members have been subjected to. Contrary to the popular belief that; people like myself who report a lifetime of abduction by UFO occupants are _already_ psychologically damaged; if it wasn't for the basic integrity and strength of my personality and character, some of the crap I have had to endure at the hands of my peers could easily have caused _serious_ and _permanent_ psychological damage. And "you've had it" because some body else won't consent to expose themselves or their loved ones to that same kind of treatment. Balls! Balls!! Balls!!! Until you've stood in 'our' shoes, (the shoes of any witness that has come forward publicly) until you _know_ what it feels like to have to endure _intense_ public ridicule and to have your character and reputation shredded by virtual strangers, to have your testimony ignored, dismissed and explained away by 'armchair experts' who sit at home pontificating and passing judgement, people who have no clue about the subject they're talking about; until it has happened to you... you have absolutely no right to demand/expect it from anyone else. Much less get miffed at anybody who isn't willing to put their balls on the chopping block at your behest. I hope you never manage to convince a single witness to report publicly. If you do, and that person should be subjected to ridicule, discomfort or pain (because of your talking them into testifying in public,) I hope the guilt twists your guts _twice_ as much as theirs. You've "had it" eh? Gimme a break man. You have no concept about what it is you ask others to do. You have no clue the price you ask them to pay. In your own self-absorption you are only able to express anger and frustration at others who are not prepared to subject them selves and their loved ones to the horrible consequences that you your self are all too well aware of. ie; "ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric condemnation." Until you have proven that you are not only willing to pick up a gun, but that you are ready to sacrifice your own skin for what you believe in, do not presume to criticize or condemn those who must live in the front-line trenches and bear the full brunt of the battle. Your post really pissed me off. Enough to drag me out from behind the curtain to write this note.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Little Men In Green? - Corrales From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:35:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:40:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - Corrales >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:23:11 EST >Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? >I found this reference from a Scott Corrales story from 2002. >Any follow up on it? >http://www.ncbuy.com/news/2002-06-10/1004229.html >GENERAL ACHA, Argentina (Wireless Flash) -- Farmers near General >Acha, Argentina, have suffered at least ten cattle mutilations >since mid-May, and now some are blaming a "green dwarf" for the >attacks. >According to Pennsylvania-based UFO researcher Scott Corrales, >some Argentinian locals say they're being visited by a short >green figure described as either a midget or a dwarf. >One grandmother claims the bizarre creature appeared twice in >her garden but ran away before she could get her husband to wake >up from his nap. >There have been other sightings, but Corrales says the only >thing eyewitnesses agree on is the creature is "short, green and >fast." >Although many blame the green dwarf for the recent cattle >mutilations, Corrales says, so far, the mysterious midget hasn't >been seen near a single cow. Hi Greg The "green dwarf" was part of the 2002 Argentinean Cattle Mutilation wave. Some said it was actually a vagrant dressed in green (seriously!) while others thought it was, in fact, one of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:37:32 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:42:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Kimball >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:29 -0600 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:59:34 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >>>Subject: Apology To Dick Hall Mr. Lehmberg: <snip> >>I will reserve judgment about the adequacy of Feschino's >>research until I read the book (a friend is sending me a copy), >>but I can't help being skeptical in advance given his apparent >>tendencies toward extreme speculation. I will read the book >>carefully and submit a review here. <snip> >I understand that speculation is not science, Mr. Hall, but it >is certainly the precursor of it and the soil in which it grows >or refines itself, I think. Moreover, one man's "extreme >speculation" may be another's gainful inspiration. There is no room for "extreme speculation" in any field that wishes to be taken seriously. There is room for evidence. There is room for objective analysis of that evidence. And there is room for reasoned conclusions based on that evidence, conclusions about which reasonable and informed people may legitimately disagree. Beyond that, however, lies... well, a place where ufology should not, but, unfortunately in my view, far too often does, go. Speculation like Feschino's (and here I talk only about the aerial battle scenario that he cooked up, and which is certainly extreme) only serves to undermine the efforts of those - like Dick Hall - who have been trying to get people to take a look at the real evidence for so many years, or, in Feschino's case, the substantial work (albeit flawed in some respects) he did on the actual Flatwoods incident.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:40:10 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:44:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:14:06 EST >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:09:29 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:16:49 EST >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>There is, in fact, circumstantial evidence from Canadian radio >>engineer Wilbert's Smith statements, corroborated by Vice >>Admiral William Knowles, that at least one saucer was fired upon >>and a piece or pieces shot off during the Washington overflights >>of late July 1952. Smith claimed that a piece was sent to him >>(and the metallurgists working with him) for analysis. Knowles >>confirmed that Smith showed it to him. >>According to Knowles, "To the best of my recollection the object >>was shot down by a plane and was seen to fall in the yard of a >>farmer across the river in Virginia. Upon searching the area >>several pieces were found, one of which was turned over to Mr. >>Smith for independent research. On one of his trips down to see >>me he brought the piece along for inspection." >http://www.roswellproof.com/debris8_misc.html >No one saw any object falling from the sky, no Navy jet >interceptor has ever been identified and no intercept mission >has ever been discovered. The object was found by CIA's USNR Lt >Cdr Alvin E. Moore's neighbor hear his estate in the Herndon, >Virginia, area on July 23, 1952. It _looked_ like it had fallen >from the sky because tree branches above the object were broken >as if an object had fallen recently. Moore admits the object >looked like a piece of concrete yet the Blue Book file contains >evidence that Moore was misrepresenting it as "metal." Moore's >full report is in the BB files along with photos, etc. Brad, Nonetheless, the story given Wilbert Smith by the Air Force, which he related in the interviews in the link above, was that this was a piece shot off from a small flying saucer in July 1952 as it overflew Washington. This certainly jibes with initial newspaper stories of July 29, 1952, of the USAF admitting to a "shoot down" order being in place. Wilbert Smith said their analysis showed that the piece was metal, a matrix of magnesium orthosilicate with some iron rust (hardly "concrete"). Smith said he showed it to Knowles. Knowles confirmed that Smith showed it to him, and also gave the same (external) description of the piece as Smith did. Again readers are referred to the link. In one interview by Bob Groves (again see link), he notes: "There is some confusion at this point whether or not there was one or two pieces involved. One piece we know for sure was recovered by Commander Alvin Moore an intelligence officer with the CIA. It was transported back to Wilbert Smith along with a sample of angel hair." I certainly don't know the full story for the discrepancy in stories between the Smith/Knowles accounts and the Moore account in BB files. One possibility is the piece spoken of by Smith and Knowles wasn't the one recovered by Moore but some other one recovered by a search party that Smith mentioned. Another thing to think about is how do we know what was shown in the BB photos is really what was recovered? I think there is a consensus that BB was more of a USAF PR front for UFO investigations. Anything of a truly sensational nature, like a real piece off a flying saucer, would never make it into BB files..... It would be too highly classified and would be dealt with by someody else in a much more secretive fashion. Instead, it would be very easy to substitute some other piece of junk in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:49:14 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:46:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Rudiak >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:22:06 -0400 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:41:53 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:08:52 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >Incidentally I learned the other day that the Truman Archives >still include about 45,000 pages of classified material - as >compared with 300,000 from the Eisenhower. Much presidential >stuff does not even make it to Presidential Archives, but is >passed on to the next administration. >What I would very much like to see is other newspaper articles >similar to the one provided by Dave Rudiak from the July 29, >1952, Seattle Post Intelligencer, page 1, saying the "Air Force >Orders Jet Pilots to Shoot Down Flying Saucers..." There should >have been others. Stan and List, For some reason, articles about the Air Force's "shoot-down" order seem to be rare. The Seattle P-I article from INS is the only one I've found so far. Again: http://www.roswellproof.com/ShootDown_INS_72952.html Nonetheless, the public at large seems to have been aware of it. Grant Cameron found some letters and telegrams at the Truman Library protesting the order, most of them along the lines of "Are you crazy?" Two of these I scanned and put up on my website. http://www.roswellproof.com/Protests_1952.html There was also some talk in the newspapers of public panic. E.g., reporting on the big press conference of Gen. Samford and Gen. Ramey on July 29 in Washington, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote in their sub-headline, "Experts Answer Questions on Reported Objects to Avert Mass Hysteria." http://www.roswellproof.com/StLouisPostDispatch_7_30_52.html Several days later Gen. Ramey was on CBS TV being grilled by reporters. In answer to a question whether the Air Force was trying to dispel "hysteria," Ramey replied, "The Air Force is attempting now to make fast explanations." But he also claimed in another article that "he was convinced at least that the saucer's had no hostile intent. He did not rule out the possibility that the objects were interplanetary visitors, but he was exceedingly skeptical." http://www.roswellproof.com/Ramey_1952.html Ramey was sending mixed messages with his strange choice of words. He and Samford had been trying to sell the idea that there was no evidence of material existence to the saucers. If that were the case, then he should have said that he was convinced the phenomenon posed no danger. Why bring up "hostile intent?" Only material, animate things can have "intent" and "hostility." The evidence points to the Air Force being highly concerned about the saucers during the big 1952 flap. "Shoot-down" orders were put into effect, as evidenced by the INS article and the protest letters. Obviously the USAF thought the saucers were real material objects, because you can't shoot down mirages. According to Grant Cameron's website, quoting Brad Steiger, the shoot down order was quickly recinded on July 29 when the public became aware of it. Steiger's source for this information, I don't know. And whether the order was really rescinded, I also
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:31:26 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:47:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Rudiak >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too >good. >The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >came via Loren Gross. >A trio of musicians were northbound on US 395 from Southern >California to Reno, NV. >Anyhow, at 3:50 AM, a few minutes north of Big Pine, CA, putting >them a few miles south of Bishop, CA, a huge 'flying saucer', >width of a full city block, passed over at around 12,000' feet >altitude (judged from Mt. Whitney which is 14,000 ft or so), >going generally east or ENE toward the Nevada state line. >Visible for its orange color (glow I presume, it was still dark) >observers made out 2 rows of windows. >There was no sound other than their car, no visible exhaust etc. >Drake likened it to a Christmas tree ornament. The road was >otherwise deserted. >A search for Dick Drake led in circles. He was on his way for a >band engagement at a club in Reno. One sideman played accordion, >I doubt they made the annals of music history. >My question is this: Would FATE magazine have invented a story >like this, beginning to end, in 1961? The details are almost >too good, precise date, time of day, location, altitude etc. I'm >so used to imprecision for those data that I got suspicious, >maybe overly so. >The location is interesting. With a generally west to east >trajectory, the UFO would have come out of the loneliest >roadless part of the southern Sierras, headed for equally >deserted rough desert terrain north of the Nevada test site. The E or ENE trajectory would take the object in the direction of Goldfield and Tonopah, Nevada, only about 50 or 60 miles away. I might be able to search the Goldfield and Tonopah newspaper in a few weeks and see if anything appears there. It is also conceivable that somebody on Highway 95 between Las Vegas and Reno may have seen something and it might have shown up in one of the Vegas or Reno papers. Again I could search these.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:34:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:50:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Friedman >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:50:34 EST >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:58:51 -0400 >>Subject: Apology To Dick Hall >>Concerning the flap on this List over the air battle described >>imaginatively in Frank Feschino Jr.'s new book, The Braxton >>County County Monster: The Coverup of the Flatwoods Monster >>Revealed, I feel I should publicly apologize to Dick Hall for my >>overly harsh comments. >I don't mean to butt in here but if there were air battles at >that time and casualties occured there's an old trick I've used >for years to find out. >I'll send the info to you Mr. Friedman so you can peruse it. Thanks, though I won't hold my breath. Military Air Crashes are not easy to dig into. The NTSB is not involved. The Military Safety Mishap Board prepares a classified report. Most of the findings of such investigations are excluded from FOIA. Obviously it has been government policy not to admite the reality of flying saucers, so they are certainly not going to admit that pilots shot at them or that fire was returned. One of the half dozen stories that I mentioned about planes disappearing involved a Cuban Mig-21 in 1967. Fawcett and Greenwood (Clear Intent)presented some of my information. I had earlier heard about the case from someone who had interviewed me after a college lecture. With nobody around, he told me of working for the NSA and hearing the real time encounter and the wingman saying that the lead plane which had been told to shoot down the intruding UFO, had disintegrated, after a radar lockon was made. The NSA unit was told to list the plane loss as equipment malfunction and to ship the original tape, which was very unusual, a transcript was normally enough. The person typed out an account.. without his name, and I shared it with Bob Pratt who asked Bob Todd if he could find out more. Todd sent out a bunch of FOIA requests and then threatened to write Cuba. He was visited by the FBI and threatened by them and the USAF JAG people. I had shared with Len Stringfield and he put me in touch with another NSA guy who confirmed my guy's story. Just an anecdote?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:39:36 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:52:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Koi >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:41:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >For me to come to any conclusion regarding this case I would >have to examine the initial notes and reports of Donald Keyhoe, >Ivan Sanderson, and Gray Barker. I would have to read the >Flatwoods monster book and examine Frank's sources. I would have >to fly to Flatwoods and reinterview the former National Guard >officer and all the witnesses. If it is claimed that the Air >Force kept any debris or any other evidence I would have to >search military archives and file a FOIA request. Hi Josh, List, In case you find it useful as a starting point (or in case other members of the List want to brush up on the Flatwoods incident), I've cut and paste below some references from a draft UFO chronology I'm working on (which is presently incomplete). (When I circulate the chronology as a Microsoft Word document, it will be possible to sort the references for each event, document or person into alphabetical order, chronological order, or by length of discussion. In this email I have had to cut the columns for date and length of discussion, and simply included the list of references in alphabetical order by author). Some references relating to the Flatwoods incident: Baker, Alan in his The Encyclopaedia of Alien Encounters (1999) at pages 80-81 (in an entry entitled Flatwoods, West Virginia) of the Virgin hardback edition. Bergier, Jaques in his Extraterrestrial Visitations From Prehistoric Times to the Present (1970) at pages 149-150 (in Chapter 9) of the Signet paperback edition, at pages 168-169 of the Futura paperback edition (published under the title Mysteries of the Earth). Brookesmith, Peter in his UFO: The Complete Sightings Catalogue (1995) at page 54 (in Chapter 3) of the BCA hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Blitz hardback edition, and in the Barnes & Noble hardback edition published under the title UFO: The Complete Sightings). Bullard, Thomas E in Jerome Clark's The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 3 - High Strangeness (1996) at page 583 (forming part of an entry entitled Waves) of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Chalker, Bill in UFO: 1947-1987 (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at page 183 (in Chapter 3.4.1, entitled Physical Traces) of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition. Christopher, Paul in his Alien Intervention (1998) at pages 32, 34-35, 36 (in Chapter 2), 141 (in Chapter 8) of the Huntington House softcover edition. Clark, Jerome in his The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 2 - Emergence of a Phenomenon (1992) at pages 144-146 (in an entry entitled Flatwoods Monster) of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Clark, Jerome in his The UFO Encyclopedia: The Phenomenon from the Beginning - 2nd edition : Volume 1:A-K (1998) at pages 409-412 (in an entry entitled Flatwoods Monster) of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Cohen, Daniel in his A Modern Look at Monsters (1970) at pages 223-228, 233-234 (in Chapter 8) of the Tower paperback edition. Cohen, Daniel in his The Encyclopedia of Monsters (1982) at pages 198-200 (in Chapter 7) of the Guild Publishing hardback edition. Cohen, Daniel in his The World of UFOs (1978) at pages 87-88 and 91 (in Chapter 11) of the Lippincott hardback edition. Dolan, Richard M. in his UFOs and the National Security State: Volume 1 (2000) at pages 183-184 (in Chapter 4) of the Keyhole softcover edition, at page 115 of the 2002 revised Hampton Road softcover edition. Edwards, Frank in his Flying Saucers - Serious Business (1966) at page 90 (in Chapter 7) of the Bantam paperback edition, at page 97 of the Mayflower-Dell paperback edition. Gansberg, Alan & Gansberg, Judith in their Direct Encounters: The Personal Histories of UFO Abductees (1980) at pages 43-44 (in Chapter 2) of the Walker & Co hardback edition. Guieu, Jimmy in his Flying Saucers Come From Another World (1956) at pages 241-243 (in Chapter 11) of the Hutchinson hardback edition. Holzer, Hans in his The UFOnauts (1976) at page 30 (in Chapter 2) of the Fawcett Gold Medal paperback edition. Huyghe, Patrick in his The Field Guide to Extraterrestrials (1996) at pages 56-57 (in the unnumbered section entitled Humanoid) of the Avon softcover edition (with the same page numbering in the NEL softcover edition). Keel, John in his Disneyland of the Gods (1988) at page 143 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled Other Realities) of the I-Net softcover edition. Keel, John in his The Cosmic Question (1975) (formerly The Eighth Tower) at pages 119-122 (in Chapter 14) of the Panther paperback edition. Keyhoe, Donald E. in his Flying Saucers from Outer Space (1953) at pages 116-120 (in Chapter 7) of the Henry Holt hardback edition, page 118-119, 120-122 of the Tandem paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in Encounters with UFO Occupants (1976) at pages 169-170 (in Chapter 10) of the Berkley paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their Flying Saucer Occupants (1967) at pages 116-117 (in Chapter 7) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their UFOs: The Whole Story (1969) at pages 47-48 (in Chapter 1) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral in Flying Saucers: the Startling Evidence of the Invasion from Outer Space (1966) (an enlarged version of her The Great Flying Saucer Hoax (1962)) at pages 77-78 (in Chapter 6) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral in The Humanoids (1969) (edited by Charles Bowen) at pages 144-145 (unnumbered chapter entitled UFO Occupants in United States Reports) of the Futura paperback edition. Menzel, Donald and Boyd, Lyle in their The World of Flying Saucers (1963) at pages 137-138 (in Chapter VII) of the Doubleday hardback edition. Moseley, James and Pflock, Karl in their Shockingly Close to the Truth! (2002) at page 119 (in Chapter 5) of the Prometheus hardback edition. Nickell, Joe in his Investigating the Paranormal (2001) at pages 301-311 (in Chapter 46 generally) of the Barnes & Noble hardback edition. Nickell, Joe in his article Investigative Files: The Flatwoods UFO Monster (2000), Skeptical Inquirer, Volume 24, Number 6, November/December 2000, at pages 15-19. Article available online at: http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-11/i-files.html Norman, Eric (pseudonum of Warren Smith) in his Gods, Demons and Space Chariots (1970) at page 7 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled Angels, Spacemen and UFO's) of the Lancer paperback edition. Randle, Kevin D and Estes, Russ in their Faces of the Visitors (1997) at pages 24-26 (in Part 1) of the Fireside softcover edition. Randle, Kevin in his Project Moon Dust (1998) at pages 60-61 (in Chapter 2) of the Avon softcover edition. Sachs, Margaret in her The UFO Encyclopedia (1980) at pages 106-107 (in an entry entitled Flatwoods, West Virginia) and included in a list entitled Chronological list of UFO sightings at page viii of the Corgi softback edition. Sanderson, Ivan T in his Uninvited Visitors (1969) at pages 40-55 (in Chapter 3), 80 (in Chapter 5), 150 (in Chapter 8) of the Tandem paperback edition. Smith, Warren in his UFO Trek (1976) at page 65 (in Chapter 4) of the Sphere paperback edition. Steiger, Brad in his Project Blue Book (1976) at pages 101- 102 (in Chapter Five) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. Steiger, Brad in his Strangers from the Skies (1966) at pages 13-14 (in Chapter 2) of the Award Books paperback edition. Stemman, Roy in his Mysteries of the Universe: Great Mysteries (1978) at page 205 (in Chapter 10) of the Book Club Associates hardback edition. Story, Ronald in his The Encyclopedia of UFOs (1980) at pages 127-128 (in an entry entitled Flatwoods (West Virginia) monster) of the NEL hardback edition. White, Dale in his Is Something Up There? (1968) at pages 80- 82 (in Chapter 7) of the Scholastic Book Services paperback edition. Wilkins, Harold in his Flying Saucers Uncensored (1955) at page 79 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled Messages From Outer Space?) of Pyramid paperback edition.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:16:36 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:22:26 -0500 Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse - Warren >From: Rich Reynolds <RRRGroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:24:59 -0500 >Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:12:00 -0800 >>Subject: Re: To Amuse Or Not To Amuse <snip> >>I don't feel that a UFO sighting would change Sakulich's views; >>his mind is made up, and he doesn't have time for the >>evidence=97even if he saw it with his own eyes! >>He can spell and form sentences, that I'll grant him, but beyond >>that, I think Terry depicts him well: uninformed, spouts >>opinions and portrays them as truth, i.e., conjecturist. >>I think the same can be said for his writing skills. >>Sakulich's twaddle is like a bad movie, thank god we can get up >>and leave! >But that's the point: we can take Sakulich or not. And I prefer >to hear his side of things, the other viewpoints he presents. I prefer _not_! I don=92t take issue with his "view points"; I take issue with "how" he gets there, as well as the confabulations he then passes on. >Sakulich is prolific, and ill-kempt as a writer in some minds, >but for me he delivers a message which should not be discounted, >even by die-hard UFO believers. I appreciate your civility in regards to young Sakulich; however, his message gets lost in his delivery. >If the UFO matter was settled, really settled - that they exist >as something more than unidentified things in the sky - we would >not be spending so much time discussing them here. Again, it=92s not the "subject matter" I take issue with. >So Sakulich makes UFO-sters angry. I like the vituperative >energy he provides. That's all. And he does have a constituency. >Rich Disgust would be the operative noun for me. "Energy" is a good thing, particularly if one has the ability to convey that through the pen; however, 'malicious' energy is but a waste of the writer=92s vigor, and generally breed=92s contempt. Followers of dogma based on ignorance unfortunately is more common then not.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 17 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:16:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:25:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - White >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:29:58 -0800 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >However, in a universe where everything is moving with respect >to everything else, I have high doubts about UFO 'portals' >lingering in Bonnybridge Scotland say, or Lake Wewewawa, >Wisconsin (which I just invented). Just as the much lower-tech "St. Elmo's Fire" can attach to a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:31:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:40:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:35:23 +0200 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:05 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 14:13:06 +0200 >>>>Subject: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >>>>appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >>>>If so, would this be for refueling purposes (fuel cell recharge) >>>>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>>>activity - if this is at all possible? ><snip> >>Are all scientific discoveries not >>just a question of believing hard enough to move a mountain ie >>can't we make anything happen given time and a inquiring mind? >Do you suppose that if you believe hard enough in nuclear >reactors being interdimensional UFO portals, or some such, this >will make it so? >>Are all future scientific discoveries not present as we speak, >>and the keys to them, merely waiting to be turned? I do trust my >>intuition its what I have been given. >Are you saying that UFO-portals over nuclear reactors is an >absolute Platonic truth, out there waiting to be discovered, and >that whereas we would naively associate "discovery" with >processes of investigation and evidence, in this case we can >dispense with such formalities and substitute your intuition? >>Thanks for all the replies from the List. It's time to confirm or >>deny my speculation. >I'd be interested to know how you propose to do that? >The answer to your original question is "Yes, there is some >evidence of a statistical association between report frequency >and nuclear facilities." See the sources that Richard Hall >referenced in his reply to you. ~If~ this association is >statistically significant, would it mean that there are larger >numbers of actual UFOs in these areas, or that the probability >of an extant report in the files is greater in these areas, per >unit population? >One explanation to eliminate before "portals" and "refuelling" >would be a secondary correlation between the distribution of >nuclear facilities and the numbers of vigilant observers, the >security and official reporting structures, etc., associated >with these and other high-tech and/or defence-related >installations. I recall that the Battelle Special Report #14 >found a correlation of just this kind back in 1953. (Perhaps >someone with a copy to hand would verify this.) >Can anyone think of a sensible statistical test that would test >between Maurice's hypothesis and this one? Hi Martin and Maurice, I can see one obstacle to such a statistical test. If in fact the military has knowledge of UFOs that they are not sharing, they might very well suppress all but the most public sightings, or those that are witnessed by military men with no *need to know* and are reported before proper *debriefing*. Since the only UFO reports regarding sensitive nuclear or top- secret military installations we have are those that the military lets slip, or what is reported by whistle-blowers of the *Disclosure Project* ilk, we may be missing the majority of such events. In other words, a statistical test might indicate that most sightings are not near such installations because it doesn't include the sightings about which we're most likely not to know. UFOs have been reported in a diverse enough collection of locations to draw an inference or two in my view. Sightings in out of the way places...isolated dark roads for example, indicate to me someone doing geological research and interested in avoiding scrutiny. Alternately, it would be a good place to find an unsuspecting human *away from the herd* for abduction and testing. Sightings in or near military, nuclear, or other restricted areas would reflect an interest in our technology, and particularly our weapons and warmaking ability. Alternately, they could visit these places as a function of a relationship or agreement which provides for periodic visits. Sightings in public areas with large numbers of witnesses could be a psychology exam of sorts, to test our ability to assimilate new experience or measure the elasticity of our paradigm- shifting abilities. Alternately, they could be military psi-ops events for basically the same purpose, but with terrestrial origins. Sightings in the air are among the most compelling since pilots are by necessity observant, and typically above average in accurately estimating size, distance, and typically above average in being familiar with many odd phenomena which folks less familiar might call anomalous. This is less true now than in the past, as pilots used to be a fairly small club of highly trained technicians. Today however pilots are more plentiful, and obviously there are more that are not so highly skilled. At any rate, I read about UFO sightings every single day, and the vast majority of even those that seem intriguing or worthy of further study take place in far-flung locales removed from military or nuclear facilities. If UFOs are visiting to learn about us, the distribution of sighting reports would seem to indicate that they make appearances in a wide variety of locations. This is a very good way to learn about us, if not the only way. I cannot accept a hypothesis that proposes that they appear at nuclear facilities because they are helpful for travel or fueling. I simply feel that a society able to get here has already cracked the travel and fuel nuts. I honestly do not believe that ET craft would require fuel in the gas tank sense at all, but would use a mode superfluous to linear *action/reaction* travel. Inertial, gravitic, what have you, I don't think ET has to top off the tank from time to time. I also don't think they'd have to wait for us to build nukes so they would have a doorway to get here.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:44:14 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:43:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Lehmberg >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:37:32 EST >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:29 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:59:34 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall <snip> >>>I will reserve judgment about the adequacy of Feschino's >>>research until I read the book (a friend is sending me a copy), >>>but I can't help being skeptical in advance given his apparent >>>tendencies toward extreme speculation. I will read the book >>>carefully and submit a review here. ><snip> >>I understand that speculation is not science, Mr. Hall, but it >>is certainly the precursor of it and the soil in which it grows >>or refines itself, I think. Moreover, one man's "extreme >>speculation" may be another's gainful inspiration. >There is no room for "extreme speculation" in any field that >wishes to be taken seriously. I would only offer here, Sir, that what is extreme to the goose might not be extreme to the gander, and that the word extreme, itself, may express a sentiment that holds more weight for one than it does for someone else. Case in point, just recently Dr. Rudiak testified that the speculation in question was a _little_ less extreme to him than it was to Mr. Hall, for instance. I tried to make the point that it is not "extreme speculation" that keeps UFOs from being taken seriously, but a dodgy, hijacked, and corrupted mainstream that uses every dirty klasskurtzian trick in the book to keep UFOs from being taken seriously, Mr. Kimball, thereby provoking that "extreme speculation" at issue here. There are those of us who are innocently sucked into the information void that is created by that counterfeit mainstream. We try and make what sense we can. Mr. Feschino may be one of us. >There is room for evidence. There >is room for objective analysis of that evidence. And there is >room for reasoned conclusions based on that evidence, >conclusions about which reasonable and informed people may >legitimately disagree. Beyond that, however, lies... well, a >place where ufology should not, but, unfortunately in my view, >far too often does, go. And all that unfortunate ufological direction taking, I suggest, is provoked, not by the sincere woo-woo crowd trying to make sense out of societal senselessness, but the suspect culture of denial that created the information void in the first place. If our governments and agencies and institutions were honorably forthcoming with regard to UFOs we'd have no need or predilection to go to that place where we "should not go." There would be no need. >Speculation like Feschino's (and here I talk only about the >aerial battle scenario that he cooked up, and which is certainly >extreme) only serves to undermine the efforts of those - like >Dick Hall - who have been trying to get people to take a look at >the real evidence for so many years, or, in Feschino's case, the >substantial work (albeit flawed in some respects) he did on the >actual Flatwoods incident. Well Sir... I offer that we really won't know that until we read the book, eh? Likely, not even then... but it won't be Mr. Feschino's fault. Likely, he's just another person trying to stand tall who will be under-rewarded for his trouble. Just
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:56:19 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:45:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >One explanation to eliminate before "portals" and "refuelling" >would be a secondary correlation between the distribution of >nuclear facilities and the numbers of vigilant observers, the >security and official reporting structures, etc., associated >with these and other high-tech and/or defence-related >installations. I recall that the Battelle Special Report #14 >found a correlation of just this kind back in 1953. (Perhaps >someone with a copy to hand would verify this.) >Can anyone think of a sensible statistical test that would test >between Maurice's hypothesis and this one?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Isn't It Strange? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:57:48 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:50:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - King >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:13:15 -0400 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? <snip> >The supposition that the "occupants" of these phenomena are well >ahead of us and pretty much know what our responses will be or >know what we are thinking is not new to me. I've thought this >might be the case for many years now. It explains a lot about >why we seem to be always scrambling to keep up, why we can't >just wait, unobserved, for them to show up for the really great >film or pictures, laying in wait with radar and aircraft or a >battery of scientists equipped with the best instruments [a la >Close Encounters of the Third Kind], should it be the case. >I'd be willing to bet that many investigators of the phenomenon >on this list have run across this "ignore it" syndrome many >times during their years of searching, researching and >cataloguing. Hi Don and Rich, Don, I agree with your assessment. A symptom of the event. The remaining question is... is it a natural 'pull the covers over the head' reaction, or is it an induced phenomenon? And then of course... if induced, by whom? Rich, you are describing a common aspect of witness reaction to UFO sightings. I think it's safe to say that there is a viable psychological 'explanation' for practically every post in this List... ever. Psychology is a science of description. Describing and quantifying human behavior so as to create a suitable model for what is 'normal', and thereby creating a benchmark against which to measure deviation from that 'norm'. The field of UFOlogy, with its myriad theories and its army of theorists, proponents, disciples and pariahs, presents a fertile playground indeed for psychology. And I can't say that it isn't oft deserved. Aren't we all here just a little crazy? Or better put... 'We're all Bozos on this bus.' <g> - nod to Firesign Theater
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - From: John Harney <magonia.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:59:36 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:18:28 -0500 Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:37:49 EST >Subject: Re: USAF vs. UFOs Flatwoods Friedman & Hall <snip> >Later, Feschino (at p. 60), records that Leavitt stated, >"Something was a cover-up!" The question is - did he say that >because he really believed it, or because Feschino's questioning >led him to adopt that answer? We'll never know. >Most of Feschino's interview with Leavitt contains questions >like this, which call into question Leavitt's entire testimony. >For example, at p. 60, Feschino asks: >"Do you think it was an experimental craft, or do you think it >came from someplace else?" >Leavitt replies: >"No. I think it came from somewhere else, personally." >But, would Leavitt had provided that answer - which, when you >place it in the context of the entire interview, and Feschino's >Q & A, is clearly the one Feschino was looking for - if Feschino >had asked the proper, simple, question, namely: >"What do you think happened that night?" >Perhaps. And then again, perhaps not. We'll never know. >Thus, when people talk about the qualifications for ufological >investigation, I would suggest that a minimum should be a >university course in oral research methodology, or something >similar, at least if you intend to interview people. Most >universities will let people audit such courses, at least up >here in Canada. >Asking the right questions, however, is a fundamental part of >investigation that should never be ignored. This is a very important point, which cannot be emphasised too strongly, particularly as many investigators don't seem to be aware that they are in the habit of asking leading questions, and others are in denial about it, even when it is obvious from published transcripts of their interviews with witnesses. This question was raised last year on this List, in connection with investigators of alien abduction reports. It is only too easy to find examples of such questioning techniques in UFO books and articles, but so many ufologists are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:27:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:21:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:39:36 -0000 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:41:53 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' ><snip> >>For me to come to any conclusion regarding this case I would >>have to examine the initial notes and reports of Donald Keyhoe, >>Ivan Sanderson, and Gray Barker. I would have to read the >>Flatwoods monster book and examine Frank's sources. I would have >>to fly to Flatwoods and reinterview the former National Guard >>officer and all the witnesses. If it is claimed that the Air >>Force kept any debris or any other evidence I would have to >>search military archives and file a FOIA request. >In case you find it useful as a starting point (or in case other >members of the List want to brush up on the Flatwoods incident), >I've cut and paste below some references from a draft UFO >chronology I'm working on (which is presently incomplete). >(When I circulate the chronology as a Microsoft Word document, >it will be possible to sort the references for each event, >document or person into alphabetical order, chronological order, > or by length of discussion. In this email I have had to cut >the columns for date and length of discussion, and simply >included the list of references in alphabetical order by >author). >Some references relating to the Flatwoods incident: <snip> What an incredible effort! Thanks to Isaac!! Now one can add The Braxton County Monster: The Coverup Of The Flatwoods
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Pulling Teeth - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:32:59 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:24:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Pulling Teeth - King >From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:04:33 -0500 >Subject: Re: Pulling Teeth >>From: Greg BNoone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:41:47 EST >>Subject: Pulling Teeth >>It's like pulling teeth. >>Getting witnesses to bona fide UFO sightings of note to come >>forward. >>I've got dozens of people who were part of startling CEs but >>won't come forward. They'll email me back and forth or stop me >>on the street and gab about it but when you get them just short >>of coming before the microphone or showing their film/video >>footage they back off and cower. >>They're afraid of ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric >>condemnation. >>I've got 2 people right now who could verify some amazing >>incidents and they've got documents, phone records and photos >>plus names of other witnesses that there are records of them >>being at the incidents. >>Yet getting them to come forward is like pulling teeth. >>This is highly frustrating and I'm sure I'm not the only one. >>How do you pros get folks to gab? Money isn't the issue here. >>If it was that simple I'ld have people jawin' til the break of >>dawn. > >>It's fear. Plain and simple. > >>It's gotten so bad that I've had to turn down and turn away >>people who've had CEs from CE IIIs and CE IVs. I tell them right >>off the bat that if they're not willing to come forward, don't >>bother me with it. Even when I know they're telling the truth >>and they're falling apart from stress or injuries. > >>I hate to do it but from where I sit from now on, if you want >>help then you better give help and fork over the information to >>help others. >>I hate to be cruel but I've about had it. >_You've_ had it? >Oh, where to begin.... >Speaking as a 'witness' I think you have some crust getting into >a snit because a witness(s) has chosen not to expose themselves >and their families to, (and I'll use your own words here) >"ridicule, blacklisting, and psychiatric condemnation." >Would you? I'll bet my house and car that - after careful >consideration - you wouldn't. You obviously have no idea what it >takes/means to come forward and report in public about anything >related to UFOs. <snip> Hi John and Greg, What I find most peculiar about this exchange it that Greg's lament is that there aren't more like John, while John's vehement retort is in large part due to the absence of more like Greg. Ironic to find ire there. There is of course just a little factor of the *Elephant Man* story at work here. The researcher always wants more data and to present that data for his peers. When the presentation requires a loss of privacy by the subject, a case can be made that the researcher is exploiting the subject. The researcher has many psychological tools to persuade the subject that the scrutiny is for the greater good, or that help will be forthcoming if the story be told. Greg, I'm sure your lament was within the context of not wanting to be responsible for the ills of another, and John, I'm sure you would agree that the Greg Boones of the world represent the best hope of bringing you and others' stories into respectable investigation. You both respect an open mind, and you both respect the power of the media when it works to destroy. In that there is no ire between you.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:38:06 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:26:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:57:32 -0600 >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >>Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >>I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too good. >>The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >>came via Loren Gross.... >>My question is this: Would FATE magazine have invented a story >>like this, beginning to end, in 1961? The details are almost too >>good, precise date, time of day, location, altitude etc. I'm so >>used to imprecision for those data that I got suspicious, maybe >>overly so. >As a member of Fate's editorial staff for many years, I can >state flatly that Fate would not "have invented a story like >this." The Fullers, whose magazine Fate was, were persons of >integrity, and they would _never_ have even contemplated making >up a story for the edification of its readers. Frankly, my blood >boils at the very question. >Besides that, even if the Fullers were the sleazoids implied in >the question, they would have had no reason to make up a story >of a UFO sighting. Reports of UFOs and other anomalous phenomena >came into the magazine's offices at a dizzying rate every single >day. Hi Jerry: Please don't get angry! Your reply is what I most wanted to hear really, and I was hoping for it. I had no intention of smearing the Fullers (thanks for the name) by implication or otherwise. For what little I knew, somebody else was at the helm in 1960-1961. That's just not my turf. That said, I'm left considering the veracity of bandleader 'Dick Drake', who appears to be the sole reporter of the incident to the people at Fate. Three musicians were given as witnesses. Efforts to Google up the proper Dick Drake have led nowhere. Apparently active in Southern California, and well known enough to get a gig in a Reno club (despite the accordion) I haven't found any matches browsing. This is no surprise really. Good locally known bands of the early 1960s are all but forgotten now. For reference, the incident is placed at 0340 hrs (3:40 AM, still dark) on US 395 perhaps 10 miles North of Big Pine, CA. on the morning of 18 April 1960, when a "BIG SAUCER", emphasis from Dick Drake, passed over the car headed generally East. The location makes this case interesting to me. I have entered the incident in the database, and want some feedback for the 'credibility' field, always highly subjective. Best wishes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:49:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:54:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Friedman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:37:32 EST >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:29 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall <snip> >>I understand that speculation is not science, Mr. Hall, but it >>is certainly the precursor of it and the soil in which it grows >>or refines itself, I think. Moreover, one man's "extreme >>speculation" may be another's gainful inspiration. >There is no room for "extreme speculation" in any field that >wishes to be taken seriously. There is room for evidence. There >is room for objective analysis of that evidence. And there is >room for reasoned conclusions based on that evidence, >conclusions about which reasonable and informed people may >legitimately disagree. Beyond that, however, lies... well, a >place where ufology should not, but, unfortunately in my view, >far too often does, go. The best example I know of "extreme speculation" is the entire SETI effort. No evidence whatsoever is provided. Press usually gives it a free ride. In addition, planning for the capabilities of any deep space probe, going where no one has gone before, requires "extreme speculation" as to what might be found in order to try to cover all bases as to what tools should be used to try to get the evidence to provide facts instead of speculation. Extreme speculation might have helped IBM avoid their massive losses because they vastly underestimated how many people would want a computer and what they would want it for. Frankly, I believe that while one should certainly justify conclusions with evidence, one must on occasion wildly speculate when it is almost impossible to obtain the evidence required. Dismissal without investigation is really not much better than "wild speculation" is it? >Speculation like Feschino's (and here I talk only about the >aerial battle scenario that he cooked up, and which is certainly >extreme) only serves to undermine the efforts of those - like >Dick Hall - who have been trying to get people to take a look at >the real evidence for so many years, or, in Feschino's case, the >substantial work (albeit flawed in some respects) he did on the >actual Flatwoods incident. Hindsight is often 20/20. I have been chastised for not tape-recording my first telephone conversation with Major Jesse
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:09:26 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:55:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:44:18 +0000 >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >>Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >>I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems >>almost too good. >>The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, >>and came via Loren Gross. ><snip> >>Any ideas on the credibility factor? >To the sage of Lake Wewewawa, Wisconsin, my question is this: >What was the date of the sighting? I can check various listings >given the month and date in 1960. >Greetings from Lakeswampgas, Maryland. Hi Dick: As noted in a response to Jerry, the incident is dated 18 April, 1960. Time = "around 20 minutes to 4:00 AM" or 0340 local time. I haven't checked yet if that's PST or PDT, but it was still dark out per band leader Dick Drake. Drake likened it to a Christmas tree ornament, orange in color with 2 rows of 'windows' which showed up black against the body of the craft. "The orange color of the craft stood out brightly" which I take as some sort of glowing effect. The musicians discussed this and decided it had to be the size of a large city block. It made no turns or other accelerations, just straight level steady flight. They had it in sight for 3 or 4 seconds. No noise or exhaust was noticed. The band was northbound on US 395 when and the craft passed overhead left to right, or generally eastbound. Gross gives the source: FATE Magazine for July, 1961.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:23:50 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:57:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:16:34 -0500 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:29:58 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>However, in a universe where everything is moving with respect >>to everything else, I have high doubts about UFO 'portals' >>lingering in Bonnybridge Scotland say, or Lake Wewewawa, >>Wisconsin (which I just invented). >Just as the much lower-tech "St. Elmo's Fire" can attach to a >moving craft, I don't see, given our lack of knowledge about how >portals work, that a portal couldn't attach to a place.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Little Men In Green? - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:36:00 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:00:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? - Boone >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:35:47 -0500 >Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:23:11 EST >>Subject: Re: Little Men In Green? >>I found this reference from a Scott Corrales story from 2002. >>Any follow up on it? >>http://www.ncbuy.com/news/2002-06-10/1004229.html <snip> >The "green dwarf" was part of the 2002 Argentinean Cattle >Mutilation wave. Some said it was actually a vagrant dressed in >green (seriously!) while others thought it was, in fact, one of >the many "petisos" or hairy dwarves that populate Argentinean >fact and fiction. Thanks for remembering that news item :-) You're welcome Scott. I think it's an important story! I hope you have more on the subject. It says to me that these stories of little people, dwarves, beings come from every corner of the globe! Subterraneans which we see aren't that far off with the latest on that find in Indonesia last year of a branch of hominids that were indeed little cave dwelling people. If you've any more info or books and such please lemme know.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Pulling Teeth - Matteson From: Gary Matteson <mystrius.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:22:59 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:04:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Pulling Teeth - Matteson >From: Greg BNoone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:41:47 EST >Subject: Pulling Teeth >It's like pulling teeth. >Getting witnesses to bona fide UFO sightings of note to come >forward. <snip> Let me be clear, I am speaking only for myself regard the following: As serious as that is for you, Greg, this is no less so here. Among the many folks who come to our MUFON-NE meetings, most come to listen and to discuss, often presenting another interesting point of view. Often, these are very lively meetings. What is disappointing to me, the very few who are unwilling to offer their thoughts, or to state their interest; they do not offer an E-Mail address (or sometimes, a phone number) when asked, to contact them. Why? To be blunt: It is my opinion, unjustified paranoia barring the door. A helpless feeling overcomes me, we are unsuccessful with attempts to persuade any with that mindset, there is no need to act in such a manner. From my perspective, what a sad
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:10:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:30:06 -0700 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:51:07 +0200 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>>Yes the term "portals" does sound rather fortean but in a recent >>>paper written by Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee >>>and Harold Puthoff called "Inflation-Theory Implications For >>>Extraterrestrial Visitation" they reference recent Superstring >>>and M-Brane theories which imply that other universes could be >>>co-existing right beside ours. <snip> >>I am interested. Did UFO activity not increase in leaps and >>bounds as our nuclear activity increased here on earth? I am >>just speculating. <snip> >In FSR 49/1, Spring 2004, is an article The Flying Triangle >Mystery: Don't Think Of A Black Triangle, which states "its >alarmingly high number of visits to nuclear power stations along >the east coast [of England]." One thing I find missing in most of the discussions on this and other UFO lists is the distinct possibility some or perhaps many UFO sightings could be due to military surveillance, exercises or deliberate deception. Discussions go on and on about a UFO possibly being from Mars, distant galaxies or coming through "portals" but rarely is the possibility it was man-made even considered. Anyone notice something wrong with this picture? And when such a possibility is proposed (that a UFO could be man-made), it is quickly squashed with statements like, "Show me the technology" or "we don't have anything like that." Yet it makes more sense to assume it is from another planet or coming through 'portals'?! What better way to hide something than in plain sight as something no one would label "man-made". What better way to conduct surveillance over foreign and/or restricted territories than doing it in such a way no one will believe it even if they see it with their own eyes. Ever notice how easily we accept UFOs sighted over nuclear facilities than possible man-made UAV's or MAV's? Anyone realize how strange it is for so many intelligent people to live most of their lives rarely considering such rational possibilities? And... has anyone noticed how quickly these theories are rejected, attacked and dismissed? _Especially_ on UFO Lists? This 'syndrome' confused the crap out of me until I came across a web site about the classic techniques of propaganda. I'd read these techniques before in reference to tactics used by alleged "government agents" to 'debunk' UFOs but, for the first time, I recognized them in use in the opposite direction - to debunk the truth. What better way to hide something than in plain sight as something no one would _perceive_ as man-made. They may see one thing with their eyes, but they will _perceive_ a UFO. What we see with our eyes is vision or sight but how we process what our eyes see is perception. Anyone who knows even a little bit about magic, illusion and the art of deception understands the basics of human perception and how perception is manipulated. "UFO perception" is more than mere slight of hand and illusion, it involves so much more than I can even begin to describe in this soon-to-be-forgotten post. UFOlogy has spent decades studying UFOs. What if UFOlogy is leading us _away_ from the truth rather than closer to it? If you give people paradigms they will accept and believe, they won't go looking for other truths. By keeping UFOlogy _focused_ on UFOs, perception is filtered through popular beliefs and theories about them. Keep the public distracted and confused and no one will ask embarrassing questions or demand true accountability. But above all...maintain the status quo. If even one of those UFOs sighted over nuclear facilities was/is man-made, then we should be terribly concerned. Given the current state of terrorism in the world, anything that can get away with buzzing a nuclear facility poses a threat to all of humanity. Why is it easier to accept a UFO over a nuclear facility than something man-made? Why is it more comforting and almost nonchalant to assume anything observed over military bases, government offices, our tallest buildings and nuclear facilities are UFOs than something made by humans? In this case, the known may be more frightening than the unknown. Under no circumstances should the public become alarmed. UFOs pose no threat to humans...(as long as they're on OUR side).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:49:31 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:14:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' - Friedman >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:49:14 -0800 >Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:22:06 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Leir's 'Alien Debris' <snip> >The evidence points to the Air Force being highly concerned >about the saucers during the big 1952 flap. "Shoot-down" orders >were put into effect, as evidenced by the INS article and the >protest letters. Obviously the USAF thought the saucers were >real material objects, because you can't shoot down mirages. >According to Grant Cameron's website, quoting Brad Steiger, the >shoot down order was quickly recinded on July 29 when the public >became aware of it. Steiger's source for this information, I >don't know. And whether the order was really rescinded, I also >don't know. Maybe they kept shooting. Always good to get more data. I think the order was not rescinded because as noted by Frank, page 203, a SECRET CIA memo on Sept. 24, 1952, from Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence, to DCI W.B. Smith states: "Major Air Force bases have been ordered to make interceptions of unidentified flying objects". The entire memo is given in Tim Good's, Above TOP SECRET, p.506. I seem to recall that Brad Sparks was heavily involved in getting this and other CIA UFO documents declassified in 1977.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Whitley Strieber's Novella Pain From: Chris Burns <Thurstonoreggae.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:16:35 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:16:38 -0500 Subject: Whitley Strieber's Novella Pain Dear List, As Strieber's novella, Pain, (released as a pdf download) hasn't been available in years with no sign of a re-release, does anyone know anywhere I could get this ebook file? Pain, by the way, is a short story he wrote immediately after his first cabin encounter, and I am extremely curious to read it as I have just reviewed some of his Communion-era interviews and essays.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:27:41 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:20:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Shough >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:13:15 -0400 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:48:56 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? <snip> >I'd be willing to bet that many investigators of the phenomenon >on this List have run across this "ignore it" syndrome many >times during their years of searching, researching and >cataloguing. Hi Don I wonder if this is unique to ufology? Psychical researchers have noted a similar effect. In the 1890s the French physiologist Charles Richet noted "a curious anomaly of our minds" due to which strange events failed to register with a full sense of reality until the experimenter was "mentally habituated". In a paper read to the SPR in 1899 Richet admitted that he had previously laughed at the experiments of Sir William Crookes until making his own observations in Milan. But even after that, he said: "... a remarkable psychological phenomenon made itself felt; a phenomenon deserving of all your attention. Observe that we are now dealing with observed facts which are nevertheless absurd; which are in contradiction with facts of daily observation and which are denied not by science only, but by the whole of humanity - facts which are rapid and fugitive, which take place in semi-dartkness, almost by surprise; with no proof except the testimony of our senses, which we know to have been often fallible. After we have witnessed such facts, everything concurs to make us doubt them. Now, at the moment when these facts take place they seem to us certain, and we are willing to proclaim them openly; but when we return to ourself, when we feel the irresistable influence of our environment, when our friends laugh at our credulity - then we are almost disarmed, and we begin to doubt. May it not all have been an illusion? May I not have been grossly deceived? And then that experiment which once seemed so conclusive gets to seem more and more uncertain, and we end by letting ourselves be persuaded that we have been the victims of a trick." Other SPR experimenters observed a similar effect. Like Charles Fort's lament about "our slippery brains". It's as though the strong current of 'everyday reality' irresistably erodes anomalous experiences away until they are on some level no longer visible. Witnesses can be effectively blinded to what they are socially not permitted to experience. Remember the classic "playing card experiment" that Kuhn used as an illustration for paradigm shift? Subjects were rapidly flashed images of playing cards with an occasional RED four of clubs, say. Often they literally could not "see" the anomalous cards because they had no counterpart in their expectation. Some subjects got very distressed, but couldn't work out why. Some sort of profound mental set like this could be operating naturally in all of us, a psychological "firewall" against radically anomalous incursions from a region of actuality with which we are not as a species evolutionarily equipped to deal.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:22:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:22:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Reynolds >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:57:48 -0600 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >The field of Ufology, with its myriad theories and its army of >theorists, proponents, disciples and pariahs, presents a fertile >playground indeed for psychology. And I can't say that it isn't >oft deserved. >Aren't we all here just a little crazy? Or better put... >'We're all Bozos on this bus.' <g>- nod to Firesign Theater Kyle, as one of the Bozos on the bus, let me offer this... The phenomena we're dealing with has been observed or experienced for a long time. What are the originators of the phenomena striving for; what's taking them so long to accomplish their "mission"? The purpose is inscrutable, something like that of the insane Deity we call God. These "puppet masters" control the masses? And those who think they're controlling the masses? (The military/politicos) It's Kafkaesque. And we're no closer to defining the UFO mystery than we are determining if God is dead or alive, or ever lived at all.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:54:57 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:23:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hall >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul, jkclark.nul >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:38:06 -0800 >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:57:32 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>>To: Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0800 >>>Subject: Report Is Almost Too Good >>>I'm entering a case from 1960 that in some ways seems almost too good. >>>The narrative is taken from FATE magazine for July 1961, and >>>came via Loren Gross.... >>>My question is this: Would FATE magazine have invented a story >>>like this, beginning to end, in 1961? The details are almost too >>>good, precise date, time of day, location, altitude etc. I'm so >>>used to imprecision for those data that I got suspicious, maybe >>>overly so. >>As a member of Fate's editorial staff for many years, I can >>state flatly that Fate would not "have invented a story like >>this." The Fullers, whose magazine Fate was, were persons of >>integrity, and they would _never_ have even contemplated making >>up a story for the edification of its readers. Frankly, my blood >>boils at the very question. >>Besides that, even if the Fullers were the sleazoids implied in >>the question, they would have had no reason to make up a story >>of a UFO sighting. Reports of UFOs and other anomalous phenomena >>came into the magazine's offices at a dizzying rate every single >>day. >Hi Jerry: >Please don't get angry! Your reply is what I most wanted to hear >really, and I was hoping for it. >I had no intention of smearing the Fullers (thanks for the name) >by implication or otherwise. For what little I knew, somebody >else was at the helm in 1960-1961. That's just not my turf. >That said, I'm left considering the veracity of bandleader 'Dick >Drake', who appears to be the sole reporter of the incident to >the people at Fate. Three musicians were given as witnesses. >Efforts to Google up the proper Dick Drake have led nowhere. >Apparently active in Southern California, and well known enough >to get a gig in a Reno club (despite the accordion) I haven't >found any matches browsing. >This is no surprise really. Good locally known bands of the >early 1960s are all but forgotten now. >For reference, the incident is placed at 0340 hrs (3:40 AM, >still dark) on US 395 perhaps 10 miles North of Big Pine, CA. on >the morning of 18 April 1960, when a "BIG SAUCER", emphasis from >Dick Drake, passed over the car headed generally East. >The location makes this case interesting to me. I have entered >the incident in the database, and want some feedback for the >'credibility' field, always highly subjective. I was unable to find any other cases anywhere for 18 April 1960 in my files, but that was a very slow year with little public
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 18 Re: Apology to Dick Hall - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:46:33 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:25:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology to Dick Hall - Kimball >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:44:14 -0600 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:37:32 EST >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall <snip> >>There is no room for "extreme speculation" in any field that >>wishes to be taken seriously. >I would only offer here, Sir, that what is extreme to the goose >might not be extreme to the gander, and that the word extreme, >itself, may express a sentiment that holds more weight for one >than it does for someone else. Case in point, just recently Dr. >Rudiak testified that the speculation in question was a _little_ >less extreme to him than it was to Mr. Hall, for instance. Mr. Lehmberg: I accept that the USAF issued orders to track, intercept and even, perhaps, engage with UFOs. Just because that is the case, however, does not mean that it happened in the Flatwoods case, as described by Feschino, unless he can offer some evidence to that effect other than pure speculation. >I tried to make the point that it is not "extreme speculation" >that keeps UFOs from being taken seriously, but a dodgy, >hijacked, and corrupted mainstream that uses every dirty >klasskurtzian trick in the book to keep UFOs from being taken >seriously, Mr. Kimball, thereby provoking that "extreme >speculation" at issue here. There are those of us who are >innocently sucked into the information void that is created by >that counterfeit mainstream. We try and make what sense we can. >Mr. Feschino may be one of us. I grant you that there are those debunkers out there who make life difficult, but a rational, thinking person can see them for what they are, a la Joe Nickell with his barnyard owl explanation (which isn't really his, but just something he lifted from someone else, so he's not even an original debunker, but just a pale copy). However, should ufology descend to the same level, only in reverse, where there is an information overload, and where every claim is simply accepted as the truth at face value, just as debunkers reject every hypothesis, or piece of evidence, out of hand? I would hope not. >>There is room for evidence. There >>is room for objective analysis of that evidence. And there is >>room for reasoned conclusions based on that evidence, >>conclusions about which reasonable and informed people may >>legitimately disagree. Beyond that, however, lies... well, a >>place where ufology should not, but, unfortunately in my view, >>far too often does, go. >And all that unfortunate ufological direction taking, I suggest, >is provoked, not by the sincere woo-woo crowd trying to make >sense out of societal senselessness, but the suspect culture of >denial that created the information void in the first place. If >our governments and agencies and institutions were honourably >forthcoming with regard to UFOs we'd have no need or >predilection to go to that place where we "should not go." There >would be no need. I agree; the governments (yours and mine) have been woefully unforthcoming as to the truth (which may or may not be extraterrestrial in nature). That doesn't mean we should go around making things up. How, exactly, does that help speed along the search for the truth? Instead of writing a book with "imaginatively created" scenarios, like Feschino's, perhaps I should fake some documents, then make a film about them, in the hopes that they'll flush the truth out? Perhaps I should "imaginatively create" a UFO incident (easy enough to do with the technology I have access to) for the same purpose? To me, there would be no difference between those things, and a writer who "imaginatively creates" a massive aerial battle scenario between UFOs and the USAF, and then presents it as if it was a factual event. The effect is the same (assuming I was caught) - ufology is brought into disrepute, and the "other side" chalks up another win. >>Speculation like Feschino's (and here I talk only about the >>aerial battle scenario that he cooked up, and which is certainly >>extreme) only serves to undermine the efforts of those - like >>Dick Hall - who have been trying to get people to take a look at >>the real evidence for so many years, or, in Feschino's case, the >>substantial work (albeit flawed in some respects) he did on the >>actual Flatwoods incident. >Well Sir... I offer that we really won't know that until we read >the book, eh? Likely, not even then... but it won't be Mr. >Feschino's fault. Likely, he's just another person trying to >stand tall who will be under-rewarded for his trouble. Just >like you and me and Mr. Hall. I wouldn't place Dick Hall and Frank Feschino in the same ufological category (a kind of ufological relativism where everyone is adjudged to be equally worthy just for trying), in the same way that I wouldn't put FDR and Warren Harding (or, for we Canadians, Sir Wilfred Laurier and Arthur Meighen) in the same category, but I leave individual judgements on that point up to people who read Feschino's book, or who may, for some inexplicable reason, be Harding or Meighen fans.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 3 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:38:57 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:06:27 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 3 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 3 January 19, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ HUYGENS MAKES SAFE LANDING ON TITAN "A European spacecraft Friday," January 14, 2005, "sent back the first detailed pictures of the frozen surface of Saturn's largest moon, Titan, showing stunning black-and-white images of what appeared to be hilly terrain riddled with channels or riverbeds carved by a liquid." "One picture, taken about 10 miles (16 kilometers) above the surface as the Huygens spacecraft descended by parachute to a safe landing after a seven-year voyage from Earth, showed snaking dark lines cut into the light- colored surface." "'Clearly there is liquid matter flowing on the surface of Titan,' said scientist Marty Tomasko of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory at the University of Arizona in Tucson, which made the probe's camera." "'It almost looks like a river delta,' he said, 'It could be liquid methane or hydrocarbons that settled out of the haze' that envelops Titan." "Another image, taken about 5 miles (8 kilometers) above the surface, showed light and dark masses, which Tomasko said seemed to be shadows, indicating a varied terrain. The dark areas appeared to be flooded or to have been so at an earlier time." "A third image taken at the surface showed several large white chunks--boulders or blocks of water ice--in the foreground and a stretch of gray surface behind them." "'There aren't too many planets with liquid,' Tomasko said, 'There's Earth, and now there's Titan.'" "'We clearly have a success,' said Dr. Jean-Jacques Dordain, director-general of the European Space Agency (ESA), 'This is a fantastic success for Europe." "Titan is the first moon other than Earth's to be explored." With a diameter of 3,190 miles, Titan is slightly larger than the planet Mercury. Titan's surface temperature is 292 degrees below zero on the Fahrenheit scale. Titan is about 1.3 billion miles (1.9 billion kilometers) from Earth. "Huygens was spun off from the Cassini mother ship on (Friday) December 24 (2004) before its descent to the surface of Titan." "Scientists say they received more than three hours of data from Huygens ' descent and more than 10 minutes of data to the surface. Applause erupted at Mission Control in Darmstadt (Germany) at news of the data transmission." Huygens entered Titan's thick atmosphere at an altitude of about 250 miles (400 kilometers). It then dropped through the Haze Zone, between 186 and 62 miles (297 to 99 kilometers) and then through rain until it reached the surface. "The heart of the mission was the probe's two-and-a- half hour parachute descent, taking pictures and sampling the atmosphere before landing on Titan." "Early signals confirmed the probe had powered up for entry and deployed the parachute, and officials were confident it made a safe landing because Huygens was designed to go on transmitting from the surface for at least three minutes before its batteries died--a total transmission of less than three hours. But the signals kept coming for more than five hours." "The Cassini-Huygens mission was launched October 15, 1997 from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Mission officials--who have waited since 1997 for Huygens to reach its destination--had tears in their eyes as the first signal was picked up, indicating the probe was transmitting to the Cassini mother ship." The probe was named after Christiaan Huygens, a Netherlands astronomer who discovered Titan while exploring the rings of Saturn by telescope during the Seventeenth Century. (See the Minneapolis Star-Tribune for January 15, 2005, "Images from Titan amaze," page 1A, and "Channels can be seen in frozen surface," page 4A.) FIREBALL AND SKY BOOM FRIGHTEN MANY IN INDIA "Villages in India are in a state of shock and local officials are baffled after a fireball was seen crashing to Earth Tuesday night (January 11, 2005), causing a massive explosion." "'I saw a large ball of fire in the air,' a farmhouse caretaker told the (newspaper) Mumbai Mid-Day. 'It arrived from the east so fast that, before I could do anything, my house shook and all my utensils came crashing down.'" "More than half a dozen villages near Khopoli, Uran and Panvel felt the impact." "Locals ran outside of their homes and remained outside for fear of roofs collapsing." "'The noise was so loud. For a moment, I thought I had turned deaf. It was almost like a huge bomb blast,' said resident R. Chaitanya." "More than 80 calls about the event flooded the regional police headquarters in Navi Mumbai." Immediately after the sky boom, "a tornado-like effect was also detected in the jungled districts of Bazruddin, Wavochi and Karochi, which saw trees uprooted." "Air traffic control officers say all planes have been accounted for, and the Mumbai Meteorological Department ruled out any aerolite or meteorite event." "Officer D.D. Bharsat in the village of Bharapada told the Mid-Day he saw fire and smoke" in the sky "and the impact sent leaves and other small articles from the ground hurtling into the air." "But police still haven't reportedly found the area where the blast occurred." "'Our men are travelling from village to village to find the exact spot of the unidentified explosion,' Superintendent Dyaneshwar Phadtare of the Rhigad police said. 'Many heard the explosion but nobody has been able to pinpoint the spot.'" (See the Indian newspaper Mumbai Mid-Day for January 12, 2005. Many thanks to Krishnari Bai Dharapurnanda for forwarding this newspaper article.) (Editor's Comment: Welcome to Earth Gets Clobbered Week here at UFO Roundup. Fireballs and sky booms were seen all over our planet last week If this was the January meteor shower, it's ten days ahead of schedule. Read on...) FIREBALL SEEN BY HUNDREDS NEAR TUCUMAN, ARGENTINA "A strange apparition appeared in the sky on Tuesday night," January 11, 2005, "in Tucuman province, Argentina. It surprised many Tucumanos and people in different towns of the province. No one is certain what occurred, but the experts believe that it might have been a meteorite." "'It was a ball of fire that crossed the sky from north to south. As it passed over, it lit up the entire sky like a white star. It then disappeared to the southeast,' explained Rene Arganaraz, who was with his companion Ricardo Baunaly at their house in Tafi Viejo," 8 kilometers (5 miles) northwest of San Miguel de Tucuman, the provincial capital, "at 11:30 p.m." "'There was a strong explosion,' the two men agreed." Argentina's "Civil Defense reported, 'People described an impressive luminosity in the sky, followed by an explosion and a shaking of the earth.'" "Many of the witnesses were from Leales and Cruz Alta," 20 kilometers (12 miles) southwest of San Miguel de Tucuman, "who said they observed a blue or green light. Other witnesses in Termas de Rio Hondo claim to have seen something similar to 'a shower of stars.'" "'It was definitely a meteor. They observed an enormous star of white light, very brilliant, late Tuesday evening. The meteor must have disintegrated in the upper atmosphere,' said an expert from the local university." (See the Peruvian newspaper El Comercio for January 12, 2005. Muchas gracias a Monica Gaetano de Silva para esto articulo de diario.) FIREBALL SPOOKS CROWD IN ANTIGO, WISCONSIN "On Tuesday evening," January 11, 2004, "there was light where there should be none and noise where quiet should have reigned." "Antigo (population 8,560) and Langlade County were apparently in the path of a meteor that brought reports of strange happenings from South Dakota to central Wisconsin. Motorists who were traversing the area reported the bright light in the sky about 6:15 p.m., and there were sounds that had people answering unknocked doors and peering into yards to determine who or what was lurking outside their homes." "The calls to local law enforcement started at about 6:12 p.m. with reports that a meteor had gone down in the Neva area and near the Langlade-Lincoln County line. But as far as anyone knows, there is no evidence that the meteor came to Earth." "Many people heard the noise and saw the light; houses rattled as the meteor passed." "Area law enforcement agencies contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at the" Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport "to determine what was going on, and the tower personnel said they had taken reports from an aircraft flying at 31,000 feet south of Eau Claire (Wisconsin) and another from a pilot outside of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Both reported bright flashes of light in the sky." "The Langlade County Sheriff's Department, in a report entitled 'X-File Info,' noted that loggers working in the area of the Taylor-Lincoln County line had reported seeing the glow of a fire in the woods, but were unable to find the source of the light." Antigo, Wis. is on Highway 45, just west of the Menominee Indian Reservation, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) northeast of Wausau. (See the Antigo, Wis. Daily Journal for January 12, 2005, "Meteor soars over area with light and noise." Many thanks to Mary Lou Jones-Drown for forwarding this newspaper article.) UFO STARTLES THOUSANDS AT MEXICO CITY STADIUM On Sunday afternoon, January 9, 2004, thousands of Mexicans filled the seats of the city's Plaza de Toros to watch the Temorada Grande bullfights. During the tenth fight of the afternoon, someone noticed a bright object in the sky, and soon all necks were craned upwards, including those of bullfighters Jose Luis Angelino of Tlaxcaltec and Humberto Flores of Jalisco. "The object, which appeared to be a silver globe, was captured by TV cameras for a moment while hovering in the air above the Plaza," Mexican ufologist Ana Luisa Cid Fernandez reported. "The object then darted away and disappeared over the horizon." "Images of this flying saucer were shown" Sunday evening "on the program La Jugada on Canal (Channel) 2 Television de Mexico at 10:30 p.m. The object was seen by thousands at the Plaza de Toros." (See the Mexican newspaper El Universal of January 10, 2004. Muchas gracias a Ana Luisa Cid Fernandez para esto articulo de diario.) HILLSIDE VANISHES AFTER UFO EVENT IN SONORA "More than half of a hill located on the coast near Hermosillo" in Mexico's state of Sonora "apparently 'vanished.'" "The event was classified by Sonoran scientists as 'strange and surprising.'" "According to a series of images taken by (the Mexican newspaper) El Imparcial, a hill belonging to the Sierra de Cirios near Puerto Libertad ceased to exist in a matter of hours." "At 8:54 a.m. yesterday (Friday, January 7, 2005), a reporter and a photographer from the newsroom saw what they took to be a UFO as they drove along Ruta 36 Norte (Route 36 North--J.T.) along the (Golfo de California) coastline. After the sighting, there arrived a strange phenomenon in which really fantastic clouds" obscured their view. "At 2:05 p.m., as shown by photos taken by the pair, a considerable part of the hill had disappeared." Studying a photo they shot at 9:02 a.m., the witnesses reported, 'Matter begins to fall from the object before it lands on the hilltop. This is one of 12 images I recorded of the changes before 9:07 a.m. The change of elevation of the hill on the right can be seen, and the formations on the left have changed shape." (See the Mexican newspaper El Imparcial for January 8, 2005. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Marco Reynoso para esto articulo de diario.) ANOTHER UFO SIGHTED IN EASTERN MEXICO "The sighting of an aerolite or Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) over La Antigua," a city in Mexico's state of Veracruz, "caused much expectation and uncertainty among local residents. The object fell at sunset, leaving a luminous wake." "According to preliminary reports collected by Notivel, around 6 p.m. yesterday (Thursday, January 6, 2004) several persons witnessed the event, which could be seen unaided. At the barracks of the Public Safety Office at Ciudad Carol, duty personnel received dozens of phone calls from people who believed it was an aircraft in flames, falling to the ground." "Others believed that the object was meteorite- shaped, since it left a wake as it fell to Earth." "A bright light was seen as it fell in the vicinity of La Antigua." "Personnel of the Public Safety Office, aboard their vehicle, surveyed the region, but as of yesterday no reports of any aerial or terrestrial accidents had been received, nor a possible explanation" of the event. "However, the sighting was a cause for alarm, as the light appeared to descend out of a point in space, only to fall somewhere on Earth." (Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Marco Reynoso para estas noticias.) SPHERICAL UFO SEEN AT ANOTHER BEACH IN CHILE On Saturday, December 18, 2004, "at around 8:30 p.m., Alejandra Bauerle was spending time on the beach at Cau- Cau, near Horcon" in Chile. "Upon looking at the sky and the lovely sunset, she became aware of some strange lights crossing the firmament. At first she believed they could be aircraft, but after analyzing the contrails left in the skies and the object's sudden and irregular movements, she dismissed the possibility altogether." "'It started out like a dot, perfectly round,'" Sra. Bauerle reported, "'And it became fuzzy, first as a vertical line and then as it moved toward the left. We thought it could be a commercial aircraft flying low, but it was too large to be the trail (contrail) of an airplane. We looked at it through binoculars and could see only the light.'" "It is not known if the light and the object were present or if it was only the impressions that they left. In fact, the object could barely be seen, only the tremendous light that became longer and changed course." (See the OVNI Chile report for December 31, 2004. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Guillermo Gimenez para estas noticias.) MAN PHOTOGRAPHS A UFO IN SANTA ROSA, ARGENTINA "On Saturday, December 18, 2004, at 3:45 p.m., a rural contractor managed to photograph a strange flying object in a field near Santa Rosa," a city in Argentina's La Pampa province. "Roberto Maggio was taking snapshots of the various (farm) machines working on tasks related to harvesting without even being aware of the UFO's presence." "That night, upon downloading the digital photos from the camera to his personal computer, he was startled to detect an object that showed a blurry outline. On its top and bottom, however, the object was much sharper, presenting a darker central area. Maggio was also able to detect a small blurry dot on an earlier photo but appearing with a better perspective in the next shot." "The witness claims not having natural objects which could have led to misinterpretation moving in front of the lens prior to taking the photographs." Santa Rosa is in eastern La Pampa province, located about 350 kilometers (210 miles) southwest of Buenos Aires, the national capital. (See the Argentinian newspaper La Arena for January 8, 2005. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Raul Oscar Chavez para esto articulo de diario.) SILVER SPHERE UFO SEEN IN O'CONNOR, AUSTRALIA On Sunday, December 19, 2004, at 3 p.m., Alex Burns reported, "I went outside to have a cigarette" in O'Connor, in the Australian Capital Territory (A.C.T.) near Canberra. "I was looking at the moon, which was at the time situated to the northeast of the city at 45 degrees in the sky. The sky was mostly cloud free, and there were no clouds near the object." "From behind a tree, a small spherical object became visible, moving in a straight line horizontally in what appeared to be a northerly direction about five degrees under the position of the moon (40 degrees above the horizon--J.T.) The object periodically flashed due to what I thought was a combination of rotation and the reflection of the sun." "I can't accurately estimate the height (altitude in the USA--J.T.) of the object. However, it was about the size of the radius of a cigarette filter at arm's length. The object appeared to jitter, moving up and down a few times, probably at a distance of about a hand's width, while still travelling forward at the same speed." "It then shot upwards at a 45-degree trajectory, without slowing or curving whatsoever. It was then that I called out to my housemate to come quickly and see what was in the air. The object then moved downwards in a large arc and vanished." "I knew for a fact it was not an airplane, a meteor, a satellite, a weather balloon or anything I have seen before. I am very excited by what I have seen, and I didn't feel afraid or have any negative emotions about it. Obviously, I don't know whether it was an alien craft. Maybe someone else saw something similar in the sky? It appeared to be spherical, metallic in colour, although I was quite far away." (Email Form Report) LUMINOUS ORANGE UFO SIGHTED IN TASMANIA On Sunday, January 2, 2005, at 1:30 a.m., M. Davy was driving home in Launceston, a city on Australia's island- state of Tasmania when she saw a strange glow in the dark sky. "Driving home, I saw it hovering in the northeastern sky," she reported, "It was a massive orange thing in the sky. As I travelled further along the road, it never seemed to move. It simply hovered in the sky. But I didn't seem to be close to it. It was orange, not really bright, with a round center, almost like a disc." "It didn't look like it was travelling anywhere but just appeared in the same spot. I would say it was about 45 degrees above the horizon." (Email Form Report) UFO FLOTILLA SPOTTED IN SAND SPRINGS, OKLAHOMA On Tuesday, January 11, 1005, at 8:15 p.m., Cheryl S. was outdoors at her home in Sand Springs, Oklahoma (population 17,451) when she saw strange lights approaching from the southwest. "I saw six bubble-shaped lights," she reported, "They appeared to be doing a movement in the sky. I called it 'dancing.' Four would be in a circle, and two outside the four. The lights reminded me of those spook lights down in Marfa, Texas (a long-running Fortean phenomenon located 229 miles southeast of El Paso--J.T.) They also lit up our backyard and our patio." She described the objects as "clear, round, no light trail following it when it moved back and forth across the sky. Approximate distance of an airplane flying overhead, but it was faster than any airplane. I called Channel 8 TV to report it. They said they had other reports of these lights." Sand Springs is in Sapulpa County, on Highway 412, approximately seven miles (11 kilometers) west of Tulsa. (Email Form Report) Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more UFO, Fortean and paranormal news from around the planet Earth--and occasionally, Titan--brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you next time. UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2005 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup on their Web sites or in news groups 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.nul> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://www.ufoinfo.com/submit/sightings.shtml -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster.nul> UFOINFO: http://www.ufoinfo.com Official Archives for UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:39:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:08:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reynolds On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:10:58 -0500 UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>writes: >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:39 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >UFOlogy has spent decades studying UFOs. What if UFOlogy is >leading us _away_ from the truth rather than closer to it? If >you give people paradigms they will accept and believe, they >won't go looking for other truths. By keeping UFOlogy _focused_ >on UFOs, perception is filtered through popular beliefs and >theories about them. Keep the public distracted and confused and >no one will ask embarrassing questions or demand true >accountability. But above all...maintain the status quo. Amy... You have hit a nail right on the head. This is a topic for
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:14 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:09:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:56:19 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>One explanation to eliminate before "portals" and "refuelling" >>would be a secondary correlation between the distribution of >>nuclear facilities and the numbers of vigilant observers, the >>security and official reporting structures, etc., associated >>with these and other high-tech and/or defence-related >>installations. I recall that the Battelle Special Report #14 >>found a correlation of just this kind back in 1953. (Perhaps >>someone with a copy to hand would verify this.) >>Can anyone think of a sensible statistical test that would test >>between Maurice's hypothesis and this one? >ANCOVA (Analysis of Covariance). Hi Cathy Yes, but how would you go from establishing a significant coefficient of correlation (when the distribution is corrected for population density, as has been claimed) to an analysis of causation - within the figures? I'm sure you're a far more competent statistician than me. I'd be interested to know how you would approach this. An analogous case that I'm fond of is the strong negative correlation between the percentage of open park space in different districts of London and the rate of accidents to children (as a proportion of all accidents). The 'obvious' conclusion is that increasing park provision reduces child accident rates, and we can see how that might happen - for example, an area with large park areas will tend to have fewer busy road intersections for a start. On the other hand, if the areas with more park space are monied areas then the families here might tend to be smaller, with fewer children as a percentage of population. Well-off professional families might also afford more child care, and there are other social factors that might lead to children in these areas being less likely to "go out to play", regardless of park provision. So the child accident rate might be smaller whatever the ratio of open to built space, and the correlation is not necessarily evidence for the "obvious" thesis that more parks are A Good Thing. In the present case I think it would be interesting to ask whether the correlation of UFO reports and nuclear facilities changes according to whether the reports are explained or not. If only "unknowns" show the correlation, not the "knowns", then it becomes interesting. (I personally doubt whether this would be found true, based on informal reading of numerous very low- value case reports from Oak Ridge and similar places in the early 50s especially. But it's something that can be checked. I'm not aware of any such work. Is anyone?) If it were true that "unknowns" alone showed this significant correlation it still would not be straightforward to demonstrate that this was a function of a frequency of "trufos" in the local sky. Other variables might correlate with the distribution of strategic sites (including air bases, nuclear plants, proving grounds, sea ports and industrial complexes) that Blue Book and Battelle had showed were the centres of report clusters as early as 1951-2. These variables might include the types of observer, the security awareness, the availability of reporting channels etc., plus the relative efficiency of winnowing poor reports at the grass roots level, all of which might conceivably weight the files with an excess of good unknowns from such areas even if the distribution of trufos across the continental sky were essentially constant. The NICAP Nuclear Connection Project work considers whether the correlation with nuclear sites is stronger than could be explained by the known tendency of good UFO reports to be made by observers with better education, and concludes that education probably cannot "account for" the whole value of the correlation. But I don't see any tests of statistical significance, and other factors do not appear to have been addressed. (Richard Hall may deign to correct me if I've missed something.) Specifically, how would you propose applying covariance analysis to isolate an absolute variability in the distribution of trufos?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:27:11 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:11:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:49:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:37:32 EST >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall <snip> >>There is no room for "extreme speculation" in any field that >>wishes to be taken seriously. There is room for evidence. There >>is room for objective analysis of that evidence. And there is >>room for reasoned conclusions based on that evidence, >>conclusions about which reasonable and informed people may >>legitimately disagree. Beyond that, however, lies... well, a >>place where ufology should not, but, unfortunately in my view, >>far too often does, go. >The best example I know of "extreme speculation" is the entire >SETI effort. No evidence whatsoever is provided. Press usually >gives it a free ride. Stan, Not to mention most of cosmology, which to a large extent appears to be nothing but imaginative guesswork. >In addition, planning for the capabilities of any deep space >probe, going where no one has gone before, requires "extreme >speculation" as to what might be found in order to try to cover >all bases as to what tools should be used to try to get the >evidence to provide facts instead of speculation. I can see that we have some semantical and definitional problems. I wouldn't call planning for contingencies 'speculation.' You are broadening the meaning of the word too much. >Extreme speculation might have helped IBM avoid their massive >losses because they vastly underestimated how many people would >want a computer and what they would want it for. >Frankly, I believe that while one should certainly justify >conclusions with evidence, one must on occasion wildly speculate >when it is almost impossible to obtain the evidence required. >Dismissal without investigation is really not much better than >"wild speculation" is it? When there is no evidence, you surely should not speculate wildly! If there is faint or marginal evidence that somehting may, possibly be true, the proper course is to vigorously seek more evidence (a la Jim McDonald), not substitute speculation. >>Speculation like Feschino's (and here I talk only about the >>aerial battle scenario that he cooked up, and which is certainly >>extreme) only serves to undermine the efforts of those - like >>Dick Hall - who have been trying to get people to take a look at >>the real evidence for so many years, or, in Feschino's case, the >>substantial work (albeit flawed in some respects) he did on the >>actual Flatwoods incident. >Hindsight is often 20/20. I have been chastised for not >tape-recording my first telephone conversation with Major Jesse >Marcel. I was at an airport and could not imagine that I would >be devoting so much time and effort in dealing with Roswell for >the next 27 years. I should have speculated more. Wrong use of the word again. Surely you must realize that encouraging people in the UFO field to speculate, instead of to investigate, is like throwing gasoline (petrol) on a fire. It seems to me very clear that in ufology, and noticeable on this list, that each time some oddity is reported (be it a bright fireball, an odd structure on Mars, or laser beams hitting airplanes) two immedoiate instincts are displayed: (1) to speculate; (2) to investigate. Actually sometimes (3) to ignore might be a better course. The latter (investigation) is greatly to be desired. The former is greatly overdone in ufology, and as a philosopher I am well aware of the views of Peirce and others on the role of imagination in science; they are not talking about open-ended speculation. In fact, you display some foresight or imagination - better words for what you are talking about - if you recognize
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Man Charged In Dr. John Mack Case From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:07:58 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:13:28 -0500 Subject: Man Charged In Dr. John Mack Case The driver involved in the car accident which resulted in the death of Dr. John Mack in London in September of last year has today been arrested and charged after reporting to a police station to answer his bail. He has been named as Raymond Czechowski, aged 50, of 8 West View Court, Elstree, Boreham Wood, London. He has been charged under Section 3A of the Road Traffic Act of causing death while driving without due care and attention and while under the influence of alcohol.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:27:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:15:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Ledger >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >I was unable to find any other cases anywhere for 18 April 1960 >in my files, but that was a very slow year with little public >interest so not too surprising. The Preoject Blue Book index >contains one case, in Dayton, Ohio, for that date. My Eastern Canadian UFO reports get scarce from early 1958 until
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:21:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:24:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Ledger >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:27:41 -0000 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:13:15 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? <snip> >>I'd be willing to bet that many investigators of the phenomenon >>on this List have run across this "ignore it" syndrome many >>times during their years of searching, researching and >>cataloguing. >I wonder if this is unique to ufology? Psychical researchers have >noted a similar effect. In the 1890s the French physiologist >Charles Richet noted "a curious anomaly of our minds" due to >which strange events failed to register with a full sense of >reality until the experimenter was "mentally habituated". <snip> >Now, at the moment when these facts take >place they seem to us certain, and we are willing to proclaim >them openly; but when we return to ourself, when we feel the >irresistable influence of our environment, when our friends laugh >at our credulity - then we are almost disarmed, and we begin to >doubt. May it not all have been an illusion? May I not have been >grossly deceived? And then that experiment which once seemed so >conclusive gets to seem more and more uncertain, and we end by >letting ourselves be persuaded that we have been the victims of a >trick." There are similarities, Martin, but consider the event that takes place and then this "effect" kicks in within minutes of the event. And not just with the one person present. The structural engineer, Jim is his first name, was with two others and three other witnesses were present. This is a bit different than just one person experiencing an event then having doubts over time. He just went home and did nothing. A 15 year old girl, Diane, [recounted to me when she was in her early 40s] and four of her friends are returning from a dance. A huge circular object materializes over them and very low. They are lit as if in an arena by brilliant light. they are transfixed. Then it rises and colored lights begin moving around the rim of the thing . It continues to rise then disappears in the night sky. They "freak out" and run for home and none of them calls the other or discusses it for three days. But they finally do discuss it. Another case. Three automobile occupants experience a near head- on collision with a UFO in Nova Scotia. They are returning home from Nova Scotia to Hamililton, Ontario, a trip that takes 48 hours. They don't discuss it during this time period but then go to the RCMP in Hamilton and make a 5 page report. >Other SPR experimenters observed a similar effect. Like >Charles Fort's lament about "our slippery brains". It's as >though the strong current of 'everyday reality' irresistably >erodes anomalous experiences away until they are on some level >no longer visible. Another thing I've noticed, maybe due to Fort's "slippery brain" effect, is though many witnesses to a truly fantastic event, admitted by themselves to have been one of the most incredible events in their lives, the event does not seem to have impacted them suffiieintly for them to note the damn date on which it happened and usually only a rough time frame. Often they can't exactly pin down where. Maybe it's the pilot in me but I am always aware of the date, time location and compass direction of which way I'm facing. The wind direction and sky conditions too. >Witnesses can be effectively blinded to what they are socially >not permitted to experience. Remember the classic "playing card >experiment" that Kuhn used as an illustration for paradigm >shift? Subjects were rapidly flashed images of playing cards >with an occasional RED four of clubs, say. Often they literally >could not "see" the anomalous cards because they had no >counterpart in their expectation. This anomalous red four of clubs is your unexpected UFO and what Kuhn noted gets closer to the UFO scenario. >Some subjects got very distressed, but couldn't work out why. >Some sort of profound mental set like this could be operating >naturally in all of us, a psychological "firewall" against >radically anomalous incursions from a region of actuality with >which we are not as a species evolutionarily equipped to deal. That puts us right back to where we started. Witnesses get distressed, even terrified. Some are fascinated and don't want the event to end. Two 14 year old girls [the Michelle case-1994] see the same object. One is reduced to tears and is terrified, begging the other who is rooted to the spot to go back to her house. The latter is using terms like" wow" and "neat" and it's beautiful. She returns home reluctantly. Whether this is just the same thing a different way, I don't know. But the act of ignoring and immediatly relegating the event to the never-go-there drawer in a matter of minutes doesn't allow for the external pressures of society and social
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:52:09 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:26:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good - Hatch >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:54:57 +0000 >Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:38:06 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Report Is Almost Too Good <snip> >>For reference, the incident is placed at 0340 hrs on >>US 395 perhaps 10 miles North of Big Pine, CA. on >>18 April 1960, when a "BIG SAUCER", emphasis from >>Dick Drake, passed over the car headed generally East. >>The location makes this case interesting. I have entered >>the incident in the database, and want feedback for the >>'credibility' field, always highly subjective. >I was unable to find any other cases anywhere for 18 April 1960 in my files, but that was a very slow year with little public interest so not too surprising. The Project Blue Book index contains one case, in Dayton, Ohio, for that date. Hi Dick: Much the same here. The Drake case is the only one listed for that date here, and nothing at all nearby for days before and after.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Secrecy News -- 01/18/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:59:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:28:11 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/18/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 6 January 18, 2005 ** NATIONAL SECURITY CONTINGENCY PLANS ** MORE NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES ** DOE REVISES POLYGRAPH POLICY ** HOMELAND SECURITY OPERATIONS MORNING BRIEFS ** ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION (CRS) NATIONAL SECURITY CONTINGENCY PLANS An expansive account of national security contingency planning has been newly published online. National security contingency plans are devised by government and military planners to address a large and diverse range of potential threat scenarios. The hierarchical structure of such plans are described, and many of the individual plans themselves are identified, in a new publication by independent national security policy analyst William M. Arkin as part of an online supplement to his new book "Code Names." See "National Security Contingency Plans of the U.S. Government" linked from this page: http://www.codenames.org/documents.html MORE NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES The latest Bush Administration National Security President Directive (NSPD) to have left a trace in the public domain is NSPD 41, entitled "Maritime Security." The existence and topic of the Directive, dated December 21, 2004, were reported today by Martin Edwin Andersen in Port Security News (www.portsecuritynews.com). The nine-page NSPD 41 (which is also designated Homeland Security Presidential Directive 13) "provides a strategy designed to coordinate federal, state and local governmental efforts with those of the private sector to protect ports and secure container cargos, while maintaining surveillance over U.S. territorial waters," according to Port Security News. An updated but still incomplete list of Bush Administration NSPDs and HSPDs is available here: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/index.html DOE REVISES POLYGRAPH POLICY The Department of Energy has responded to scientific criticism of its polygraph policy by proposing "significant reductions" in the number of employees who are subject to mandatory polygraph testing. But even as it acknowledged fundamental concerns about polygraph validity, presented recently by a National Academy of Sciences panel, the revised DoE policy would initiate a new program of random polygraph tests "to deter unauthorized releases or disclosures." This apparent internal inconsistency was observed by polygraph critic George Maschke of antipolygraph.org, who also pointed out that DoE did not address the potential use of countermeasures to defeat the polygraph. See the proposed revision to DoE polygraph policy, published in the Federal Register on January 7, here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/01/doe010705.html Meanwhile, the BBC reports that "The US Department of Defense has given Dr. Jennifer Vendemia a $5 million grant to work on her theory that by monitoring brainwaves she can detect whether someone is lying." See "The Future of Lying," by Chris Summers, BBC News, January 14: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4169313.stm HOMELAND SECURITY OPERATIONS MORNING BRIEFS Numerous recent "Homeland Security Operations Morning Briefs," all marked "for official use only" and not intended for public release, have been obtained and published by Cryptome.org. The Briefs provide preliminary accounts of dozens of security- related incidents around the country, which in most cases have not been widely reported and which "may or may not be accurate." See: http://cryptome.org/hsomb/hsomb.htm ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION (CRS) A brief overview of "Access to Government Information in the United States" prepared by the Congressional Research Service, newly updated January 7, 2005, is available here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/97-71.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:13:44 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:30:34 -0500 Subject: Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:49:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall Stan: In response to some remarks I made about the need for evidence, you wrote: <snip> >Frankly, I believe that while one should certainly justify >conclusions with evidence, one must on occasion wildly speculate >when it is almost impossible to obtain the evidence required. >Dismissal without investigation is really not much better than >"wild speculation" is it? No, it isn't any better; it's just the other side of the coin, which was my point. One is as bad as the other, and as intellectually flawed/dishonest. If it is impossible to obtain the evidence, then move on. As you have often reminded me, and others, there is plenty of UFO evidence out there to look at, much of it ignored by the media, the politicians etc. Why waste time trying to get people to read "wild speculation" when the real thing is out there? By doing so, one runs the risk of turning them off the field entirely. >Hindsight is often 20/20. I have been chastised for not >tape-recording my first telephone conversation with Major Jesse >Marcel. I was at an airport and could not imagine that I would >be devoting so much time and effort in dealing with Roswell for >the next 27 years. I should have speculated more. The problem with Feschino isn't that he didn't record his interviews; as you know, he did. The problem is with the questions he asked, and how he asked them - as an enthusiast, or believer, not as an objective observer. That doesn't make him a bad guy (in fact, I admire his persistence); it just means that his work is seriously flawed, and requires the reader to sift through it all carefully.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 McDonald's Prepares For Landing In Roswell From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:10:49 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:34:41 -0500 Subject: McDonald's Prepares For Landing In Roswell Glad to be back. Stig ----- Source: Roswell Daily Record - Roswell, New Mexico http://www.roswell-record.com/archives/011305/news07.html 01-13-05 McDonald's Prepares For Landing Tara May Record Staff Writer "It's coming. Are you ready?" The subtle radio advertisements are barely hinting at "what's landing in Roswell next." But what's shaping up on North Main Street is becoming clear =97 a silver flying saucer will be the new host of a Roswell McDonald's. "Out of the 30,000 McDonald's in the world, this will be the most unique," said John Snowberger, who co-owns the Roswell locations with his wife Robyn Snowberger. "That's saying something. "Everyone's asking, =91What's landing there?'" The UFO-themed restaurant is inspired from the 1947 Roswell Incident, in which a UFO purportedly landed on a ranch just north of Roswell. Snowberger said he came up with the idea himself. "I just think it's great," he said. "I'm really excited to see it completed." Developments are on track for the new McDonald's, located next door to the current location, to open as early as late March or early April. Construction is ongoing for the project, so the opening date should stay as planned unless poor weather slows the process, Snowberger said. The new children's play place will again be glass enclosed, located where the "hatch" of the UFO opens in the front of the building. "We have a really big toy coming," Snowberger said. He said the city has been "extremely welcoming and supportive" with the development of the new location. The previous building is more than 30 years old. Planning started last summer for the new location. The new McDonald's also will include a new side-by-side drive- thru, which is designed to speed up order taking and keep cars of the road, said C.J. Cota, supervisor of the Roswell locations. "It's absolutely been effective at other locations" that have tried the side-by-side drive through, Cota said. The biggest limitation right now is parking at the North Main Street location, where construction limits the amount of room available, Cota said. Once the construction is completed, more parking will be available. The same employees from the previous McDonald's will work in the new location. "We're getting a lot of new equipment," Cota said. The inside designs of the new location are posted at the old McDonald's. The entire restaurant will be UFO-themed.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:06:10 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:39:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:31:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>>Does the List have any statistics or info with regard to the >>>>>appearance of UFOs close or near to nuclear reactors? >>>>>If so, would this be for refueling purposes (fuel cell recharge) >>>>>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>>>>activity - if this is at all possible? >><snip> >>One explanation to eliminate before "portals" and "refuelling" >>would be a secondary correlation between the distribution of >>nuclear facilities and the numbers of vigilant observers, the >>security and official reporting structures, etc., associated >>with these and other high-tech and/or defence-related >>installations. I recall that the Battelle Special Report #14 >>found a correlation of just this kind back in 1953. (Perhaps >>someone with a copy to hand would verify this.) >>Can anyone think of a sensible statistical test that would test >>between Maurice's hypothesis and this one? >I can see one obstacle to such a statistical test. If in fact >the military has knowledge of UFOs that they are not sharing, >they might very well suppress all but the most public sightings, >or those that are witnessed by military men with no 'need to >know' and are reported before proper 'debriefing'. >Since the only UFO reports regarding sensitive nuclear or top- >secret military installations we have are those that the >military lets slip, or what is reported by whistle-blowers of >the *Disclosure Project* ilk, we may be missing the majority of >such events. >In other words, a statistical test might indicate that most >sightings are not near such installations because it doesn't >include the sightings about which we're most likely not to know. Hi Kyle But the situation in fact appears to be that there _is_ a positive correlation (or there is claimed to be) between nuclear sites and UFO reports (see NICAP Nuclear Connection Project). Ruppelt found an apparent correlation with other types of strategic sites working from Grudge data back in 1951, and this was also found and discussed by Battelle's BB Special Report 14 (though it appears Battelle may have fudged the data to minimise the significance). So your speculation that any excess of reports from around such installations would inevitably be masked by secrecy seems to be incorrect. <snip> >At any rate, I read about UFO sightings every single day, and >the vast majority of even those that seem intriguing or worthy >of further study take place in far-flung locales removed from >military or nuclear facilities. Yes indeed. Even if there is a statistically significant clustering around such sites I don't think it is established that we need an exotic hypothesis to explain it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:45:36 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:41:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:39 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Ufology has spent decades studying UFOs. What if UFOlogy is >leading us _away_ from the truth rather than closer to it? If >you give people paradigms they will accept and believe, they >won't go looking for other truths. By keeping UFOlogy _focused_ >on UFOs, perception is filtered through popular beliefs and >theories about them. Keep the public distracted and confused and >no one will ask embarrassing questions or demand true >accountability. But above all...maintain the status quo. All this could be true, of course, but it might also be that exactly the opposite is the case. It might be that somewhere out there is a highly secret, super- efficient government agency with undreamed of technological capabilities, which is effortlessly manipulating public opinion in order to conceal its activities. On the other hand, it might also be that what is out there is an all-too-human bureaucracy which hasn't the faintest idea what is going on, but is using the UFO phenomenon opportunistically to fabricate an aura of omniscience and military invulnerability, in the hope that any potential enemy will be intimidated through sheer technological mystique. Which version of events you prefer probably depends on whether you think secret government agencies are all-powerful, disciplined elites, or feuding bureaucracies which spend most of their time competing with each other for resources and status.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 UFO Spooks Residents Near Roswell Avenue From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:58:56 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:45:27 -0500 Subject: UFO Spooks Residents Near Roswell Avenue Source: Inland Valley Daily Bulletin- Ontario, California http://www.dailybulletin.com/Stories/0,1413,203%257E23137%257E,00.html 01-06-05 Unidentified Falling Object Spooks Residents Near Roswell Avenue Locals not exactly sure what destroyed neighbor's shack By Sara A. Carter Staff Writer ** "It came out of the night sky, landed south of Moline. Jody fell out of his tractor, couldn't believe what he seen." =97 It Came Out of the Sky, Creedence Clearwater Revival CHINO - Much like the song, something =97 nobody's sure what, exactly =97 fell from the night sky Tuesday near Roswell. No, not the town in New Mexico. This Roswell is an avenue in Chino, one street up from where -- and here's where things get even more interesting -- a shed caught fire at about the same time the flying object supposedly hit the ground. At least that's what dozens of people thought they saw around 10:30 p.m., when they contacted the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department to say an unidentified flying object was landing or crashing in town. The sighting was reported by residents and drivers from as close as the 71 Freeway and as far away as the 210 Freeway. First, falling object. Then, fire. "Somebody told one of the fire officials that they saw a plane crash," said Capt. Kim Johnson of Chino Fire Department Station 65, whose unit was called into action when a shed in the 13000 block of Cozzens Street burst into flame. "There are a lot of people who are convinced that something came out of the sky - that there was something unexplainable, a light falling from the sky," Johnson said. After the sighting, the sheriff's department received several phone calls, Johnson said. A helicopter was dispatched to check the area for a plane crash, but there was no plane to be found. "Somebody called in saying they saw something on the 210 that thought they saw fire (in the sky)," said Debra Holman, of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. "At first we thought it was a transformer but it's still undetermined." The Sheriff's Department is still investigating the incident, Holman said. All planes were accounted for at Ontario International Airport, and no unidentified flying object was detected by radar Tuesday night, said Maria Tesoro-Fermin, an airport spokeswoman. On Wednesday, the shed lay in ruins in the back of the abandoned Cozzens Street house. Charred-black wood crackled and swayed in the wind as neighbor Gary Hering worked on his RV. "I didn't hear anything," Hering said. "Not an explosion, nothing. My son and wife saw the fire coming from the shed. All I saw was flames." It's a mystery, yes, but one that not everybody thinks is a big deal, said another neighbor, Gary Matulik, who was home when the fire broke out. "I didn't hear anything," Matulik said. "I didn't even know there was a fire here last night." But some chose not to talk about the strange object that fascinated and terrified them the night before. "My cousin said he saw a shooting star," said a young man who lives on Roswell Avenue. He did not reveal his name. The young man's cousin, who also withheld his name, denied it. "I was just talking," he said. "It didn't mean anything." Fire investigators spent Wednesday at the shed, looking for a cause of the fire. "There may be a simple explanation," Johnson said. "But who knows?" Since 1967, UFO sightings in the Inland Valley have been reported from time to time. Balls of light over Diamond Bar, south Pomona and Claremont were seen in 1967. In 1974 an unexplained fiery flash perplexed residents in Azusa. And in 1966, Claremont residents were told a UFO sighting was really just a plastic bag. **
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Iranian Official: 'Shot-Down' UFO A Security Issue From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 00:40:17 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:50:01 -0500 Subject: Iranian Official: 'Shot-Down' UFO A Security Issue Source: Islamic Republic Of Iran Broadcasting http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=185851 01-16-005 IRIB NEWS Department 2005/01/16 I won't put my finger on UFOs ** Tehran, Jan 16 - Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said here Sunday in his weekly press briefing that the mass media were free to carry out their activities subject to the observance of certain rules and regulations. <snip> A foreign correspondent then asked the question of whether an unidentified flying object (UFO) had indeed been shot down in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Unidentified Flaming Object Captured On The Ground From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:05:16 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:53:36 -0500 Subject: Unidentified Flaming Object Captured On The Ground Source: Ridgecrest Daily Independent - Ridgecrest, California http://www.ridgecrestca.com/articles/2005/01/02/news/local/news04.txt 01-02-05 Has The UFO Mystery Been Solved? At least two locals think so By Linda Saholt lsaholt.nul A glowing orange ball in the sky attracted the attention of two Ridgecrest men on Dec. 9. They followed it, watched it fall, and captured it on the ground. They brought the object to The Daily Independent, where it was photographed. Upon examination, the object proved to be an ordinary large white plastic bag of earthly manufacture, with burnt edges. Evidently at one point in its recent career it had been an "unidentified flaming object", then became an "unidentified falling object." Vincent Van Buskirk told it this way. About 9:15 p.m. Dec. 9, he and his friend Gary Schreckengost were standing in front of Schreckegost's residence. "Thursday night we looked into the northern sky and saw another of the orange glowing balls. We watched it for about five minutes before it burnt out. But we saw something falling," said Van Buskirk. "So we walked from the La Mirage area to Jackson Park and saw something still falling up above the Maturango Museum. We ran to it and it happened to be that plastic bag with the burnt edges." Glowing orange lights in the sky have been sighted recently by local citizens, and were reported in The Daily Independent Nov. 28 issue. Schreckengost theorized the plastic bag may have been either lit on fire and released or a candle set underneath it, so it acted like a hot air balloon. "It really looked like some kind of UFO, like a big orange ball. It was going up, but it looked like it was coming across the sky," said Schreckengost. "This is the third one I've seen. "At one point, it looked like it stopped and dropped something. Then it flickered out. When we were in the park, we saw what looked like a white thing falling out of the sky. We found it up against the Maturango Museum." He was concerned that releasing any sort of burning object into the wind could be a potential fire hazard.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 NASA And The Contrails From: John W. Auchettl - PRAM <praufo.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:21:53 +1100 (EST) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:02:23 -0500 Subject: NASA And The Contrails Phenomena Research Australia Melbourne Hi Errol & List Members, Contrail Clutter over Georgia. "The enhanced infrared image from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), aboard NASA�s Terra satellite, shows widespread contrails over the southeastern United States during the morning of January 29, 2004. Such satellite data are critical for studying the effects of contrails. The crisscrossing white lines are contrails that form from planes flying in different directions at different altitudes. Each contrail spreads and moves with the wind. Contrails often form over large areas during winter and spring." REF: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528 http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041013.html IMAGE: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/Images/contrails_southeast_l rg.gif John W. Auchettl PRA - Director
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:58:23 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:19:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:13:44 EST >Subject: Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:49:44 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall >In response to some remarks I made about the need for >evidence, you wrote: ><snip> >>Frankly, I believe that while one should certainly justify >>conclusions with evidence, one must on occasion wildly speculate >>when it is almost impossible to obtain the evidence required. >>Dismissal without investigation is really not much better than >>"wild speculation" is it? <snip> >The problem with Feschino isn't that he didn't record his >interviews; as you know, he did. The problem is with the >questions he asked, and how he asked them - as an enthusiast, or >believer, not as an objective observer. That doesn't make him a >bad guy (in fact, I admire his persistence); it just means that >his work is seriously flawed, and requires the reader to sift >through it all carefully. 'Seriously' flawed? I think not. I don't think a sincere (making that presumption) accounting by a reasonablely intelligent person is going to be 'seriously' flawed. And no one puts into the interviewing equation the interviewee that _won't_ be lead. I'm disheartened how quickly some folks are willing to toss the baby with the bathwater in the name of appearing to be non-credulous. Bottom line, ones 'credibility' or 'reputation' is what the individual concerned thinks it is, and not what has been portentously assigned by conflicted assessors. For illustration, you think I give a rat's barking patoot what Andy Roberts thinks of me? I trust that Mr. Feschino will learn from his mistakes and move on. Moreover, 'flawed' may not be _altogether_ useless.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Disclosure Australia Newsletter #20 From: Diane Harrison <auforn.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:48:19 +1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:21:40 -0500 Subject: Disclosure Australia Newsletter #20 Issue 20 of the Disclosure Australia project Newsletter has just been uploaded to our web site at: http://disclosure.freewebpage.org This issue concentrates on the role of the CSIRO in the Australian UFO mystery between 1952 and 1972. -- The Australian UFO Research Network Disclosure Project Auspiced by the Australian UFO Research Network PO Box 738, Beaudesert, Queensland 4285 http://www.hypermax.net.au/~auforn
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Isn't It Strange? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:24:08 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:26:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? - Shough >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:21:46 -0400 >Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:27:41 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:13:15 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Isn't It Strange? ><snip> >>>I'd be willing to bet that many investigators of the phenomenon >>>on this List have run across this "ignore it" syndrome many >>>times during their years of searching, researching and >>>cataloguing. <snip> >>Witnesses can be effectively blinded to what they are socially >>not permitted to experience. Remember the classic "playing card >>experiment" that Kuhn used as an illustration for paradigm >>shift? Subjects were rapidly flashed images of playing cards >>with an occasional RED four of clubs, say. Often they literally >>could not "see" the anomalous cards because they had no >>counterpart in their expectation. >This anomalous red four of clubs is your unexpected UFO and what >Kuhn noted gets closer to the UFO scenario. >>Some subjects got very distressed, but couldn't work out why. >>Some sort of profound mental set like this could be operating >>naturally in all of us, a psychological "firewall" against >>radically anomalous incursions from a region of actuality with >>which we are not as a species evolutionarily equipped to deal. >That puts us right back to where we started. Witnesses get >distressed, even terrified. Whether this is just the same >thing a different way, I don't know. But the act of >ignoring and immediatly relegating the event to the >never-go-there drawer in a matter of minutes doesn't allow >for the external pressures of society and social mores to >kick in as suggest by experiments above. Hi Don, I'm not saying the suppression has to be merely social. But if there is an inate firewall effect in operation, making the human mind resistant to really radical anomaly, then it would likely have a cultural expression as well as just a personal one. Some of society's more extreme and irrational conservatism in the face of these things could then be seen as this inate effect institutionalised and writ large. What I'm suggesting is that the events you describe may be instances of marginal failures of such a firewall (almost successes) and the UFO context might be only one of several "given" cultural forms in which the same basic "virus" gets itself expressed by our human software. This idea takes us beyond pelicanism or the ETH and into a much broader "theory" of human nature that generalises the notion of paradigm-blindness to the human condition as a whole and sees UFO experiences as one exemplar in a spectrum of responses to extra-paradigmatic anomaly that occur throughout history. The assumption would be that there are finite boundaries on the ability of human nature (interpreted in the most broad possible terms) to process existence, leading to a functional division of actuality into an elicited world, and an unelicited world or "otherworld" that is never (actively) apprehended by human nature. The rich world of human experience could be seen as a phenomenon brought into being at the interface between consciousness and the largely unelicited otherness in which it is immersed, like ~maya~ or the "world illusion" of mahayana buddhism. Obviously there are many anomalies that get successfully interpreted and incorporated into the evolving rational world- view, but I think in terms of two types of anomaly, "random anomaly" and "specific anomaly". The former are local and tractable in varying degrees and their solution tends ultimately towards filling out the picture of the elicited world-illusion - paradigmatic science writ large. The latter are incursions, occasional failures of the firewall. Intimations of otherness. I wonder if this sort of model might be developed into a useful way to generalise a variety of anomaly-research issues, UFOs included, for those who are impatient with detailed report analysis and want a new research direction? We've got a "new physics" - I think we should now formalise a viable "new metaphysics" for the 21st century, based on using the study of specific anomaly to map out the ~boundary conditions~ of human nature and its elicited world (which in the limit are dual representations of the same thing). Well I'll leave it there as food for thought. A very large and very speculative can of worms...,,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Strange Flying Object Over Newfoundland From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:20:45 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:31:13 -0500 Subject: Strange Flying Object Over Newfoundland News: Strange Flying Object Just a little bit of information on this sighting report. Lots to come as I have been on the phone with many witnesses, the RCMP, etc. I also just this morning talked to more witnesses who saw a similar thing on January 12, 2005 in the wee hours of the morning. The sighting the news is referring to below is for January 16, 2005 A full report will be coming later on. ----- Source: VOCM News Radio Newfoundland http://www.vocm.com/ 01-19-05 Strange Flying Object 1/19/05 (Audrey Whelan) RCMP in New-Wes-Valley are looking into reports of an Unidentified Flying Object. Constable Vicki Colford says several residents in the area reported seeing the object, including a person who called police Sunday afternoon. The object was described as cone-shaped, blue and white in colour, 15 feet tall and 8 feet wide. The object was about 250 feet off the ground and moved in a westerly direction before going out of sight. The
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: NASA And The Contrails - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:08:03 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:32:44 -0500 Subject: Re: NASA And The Contrails - Smith >From: John W. Auchettl - PRAM <praufo.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:21:53 +1100 (EST) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: NASA And The Contrails >Phenomena Research Australia Melbourne >Contrail Clutter over Georgia. >"The enhanced infrared image from the Moderate >Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), >aboard NASAs Terra satellite, shows widespread >contrails over the southeastern >United States during the morning of January 29, >2004. Yes, I have seen this and it inspired me to look at random other images from MODIS. I found a couple interesting other images but they really have little meaning (e.g. a circular contrail? so what?). Most of the odd contrails I found were off the coast and likely training flights or something. Couldn't prove it was a UFO or not a UFO so its not valuable data.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:13:34 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:33:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:45:36 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Which version of events you prefer probably depends on >whether you think secret government agencies are all- >powerful, disciplined elites, or feuding bureaucracies >which spend most of their time competing with each >other for resources and status. Based on my
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:56:11 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:34:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:14 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? Hi Martin, >Yes, but how would you go from establishing a significant >coefficient of correlation (when the distribution is corrected >for population density, as has been claimed) to an analysis of >causation - within the figures? You can't - not using statistical methods, anyhow. As they say, correlation doesn not imply causation, and the question of causal mechanisms necessarily falls outside the field of statistical analysis. What you can do, though, is regress the dependent variable (say, the number of UFO sightings in a district) against one or more covariates (such as population density) in a number of separate conditions, such as the presence or absence of an atomic power plant in that district, and test to see if the regression lines for each condition are significantly different. This depends on a number of assumptions, obviously. One needs to have some meaningful, and unbiased, way of defining what a "district" is, and one has to assume that the relationship between the dependent variable and the covariates is either linear, or can be transformed so that it appears linear. One also needs both the dependent variable and the covariate to be measured on an interval scale which can be treated as continuous. Since the number of UFO sightings is probably never going to be very large, this could be a problem. One might be able to get around this by switching the model around somewhat, and regressing some other variable (such as the distance between a district and the nearest atomic power plant) and regressing that against the covariants, and using the number of UFO sightings as the independent variable. This would require exercising some judgement - if it turns out that UFOs are more likely to be seen within 100 miles rather than 1000 miles of a reactor, one should not regard one's hypothesis as supported. Alternatively, if the data aren't rich enough for analysis of covariance, it might be better to collapse it into categories and subject it to log-linear analysis. >I'm sure you're a far more >competent statistician than me. Heavens, I certainly hope not. >I'd be interested to know how you would approach this. <example snipped> >If it were true that "unknowns" alone showed this significant >correlation it still would not be straightforward to demonstrate >that this was a function of a frequency of "trufos" in the local >sky. Other variables might correlate with the distribution of >strategic sites (including air bases, nuclear plants, proving >grounds, sea ports and industrial complexes) that Blue Book and >Battelle had showed were the centres of report clusters as early >as 1951-2. These variables might include the types of observer, >the security awareness, the availability of reporting channels >etc., plus the relative efficiency of winnowing poor reports at >the grass roots level, all of which might conceivably weight the >files with an excess of good unknowns from such areas even if >the distribution of trufos across the continental sky were >essentially constant. There's no reason why you can't do an Ancova with multiple covariates. The real problem here is likely to be getting reliable and accurate measures of the covariates. If you can't get these, then I'm afraid no amount of statistical analysis is going to be of any use. Although you might still be able to compare your sample of sightings near atomic reactors with samples of sightings near other locations where the covariates would be expected to have similar values. <more snipped> >Specifically, how would you propose applying covariance analysis >to isolate an absolute variability in the distribution of >trufos?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Strange Aerial Light Reported From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:51:30 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:37:50 -0500 Subject: Strange Aerial Light Reported Source: Delaware Coast Press - Rehoboth, Delaware http://www.delmarvanow.com/deweybeach/stories/20050119/1888373.html 01-19-05 Strange aerial light is reported By Roger Hillis Coast Press Reporter When Teresa Alexander of Seaford drove to the Rehoboth Beach area with her husband to do some Black Friday holiday shopping, "they were not alone." Alexander said she and her spouse noticed a strange light which appeared to follow them for almost an hour Nov. 26. The incident so unnerved Alexander that she began researching UFOs on the Internet and discovered a Web site, www.ufocenter.com, which is regularly updated with reports from throughout the country. She filed a report Dec. 9 and it was posted a few days later. While larger states have dozens of sightings per year listed in the site's data base archive, Delaware averages between five and 10 cases per year. Alexander said she was surprised to see a Millsboro report from 1999 which was strikingly similar to hers. The site is maintained by Seattle UFO researcher Peter Davenport. Portions of a Jan. 8 lecture by Davenport in Seattle were filmed by ABC News for possible inclusion in a television program to air during the last week of February. Davenport is also a regular guest on the (very) early morning syndicated radio program "Coast to Coast," which is broadcast throughout coastal Sussex County daily from 1 to 5 a.m., on 92.7 WGMD-FM. To ensure that people who file reports are spared the ridicule that is common with those who acknowledge UFO sightings, Davenport deletes names and personal information when posting reports to his site. Alexander, however, said she is far from embarrassed about her experience. "I don't worry about what other people think," she said. "I know what my husband and I saw." Strange sight Alexander said she and her husband wanted to arrive at the Kmart store on Route 1 near Rehoboth prior to its 6 a.m., Black Friday opening to take advantage of the store's holiday sale. They left Seaford at about 4:30 a.m., to drop their children off at a relative's house in Millsboro, Alexander said. "We were traveling on Route 20 toward Millsboro and I noticed this bright 'star' on the left side of the road above the woods," Alexander said. "My husband commented about how bright it was. I said, 'Yeah, it must be the north star,' but that didn't make sense because we were traveling southeast." Alexander said the light crossed the road to the right. "It would seem to stop and then accelerate to keep up with us," she said. "It was very high in the sky, and all we could see was like a round ball of bright light." When the car turned right on Route 113, the object appeared to make a sharp righthand turn, said Alexander, who became scared. After they had dropped their children off on Mitchell Road in Millsboro, the Alexanders drove down Route 24 toward Long Neck. "The light still seemed to be following us, but I was relieved that the kids weren't in the car any more," Alexander said. "I told my husband to speed up and make sure he was close to other cars because I didn't want us to be alone with that thing. "After we had stopped at a red light, my husband started speeding down Route 24 doing about 80 mph and the light kept up with us the whole time." Alexander said the light now appeared to be a little closer to the ground. "It was kind of florescent blue," she said. "It would dim and then brighten, and it reminded me of a lighthouse light. It would dissipate and then come back as if it had made a full circle." When the Alexanders arrived at Kmart on Route 1, the light appeared to hover above the store. "I don't know if anyone else noticed this since everyone was so preoccupied with getting in line for holiday shopping," Alexander said. "But I wonder if anyone else traveling the road noticed." When a Frankford family reported a UFO sighting in 2002, a town spokesperson cited a possible earthly explanation -- a high- powered searchlight which was projected against the clouds by a former Ocean City, Md., nightclub.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:19 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:39:07 -0500 Subject: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal Hi List I've been exchanging emails with Peter Davenport concerning his proposal to use Multistatic Passive Radar For Real-time Detection Of UFO's In The Near-Earth Environment. Despite the long title the concept is very simple. Passive radar reads the signals that are being sent out in all directions from devices like AM-FM Radio, Cel phones and anything else that produces an electromagnetic signal. With the current state of high speed computers, just a few stations could receive these signals and interpret many things from objects that pass through them like velocity, trajectory and even size, all in real-time. Conventional radar technology can't do this since it's required to broadcast a signal and then wait to receive any signal that might be bounced off of a object. Since standard radar only broadcasts intermittently it's likely to miss a very fast object which may just appear as a blip then it's gone. Passive radar would have a continuous feedback from this object since the signals broadcast from the devices above would be fairly continuous. The main reason I'm posting this though is that Peter is "flabbergasted" that he has received little response from anyone about this. He has been discussing this with people since 1995 and he published his first article on it in the Oct. 1999 issue of The MUFON Journal. It was more than 9 weeks after the article was published that he received any response at all. I have published his proposal as an HTML page (with his permission) and I really believe the UFO community at large should sit up and take notice. I feel this is just the kind of real-time approach that Ufology needs if it's to ever be considered as a serious science. You can access my page on the Dallas-Fort Worth MUFON site at http://terrygroff.com/dfwmufon/articles/passive_radar.html or you can download the DOC file from the NUFORC site at http://www.nuforc.org/MUFONPresentation.doc. I'm sure Peter would love to hear from you about this proposal. Thanks Terry Groff Dallas-Fort Worth MUFON
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Tim Swartz's Mother Passes Away From: Loren Coleman <lcoleman.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:31:54 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:41:30 -0500 Subject: Tim Swartz's Mother Passes Away Tuesday, 18 Jan 2005 For those that know him, please be advised that Tim Swartz's mother passed away in her sleep early Tuesday morning. Tim had just been to visit her in the hospital in St Louis. +++++ Tim Swartz is an Emmy-winning TV producer/writer and conspiracy researcher of all things mysterious and strange. He has written numerous magazine articles and eleven books, including The Lost Journals Of Nikola Tesla, and Teleportation: From Star Trek to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:17:24 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:45:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:39:19 -0500 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:25:39 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>UFOlogy has spent decades studying UFOs. What if UFOlogy is >>leading us _away_ from the truth rather than closer to it? If >>you give people paradigms they will accept and believe, they >>won't go looking for other truths. By keeping UFOlogy _focused_ >>on UFOs, perception is filtered through popular beliefs and >>theories about them. Keep the public distracted and confused and >>no one will ask embarrassing questions or demand true >>accountability. But above all...maintain the status quo. <snip> Ufology has _not_ spent decades studying UFOs. To say it has makes it sound like a scientific endeavor that is carefully and systematically building on its accumulating knowledge. As I have pointed out many times before, if evaluated according to what normal scientific disciplines do and what they have in the way of resources to bring to bear on a problem (typically dozens or say a hundred full-time high-caliber scientists living, breathing and dreaming about their subjects 24/7) there has only been the equivalent of about 6 months of that in the UFO world in the past 58 years. We see about 6 months' worth of progress in understanding the UFO problem as of today, which is not very much. Yet I often read complaints that "science does not work" on UFOs therefore let's abandon the scientific method, just because there has been so little progress in 58 years when in fact there has really been only about 6 months of concentrated scientific study and we see just about what we should expect to see after so little effort. Amateur methods carried out by amateurs will not solve the UFO problem because there we do see 58 years of amateur efforts and they have not solved it. Imagine a trillion-dollar network of activities spread across the globe and all reporting back their UFO observations, or most of them, to a central repository. How can amateurs no matter how well organized and dedicated how can they possibly come up with much if anything to compare with a trillion-dollar UFO reporting network? Is the trillion-dollar UFO network just a dream? Guess what? We have the trillion-dollar UFO reporting network and we have most of its files! It's called the US Air Force and for most of the 23 years or so from 1947 to 1970 it had collection efforts that attracted (or in some cases required by mandatory directives) UFO reporting from the entire US
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Filer�s Files #4 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:15:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:49:56 -0500 Subject: Filer�s Files #4 - 2005 We Are Not Alone The purpose of these files is to report weekly the UFO eyewitness and photo/video evidence that occurs on a daily basis around the world and in space. Many people claim it is impossible for UFOs to visit Earth, I ask you only to keep an open mind and watch the evidence we accumulate each week. These Files make the assumption that extraterrestrial intelligent life not only exists, but my hypothesis is that of the over one hundred UFOs reported each week many represent a factual UFO sighting. Titan - Another Chance for Life in Space. UFOs were seen over Alabama, Alaska, California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington. Sightings were also reported in Australia, Canada, Chile, El Salvador, Greece, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Portugal, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. Mars has Pyramids and Green Vegetation. Earth slows in its orbit. Titan - Another Chance for Life This composite was produced from images returned January 14, 2005, by ESA's Huygens probe during its successful descent to land on Titan. It shows the boundary between the lighter-colored uplifted terrain, marked with what appear to be drainage channels, and darker lower areas. This is one of the first raw images returned by the ESA Huygens probe during its successful descent. It was taken from an altitude of 16 kilometres with a resolution of approximately 40 metres per pixel. It apparently shows short, stubby drainage channels leading to a shoreline. Credit: ESA/NASA TV Credits: ESA/NASA/JPL/University of Arizona Earth Slows NASA scientists studying the Indonesian earthquake of December 26, 2005, calculated that it slightly changed our planet's shape, shaved almost 3 microseconds from the length of the day, and shifted the North Pole by several centimeters. R. Benjamin Fong Chao of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and Dr. Richard Gross of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said all earthquakes have some effect on Earth's rotation. It's just that the effects are, usually, barely noticeable. This one was not usual: The devastating megathrust earthquake registered nine on the modified Richter scale, making it the fourth largest quake in one hundred years. Editor's Note: The Earth appears to be in for more destructive activity. Strong M and X Class flares are erupting on the sun and electromagnetic storms are headed this way. The sun's activity often results in bad weather and snow storms. Based on increased UFO activity around the Pacific Rim of Fire additional heavy earthquake activity is likely to follow the recent Tsunami in Asia. The US West Coast and Japan seem vulnerable. Mars- Pyramids and Green Vegetation The Mars landscape has a series of pyramids similar to those found on Earth. Pyramids are not formed naturally and indicate they were either built or carved from natural terrain. Scientists and geologists should study the pyramids, tubes, and other structures on Mars. When I worked in Air Force Intelligence these structures if in enemy territory would likely be considered as possible targets. Mars developments indicate that an intelligent extraterrestrial hypothesis is becoming more likely. Travel from Mars to Earth is much easier than the reverse due to the comparatively low gravity on Mars. Enrico Fermi told his colleagues that if extraterrestrials are visiting Earth in his paradox: Where are they? I suggest they are here, but not recognized. Could primitive cave men built advanced structures in Egypt, UK, China, and Mexico without help from advanced intelligence? The pyramids on Mars are much older than those on Earth. Perhaps this ET technology was brought here from Mars. We know that most of the stars are billions of years older than our own sun. If civilizations arose on distant planets orbiting these suns, it is reasonable to assume their civilization spread out across the galaxy bringing their ideas and intelligent life to our planet and Mars. The development of advanced structures on Mars and around the Earth indicates a Designed Plan by higher intelligence. The sun is reflecting off the bright area to the right side of the pyramid image from JPL/NASA. Norman Bryden writes, "Here is an enlarged section of the Reull Vallis on Mars from the European Space Agency. The image is an overhead view that shows concentrated as of dark green that could be possible vegetation. I increased the overall brightness a little to help see the colors. "Reull Vallis is an outflow channel that extends 1500 kilometres across Promethei Terra in the direction of Hellas Basin. This Mars Express image was taken with a ground resolution of about 21 metres per pixel during Mars Express orbit 451 on 29 May 2004. The image shows an area located at about latitude 42=B0 South and longitude 102=B0 East. North is to the left." Thanks to Norman Bryden and the European Space Agency. Editor's Note: This image shows an intelligent design for Mars. Alabama - Disk COIMBATORE - The witness reports, "saucer shaped brown metallic object was seen descending just as I was watching the report on sea surges on December 26, 2004, at 1:30 PM, throughout Asia." I thought these two events may be connected and so wished to report it. The object was disk shaped with a dome on top. It closely resembled those flying Frisbees. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Alaska - Two Hovering Lights ANCHORAGE - On December 30, 2004, at 8 PM, the witness saw two strange objects with extremely bright lights, flying below the clouds. They looked like helicopters but there was no noise. The witness parked his car and took a close look at the lights that were hovering in a small circular motion. One slowly moved around the other one, and then they both started moving extremely slow towards the north. I called the authorities, and all my family members, and told them to look outside and record with a camera, if they had one. One of them disappeared then the other one, but before they disappeared they were flashing with a bright red to orange light, then to white and disappeared one after another. My brother-in-law caught the two objects on his camera, but it wasn't a clearly focused recording. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com California - Enormous Size Blue UFO SAN MARCOS, ESCONDIDO - The observer saw a blue glowing UFO with a white strobe on top hovering over the city on December 21, 2004, at 6:30 PM. He and his girl friend watched for a minute as it went further behind a mountain. The observer stated, ="Lets go try to get close to it babe to see if we can get a good picture." She was reluctant, but we drove onto the Freeway and saw the object further down over the hill almost at the 78 Freeway and 15 Freeway merge. I found the disposable camera. The object stopped moving across the Freeway and flew back over near the hill, then it disappeared behind some mountains in Rancho Bern Ado behind some very dark black mountains. I tried taking a picture of it in the distance. The object headed east from and moved from that location towards Mira Mar over mountains. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Florida - Cylinder SARASOTA - The witness was trimming trees and looked up to admire his handy-work and saw two silver white cylinders moving away on December 26, 2004, 4 PM. They moved too fast for blimps. It was a silvery whitish colored cylinder rounded on both ends flying north to south, with no wings visible. It flew south, and just looked like a round ball as it flew away. While I was pondering what I had just seen, another craft just like it, followed the same path and at the same speed. My impression was that they were about the same length as a 747, but about three times the diameter, flying at about 15,000 feet about 300 mph. All the other planes had wings and left a short contrail and you also could hear the jet sounds of all the jets. The UFOs left no contrail and made no sound. They flew much too fast for a blimp. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com BELLEVIEW - Two friends saw three unknown shapes in the glomming dark two minutes after midnight, on January 1, 2005. The UFOs apparently were celebrating the New Year as they had really bright colors. It had two different colors, red and yellow. At one point one was hovering, it look like it was running on some kind of gas because it had very bright flames coming from the bottom of it. I couldn't tell if was flames or not. When they were flying they were flying in a {V} shape. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com TAMPA -A saucer-shaped object, about the size of two football fields was seen traveling at high speed over Mac Dill Air Force Base at 5:30 PM, on January 1, 2005. My brother and I were with my wife at Picnic Island Park having a New Year's cookout and I noticed above the tree line a fast moving disk shaped object, that was about the size of two football fields. The craft had a row of lights around its outer leading edge. The object appeared to be in the outer atmosphere over the base moving at a high rate of speed!!! Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Illinois - Disk LOMBARD -- As my husband and I were driving to our local grocery store on December 31, 2004, at 4 PM, I saw a disk-shaped object high in the sky, glowing near one of the few clouds for three minutes. At first, I thought it might be a plane landing at O'Hare Airport, but as I watched the object it faded, disappeared for a few moments and then reappeared in the same place. It glowed again, with a very white bright light (roundish), slowly faded and then disappeared again. It reappeared for a third time in the same place and my husband and I watched it for a few seconds as it glowed and faded twice and then disappeared. The object did not seem to have any type of wing structure or tail structure. It was silver or metallic. There was no contrail like the other planes. All other planes in view had wings and tail signs. We cannot come up with any logical explanation other than this was a UFO. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com CHICAGO - There were three objects seen moving south over the near-north side of Chicago at 1:45 AM, on January 1, 2005. They flew over the downtown area and out of sight. All three objects were the same color and did not appear to be emitting any light of their own, but possibly reflecting the lights of the city. The color of the objects was a muted pinkish hue, about the same color as the haze on the horizon glowing from the city lights. At first I thought the objects were clouds or smoke from New Year's Eve fireworks, but then I realized that the sky was perfectly clear, and two of the objects were changing shape in what appeared to be a controlled movement. One object was flying significantly higher buts its shape was unlike any aircraft. They all followed the same slow path but the lower objects were amorphous, tubular and long, and kept twisting and contorting themselves, moving towards each other and back away, at times meeting with each other to form new shapes. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.Ufo.Center.Com Indiana - Glowing Hovering Disk ROCKVILLE - A married couple saw a red glowing craft hovering over the high power wires that travel across the Wabash River east of the power station at the Public Service generator on US 41 on December 18, 2004, at 7 PM. It was about 35 feet in diameter and glowing red all over and was extra bright on the bottom. It was hovering about 150 feet high and had fast strobing lights on the top and bottom that were white. We kept driving because it was a terrifying event! It was not an air craft, it WAS a UFO! Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Massachusetts - Racing Circles of Light BILLERICA - A very large circular bright white light was observed above the clouds going around and around in a very large circle traveling 80 mile per hour at 6:30 PM on December 29, 2004. We looked out again around 7:30 PM, and the clouds had moved to the right and left a clear sky. The large circle of light was still there, but moved to the right to stay above the clouds? I know it was not a search light and a plane would not run in circles at fast speed for hours and the size of the circle of white light was huge. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com New Jersey - Light With Erratic Flight Pattern FORTESCUE - On January 4, 2005 at 7 PM, my boyfriend and I had taken a trip down to Fortescue Beach, which is very quiet during the winter months. At night you can see the lights of Dover Air Force Base across the Delaware Bay. We were just standing on the beach talking and the sky seemed to be very active with planes. The temperature was about 40 degrees with.low altitude patchy clouds, and no wind. We watched one light perhaps a slightly yellow color that was over the bay and moved at a normal speed for a plane, moving ="right." I noticed what seemed like some irregularity in its speed as it continued moving to the right. It seemed to slow and speed up slightly, but it was not very obvious. It then shot up and to the right slightly and very quickly at about a 70 degree angle of accent and about five degrees up. It flew to the right and slightly up a few degrees more quickly than the first time, but its erratic speed was more apparent. It then shot down quickly and made a sharp ="V" turn before it shot up again and disappeared into the low lying clouds. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com. North Carolina - Brilliant Multi-Colored Diamond HARRISBURG -- At about 11:20 PM, on January 4, 2005, while watching television in a darkened room I observed a brilliant yet seemingly distant light through the French door. I initially discounted it as a helicopter or a C-130 that fly's over about five times a year. After about 30 seconds the light became brighter and less distant prompting me to go out onto the back step. About 15 degrees from horizontal a radiant slightly pulsating symmetrical source of extremely brilliant light was visible. The light emitted white, blue, green and yellow light in three dimensions. The axis of symmetry for the object was elongated along the vertical axis and compressed along the horizontal. The light source seemed to stay in one position for about 1.5 minutes then moved off at a moderate velocity until no longer visible 30 seconds later. The size of the object at the distance viewed was approximately that of a quarter held at arms length. No sounds of any sort were produced. I am a 39 year old Licensed Geologist and frequently search for satellites and meteor showers using my telescope. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Ohio - The Most Peculiar Aircraft ORRVILLE - On December 14, 2004, at 1 AM, I saw this peculiar craft hovering near my house for the THIRD time. This craft does not look like an alien spacecraft from the usual science fiction novels. It looks like an enormous aircraft or helicopter with white and red lights. The peculiar thing about it is it hovered approx. 250-500 feet above the treetops. The lights on the bottom are so bright, it seems as though it is spotlighting the ground beneath. The second time I saw this aircraft, I was driving and spotted it above the railroad tracks and tried to follow. After rounding a bend in the road, it was gone. This third time I decided to go in the house to grab the digital camera to get a picture. I was in the house for only 30 seconds and ran outside and the craft was GONE. This is the strangest thing I have ever seen. or less! Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com FOSTORIA - George Ritter took video images over his two Corvettes of a UFO that was lifting off from his neighbor's farm. His RCA VHS video camera regularly picks up UFOs landing and taking off in the farmer's field. It is assumed that these craft operate in an underground base since there are numerous underground caverns in the general area. Nevada - Oval LAS VEGAS - The observer says, ="I had never seen such speed of an object up on the sky." On January 1, 2005, as New Year's countdown was done on TV, I went outside and noticed several commercial airplanes and I noticed two flying oval silver- glowing shaped spheres. They seemed like they were traveling together, one just below the other one, at great speed. For a second, they stopped blinked for a fraction of a second and kept going. By the time I had gone to the front door to see to what direction they were heading, the spheres were gone! North Carolina - Chinook Like UFO POPE AIR FORCE BASE - It was in February between 1995 and 99. The closest air force base is in Fayetteville, and in the early evening hours I heard a rumble of a helicopter and went out to see and then it came into view. It was a Chinook flying at treetop high directly over my home in Rancelman. Glowing bright purple bluish lights making very curvy zigzags much higher and it was if the helicopter was flying faster than any Chinook I know this could not have been cloud reflections since there were no clouds. Thanks to Rvbsongwriter. Rhode Island - Circle PAWTUCKET -- At 8 PM, on January 2, 2005, a sphere hummed overhead while flashing red and blue - slowly departed to the east, into South Attleboro over Route 95. We saw it for five minutes. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Pennsylvania - Lights With A Shape of a Triangle PHOENIXVILLE - Around 11 PM, on December 28, 2004, two friends were driving when they noticed three objects circling on December 26, 2004, at 1:30 PM. The object was 500 to 1000 feet above the ground. There were two lights which looked to be parallel to each other. One passed over and we thought it to be a double bladed helicopter but there was no sound what so ever. So we thought it was a little strange but drove on and saw another object which was similar to the first. This time, I saw the shape of a triangle and about three lights on either side. It was moving slower than a light plane, and made no noise. After about five minutes it flew off and each object left in different directions. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com South Carolina - Silver Cigar ANDERSON COUNTY - Heading north on I-85 near the Channel 4 Doppler Radar tower, I noticed a silver cigar shaped object in the northeastern sunny sky on December 19, 2004, at 12 PM. I drove faster and was gaining on it slightly. Then, it started to turn slowly towards the west and crossed over the interstate in front of me. I looked closely for wings, but never spotted any. The sun reflected off the object as it came to a complete stop to my left. I stopped my car and watched as it started moving south again. It took the object only about 20 seconds to go from its stopped position to a small dot in the sky. At its largest, it was the size of my pinkie fingernail at arm's length. It was long and slender but slightly oval. It was clearly not a plane because there were no wings; it was too slender and metallic- like for a balloon. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Texas - UFO Image KAUFMAN COUNTY -- The witness saw a glowing object on December 4, 2004, between 6 and 7 PM, while observing the stars and was able to video tape it. He states, ="I didn't get much of it because it was probably twice as fast as a jet, but I got it passing a couple of jet clouds and some stars. I couldn't tell for sure if it was above or below the clouds since it just went by them. It seemed to me to be self-illuminated and I didn't see any other lights on it for it to be some type of normal aircraft. Video clip below this set of photos. Then on January 6, 2005, at approximately 6:30 PM, the photographer was able to video an object just over the tree line that was a glowing blue/white light looking at it with my eyes. It was going toward the southwest, not to terribly fast. I zoomed in on it trying to see if I could determine some shape to it but really couldn't tell. This sighting was over a minute long so. Video Clips can be viewed at: "ttp://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews =3Darticle =3D2272 Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Washington - Sighting Confirmed SEATTLE - The observer says, ="I spoke to my brother in law, who is a captain on a boat who also saw the fiery object in the sky on December 14, 2004, at 6:30 PM. I called him to ask him if he might have seen anything himself, on his boat that goes between Seattle and Vashon Island. He said a couple of members of his crew saw two events, just after their shift started about 21:00, and one the night before as well on his shift. He said that a crewman probably saw the event I saw, which he said was somewhere up near my house located somewhat north of the ferry dock. He said that they went quite low through the cloud cover and then burned out before they hit the ground over Puget Sound. So, I also find it strange that my brother-in-law saw the same event. My brother in law, was an officer in the Coast Guard and also has a degree in Astronomy. He witnesses at night lots of astronomical events, being out on the water, not close to land or lights. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com SEATTLE - Observers saw pulsating lights over Puget Sound at 3:40 AM, on January 2, 2005, from a 13th floor apartment. It was a stationary, pulsating light that changed color from blue-white to red, yellow, and green. I awoke my partner and she also saw the object. At one point a smaller white light seemed to emerge from the bottom of the craft, but it disappeared immediately. With binoculars we could make out the colors better, but could not discern a shape to the object. I took several pictures with both digital and film cameras. After watching the lights for about 20 minutes, I noticed a second craft to the west of the original one. It was identical in appearance, with pulsating blue-white, red, yellow, and green lights. The second craft also appeared to hover without motion over the Sound, perhaps a mile or so from the first. At 4:24 AM, the first craft slowly disappeared behind a building after arcing downward toward the west. The other craft remained stationary and I finally fell asleep. My partner and I are professional women in our 30s CANADA - Sightings Continue Over B.C. VANCOUVER, BC - On December 22, 2004, at 4:39 PM, six cigar shaped objects were sighted during sunset with a partly cloudy sky. Three cigar shaped object were flying in and out of the clouds and they seemed bigger than a 747 from that distance. These objects were flying near Vancouver International Airport. The second pair of cigars was flying downtown Vancouver. They are more like the cigar shaped object sighted in Iraq. There are some curved lines visible around each object and these lines seem to be related to the propulsion system of the objects. They seemed to be flying above 6,000 feet, so they should be of significant size. All six objects were clearly in some sort of formation and they were going in opposite directions, first pair to the southeast and the second pair to the northwest. The cigars were flying dangerously close to each other. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com UCLUELET, VANCOUVER ISLAND - A glowing green disk shaped UFO was observed at the time of the sunrise on January 2, 2005. This is a long sighting and I have all the pictures and exact location of the webcam with map and reference objects in separate pictures. The location of this sighting is at 48=B0 55' N 125=B0 32' W, over Amphitrite Point lighthouse near the Port Albion. The webcam is directed towards the southeast. There is no need for any enhancement because the UFO is completely viewable and seems to be coming down towards the ground because it is getting bigger and bigger as the next 30 minutes of photos show. There is a huge green glow to the UFO. The glow around the UFO gets bigger as it approaches the webcam and is visible for three hours. I am not able to pinpoint its exact size. The object seems to be using a magnetic propulsion system because of its amazing glow, its hovering mode and no smoke trail. This sequence of photos was taken every 30 minutes starting at 16:30 UTC or 08:30 PST each of files are name starting with UTC clock underscore PST clock. These pictures were downloaded from Environment Canada's website which is WeatherOffice.ec.gc.ca official online-presence for meteorological information and public forecasts and Environment Canada's website. Thanks Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com Australia - Formation and Flashing Light TOOWOOMBA - At 8:45 PM, on January 1, 2005, my girlfriend and I were lying outside under the stars, when a formation of lights appeared high above us. The lights traveled in a straight direction very quickly for around 13 seconds when the head of the formation suddenly changed its direction heading further away from the others in the formation and all other lights quickly followed, they then traveled independent of formation very quickly until they all faded into nothing. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com SYDNEY - I live in the inner western suburbs of Sydney and of late the sky has been remarkably clear. I was standing outside in my backyard on January 7, 2005, at 11:25 PM, when I noticed a sudden flash in the sky to the south. The flash reappeared and continued to flash intermittently on a further seven occasions. The light traveled in a northerly direction covering a 60 degree arc before disappearing in mid-air. The flashing object emitted a brilliant white strobe-like light not unlike a camera flash. The reason it was particularly noticeable is that over the city there is a no-flight curfew from 11 PM to 6 AM. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director "ttp://www.hbccufo.org Chile - Very Bright Red-Orange ="Blinking" Light SANTIAGO - For about ten minutes, on December 31, 2004, 11:15 PM hours Santiago, Chile time (21:15 hours EST time) a very bright orange-red light, way too big to be a planet, and certainly not in the right place or time for Mars, at approximately half-way between the horizon and the Pleiades (but further west) stood still but shining on and off. At first I thought it may have been related to early New Year's celebrations, but there were no noises, no fireworks at all. I ran into the house to get my wife and three of my children. All of them saw the strange sight, but did not give it much importance. I ran into the house a second time to get my binoculars, and remained focused on the bright light for a few minutes. The light then started moving for the first time, and disappeared, turning white. Even my children could see it fading with the naked eye. There is no way that this could have been a plane, or a satellite, or a helicopter. It was stationary for too long, and then disappeared too quickly as it turned white as it faded. After I wrote the above, my children called me, just before midnight to report that the light was back! We all rushed outside, and just before the official midnight fireworks, there was a bright orange-red light again, in the same place at five minutes after midnight! This was not part of the fireworks display. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com El Salvador - UFOs Following Each Other SAN JOSE VILLANUEVA - On January 9, 2005, 6:45 PM, the witness states, ="We were looking at the stars when we saw a light moving north, then we saw another one who was zigzagging around the sky." After five minutes we saw two more, one was close the other one which was way up high. Then we saw an aircraft flying in the same direction but then it left at a great speed following the other one that was high. After ten minutes more we saw two lights were going in the direction of the Pacific Ocean. One object was very small and a big one appeared. The small one was very high and the second one sped up to follow the other one toward the Pacific. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Greece - Formation ATHENS -- We saw a formation of lights moving in various directions stopping and moving again around 6:25 PM, on January 9, 2005, Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Japan - Sphere Tokyo -- Our-J UFO Magazine reports a disc was captured on a Pentax MZ-5 Sigma camera on January 21, 2001, over Urawa, Corso Department Store and observed by over 30 witnesses. Jun-ichi Kato spotted the UFO in the Southern sky and urged staff photographer Nishikawa to photograph the shiny white sphere ten miles north of Tokoyo. Thanks to Our J-UFO magazine. www.our- j.com Mexico - Egg MONTEREY - On January 1, 2005, at 6:51 PM, the witness was taking pictures with his digital camera at the bridge preparing to see the New Year's first sunrise and he took a picture of UFO. It was forming a figure of a circle, or egg in an aura of two colors. By one side, it had an orange light and by other side it had a blue light. I took various pictures at several minute intervals. Some of my pictures show their shape vaguely, but several show its shape almost perfectly. In that same picture I could see some other gray shapes that I thought were effects caused by the camera lens, but now I think differently. The camera was in perfect condition so it had absolutely no problem with its lens, and above all those gray shapes were forming completely and were the same shape as the clear one, just with different size. New Zealand -A Slow Moving Disk HASTINGS - At 9.20 PM, on New Year's Eve, December 31, 2004, we saw a bright orange glowing large upside down cup shaped object. It was like the shape of an upside down tea cup on a saucer. It flew under the very low clouds quite slowly and then darted up on an angle and then turned left and headed straight up. The saucer was clearly visible for around 15 minutes. We took photos but strangely all photos on the film before the event turned out, as did all the photos after, but the five photos taken from different positions of the saucer came out totally blank, with just the date on them. The saucer shaped object glowed white and faded away three times. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Portugal - Bright Sphere LAJES AIR FORCE BASE - A meteorologist was driving on to the Joint Portuguese, USAF base when he noticed a very bright sphere near Runway 14/32 on December 15, 2004, at 9:55 AM. The sphere was in close proximity to the eastern sunrise. This was not an aircraft as the brilliance was not a reflection from the sun and did not have an apparent movement. The brilliance was of another color of the sun, wave length, and definitely was not a reflection of an aircraft, since it was extremely white. It was very, very bright. He had little time to observe, but he could discern slight movement. I'm not a UFO type, but have observed one other visual anomaly here. Suggest you query the USAF Radar at this site. 38.77N 27.01W Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com Editor's Note: When I was flying into the Azores on a regular basis there were fairly regular reports of UFOs hovering near the base. South Africa - Sphere Balls in Sky Centurion -- On December 26, 2004, at 1:30 PM; two spheres were observed for almost ten minutes. One looked like it began to fall and disappeared. A few minutes later they were back and flew in formation making a circle horizontally then one vertically. One shot off at the most amazing speed, then reappeared. It looked like one object split and in some of the video footage there are other things as well. The three lights at the bottom of the video are street lights. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com UK/England - Silver Sparkly Cigar OXFORD - The observer looked out his car window on December 22, 2004, at 1:32 PM, and saw a silver cigar shaped object that was leaving behind a short sparkly trail. At one point the cigar split into two pieces and then reformed back together. The cigar was observed for about three minutes before it disappeared. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com WALTHAM ABBEY - At 12:20 AM, on January 1, 2005, the witnesses were setting off fireworks to celebrate the New Year, and as the last one was finishing we noticed three circles of light in a triangular formation, traveling west slowly. We managed to capture them on a mobile phones video-cam. I cannot believe we were the only ones to see this, because of how long they were visible to us. There may have been another sighting in Margate, Kent. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufo.center.com SUBSCRIBE TO KEEP YOUR FILES COMING Dear Readers - Filer's Files has been brought to you free on a weekly basis for eight years. Filer's Files has operating expenses of over a $100 each month and is operated on a "Not For Profit" basis. You can help to keep Filer's Files operating by sending a donation of $25 per year. Frankly, these files cannot exist without your help. Donations can be sent to: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. You can also mail your check to George Filer, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ 08055. I will send you a CD or DVD copy of the eight years of Filer's Files for a donation of $40 or more. MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL. A MUFON membership includes the Journal and costs only $45.00 per year. To join MUFON or to report a UFO go to http://www.mufon.com/. To ask questions contact MUFONHQ.nul or HQ.nul Filer's Files is copyrighted 2004 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the COMPLETE files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue. These reports and comments are not necessarily the OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters to Majorstar.nul Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name or e-mail confidential. CAUTION, MOST OF THESE
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:21:15 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:09:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:06:10 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:31:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:38:45 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>>>>>If so, would this be for refueling purposes (fuel cell recharge) >>>>>>or because portals are created in these areas by the reactor >>>>>>activity - if this is at all possible? <snip> >So your speculation that any excess of reports from around such >installations would inevitably be masked by secrecy seems to be >incorrect. Hi Martin, Point taken. To learn that sightings might be 'clustered' near such locations does not surprise me, due to the presence of trained observers specifically looking for intruders, coupled with the relative isolation of most nuclear facilities. If a UFO flies over such a facility, the large percentage of possible witnesses are military, whether on-base or in the adjacent towns. This is quite different than claiming that more sightings occur in such locations. The initial question assumes such facilities to be a 'destination'... a required stop. If that were the case, one would expect the vast majority of sightings overall to come from such facilities or markedly heading to or from one. In that respect, my point is brought to bear...if we aren't being told of the vast majority of military/ET encounters, then the statistical calculations are skewed such that we see what may be a correlation, but no clear, unassailable evidence. This is obviously the state that is desired. Like a distraction for sharp minds to lead them away from the real story...what could be more bizarre than UFOs..? At any rate, I accept the findings of those that crunched the numbers, but my perception that most sightings 'even highly strange ones' do not seem to correlate with nearby nuclear facilities... unless we're not being told about many of them...remains. I admit it might be a mistaken perception. Your point is sound. <snip> >Even if there is a statistically significant clustering around such >sites I don't think it is established that we need an exotic Agreed. Of course when we have hypotheses like 'hollow-earth Nazis from Antarctica launch saucer and fireball probes to assess current nuke tech as prelude to 4th Reich world invasion', who needs exotic ET portal or fuel hypotheses to explain anything. After all, Occam would place the former before the latter, no? <LOL>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:13:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:56:11 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:14 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Hi Martin, >>Yes, but how would you go from establishing a significant >>coefficient of correlation (when the distribution is corrected >>for population density, as has been claimed) to an analysis of >>causation - within the figures? >You can't - not using statistical methods, anyhow. As they say, >correlation doesn not imply causation, and the question of >causal mechanisms necessarily falls outside the field of >statistical analysis. Cathy Yes, precisely so. Hence my scepticism! >What you can do, though, is regress the dependent variable (say, >the number of UFO sightings in a district) against one or more >covariates (such as population density) in a number of separate >conditions, such as the presence or absence of an atomic power >plant in that district, and test to see if the regression lines >for each condition are significantly different. <snip> >There's no reason why you can't do an Ancova with multiple >covariates. The real problem here is likely to be getting >reliable and accurate measures of the covariates. If you can't >get these, then I'm afraid no amount of statistical analysis is >going to be of any use. Although you might still be able to >compare your sample of sightings near atomic reactors with >samples of sightings near other locations where the covariates >would be expected to have similar values. >>Specifically, how would you propose applying covariance analysis >>to isolate an absolute variability in the distribution of >>trufos? >Have I answered this above? You've covered the issues, but I'm still sceptical that we could discriminate between the hypotheses of interest to us - or more accurately, to Maurice Woolf. Yes, you can do a regression with three or maybe four variables if the data are rich enough and this could refine the correlation, but we would probably still only know that there is (or is not) a small tendency for more reports to come from areas where there are nuclear and other strategically important sites (proving grounds, air bases, industry, sea ports etc), not why this is so. I think we agree that it would take a very cunning analysis indeed - and also a heck of a lot better data - to tease out some subtlety which would turn this correlation from 'ho hum' to 'aha'!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:09:19 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:15:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Kimball >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:58:23 -0600 >Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:13:44 EST >>Subject: Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] >>The problem with Feschino isn't that he didn't record his >>interviews; as you know, he did. The problem is with the >>questions he asked, and how he asked them - as an enthusiast, or >>believer, not as an objective observer. That doesn't make him a >>bad guy (in fact, I admire his persistence); it just means that >>his work is seriously flawed, and requires the reader to sift >>through it all carefully. <snip> >I don't think a sincere (making that presumption) accounting by >a reasonablely intelligent person is going to be 'seriously' >flawed. Mr. Lehmberg: It is seriously flawed because his methodology is seriously flawed (in this case, his oral research metholodogy), not because he's "sincere", or "insincere". >And no one puts into the interviewing equation the >interviewee that _won't_ be lead. Colonel Leavitt was an old man when Feschino interviewed him, and the incident in question had happened decades earlier. Even a good interviewer would have to be careful when talking to a person under those conditions; these are both factors that exacerbate the damage to the integrity of an interview that can be done by "leading questions." >I'm disheartened how quickly some folks are willing to toss the baby >with the bathwater in the name of appearing to be non-credulous. I never suggested that one should "toss" Colonel Leavitt's testimony, merely that it should be viewed critically, and with caution, in light of some of the questions that Feschino asked, the way he asked them, and the fact that Colonel Leavitt is no longer around to talk about the case, and be cross-examined by a more objective (which is not to say "debunker" by any means) interviewer. >Bottom line, ones 'credibility' or 'reputation' is what the individual >concerned thinks it is, and not what has been portentously assigned >by conflicted assessors. For illustration, you think I give a rat's >barking patoot what Andy Roberts thinks of me? I suspect, from reading this List for many years now, that you don't give a "barking patoot" about what Andy Roberts thinks of you; the reverse is probably true. But credibility is not a completely subjective exercise. There are objective ways of testing it. For example, Stan Friedman conducted a fairly extensive background check on Bob Lazar, the results of which indicated that Lazar's credibility was / is, to anyone other than those who desperately want to believe in him and what he says, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, basically zilch. Besides, I never suggested that Colonel Leavitt lacked credibility; I merely pointed out that there were flaws (I maintain serious methodological flaws) in how he was interviewed. >I trust that Mr. Feschino will learn from his mistakes and move >on. Moreover, 'flawed' may not be _altogether_ useless. Here I agree with you, in that we can all learn from our mistakes (god knows I've made some doozies); I also never said that flawed, or even seriously flawed, was "worthless" - rather, that it needs to be recognised as such, and then viewed with caution.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 19 Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:24:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:37:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:19 -0600 >Subject: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal <snip> >The main reason I'm posting this though is that Peter is >"flabbergasted" that he has received little response from anyone >about this. He has been discussing this with people since 1995 >and he published his first article on it in the Oct. 1999 issue >of The MUFON Journal. It was more than 9 weeks after the article >was published that he received any response at all. Isn't CUFOS far more likely to get interested in using
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:06:57 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:53:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:09:19 EST >Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:58:23 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:13:44 EST >>>Subject: Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] <snip> >Here I agree with you, in that we can all learn from our >mistakes (god knows I've made some doozies); I also never said >that flawed, or even seriously flawed, was "worthless" - rather, >that it needs to be recognised as such, and then viewed with >caution. Your suggestion or intimation of same seemed so clear, Sir. Be that as it may, as this was the core point, it might be that we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:24:24 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:55:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:24:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:19 -0600 >>Subject: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal <snip> >>The main reason I'm posting this though is that Peter is >>"flabbergasted" that he has received little response from anyone >>about this. He has been discussing this with people since 1995 >>and he published his first article on it in the Oct. 1999 issue >>of The MUFON Journal. It was more than 9 weeks after the article >>was published that he received any response at all. >Isn't CUFOS far more likely to get interested in using >technology to study UFOs? Has anyone knocked on their door about >this? Hi Eleanor, I would think that CUFOS is already aware since it is a part of the UFO Research Coalition along with MUFON and FUFOR. Peter's proposal was one of the presentations at the last MUFON Symposium but it's my understanding that it elicited little response. It really seems like a lot of the UFO community is apathetic to this. It's disheartening considering this is one of the most straightforward proposals I've ever heard. I mean who wouldn't want to investigate an event as it happened rather than waiting to do an after-the-fact investigation. We now have the means to do it and few people seem to care. If I had the means to fund this project I'd do it in a heartbeat. Maybe if we chirp loud and long enough the right person might hear and cough up the funding which, according to Peter, would be cheaper and less restrictive than conventional radar since none of the receiving sites would be broadcasting signals.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:28:19 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:57:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:21:15 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:06:10 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>So your speculation that any excess of reports from around such >>installations would inevitably be masked by secrecy seems to be >>incorrect. >Point taken. To learn that sightings might be 'clustered' near >such locations does not surprise me, due to the presence of >trained observers specifically looking for intruders, coupled >with the relative isolation of most nuclear facilities. If a UFO >flies over such a facility, the large percentage of possible >witnesses are military, whether on-base or in the adjacent >towns. This is quite different than claiming that more sightings >occur in such locations. >The initial question assumes such facilities to be a >'destination'... a required stop. If that were the case, one >would expect the vast majority of sightings overall to come from >such facilities or markedly heading to or from one. In that >respect, my point is brought to bear...if we aren't being told >of the vast majority of military/ET encounters, then the >statistical calculations are skewed such that we see what may be >a correlation, but no clear, unassailable evidence. This is >obviously the state that is desired. Like a distraction for >sharp minds to lead them away from the real story...what could >be more bizarre than UFOs..? >At any rate, I accept the findings of those that crunched the >numbers, but my perception that most sightings 'even highly >strange ones' do not seem to correlate with nearby nuclear >facilities... unless we're not being told about many of >them...remains. I admit it might be a mistaken perception. Your >point is sound. >>Even if there is a statistically significant clustering around such >>sites I don't think it is established that we need an exotic >Agreed. Of course when we have hypotheses like 'hollow-earth >Nazis from Antarctica launch saucer and fireball probes to assess >current nuke tech as prelude to 4th Reich world invasion', who >needs exotic ET portal or fuel hypotheses to explain anything. >After all, Occam would place the former before the latter, no? ><LOL> By George, that Nazis flying out of Antarctica is a crackerjack theory because it has the [extremely dubious] honor of being able to explain almost anything. In philosophy classes we used to call that the 'demon in the corner' theory. If you assume the presence of all-powerful (or highly powerful) demons that can do most anything they choose, you can explain just about everything. However, I don't buy the trained observers at technical sites argument. They don't spend their time outdoors staring at the sky. This whole discussion reminds me somewhat of the (now- ancient) arguments about Michel's 'straight-line theory.' What constitutes a datum? To my way of thinking, if Joe Six-Pack reports seeing a light source fly past a high-security site high in the sky, that's a weak datum. If one or more employees of that site report a low-level, geometrically shaped (ellipse or oval) luminous object approaching and maneuvering (turns, etc.) near a weapons storage area at low altitude, that's a strong datum. We have a lot of the latter type of report, and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:38:21 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:59:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hall >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:56:11 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:14 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Yes, but how would you go from establishing a significant >>>coefficient of correlation (when the distribution is corrected >>>for population density, as has been claimed) to an analysis of >>>causation - within the figures? >>You can't - not using statistical methods, anyhow. As they say, >>correlation doesn not imply causation, and the question of >>causal mechanisms necessarily falls outside the field of >>statistical analysis. >Yes, precisely so. Hence my scepticism! >>What you can do, though, is regress the dependent variable (say, >>the number of UFO sightings in a district) against one or more >>covariates (such as population density) in a number of separate >>conditions, such as the presence or absence of an atomic power >>plant in that district, and test to see if the regression lines >>for each condition are significantly different. >>There's no reason why you can't do an Ancova with multiple >>covariates. The real problem here is likely to be getting >>reliable and accurate measures of the covariates. If you can't >>get these, then I'm afraid no amount of statistical analysis is >>going to be of any use. Although you might still be able to >>compare your sample of sightings near atomic reactors with >>samples of sightings near other locations where the covariates >>would be expected to have similar values. >>>Specifically, how would you propose applying covariance analysis >>>to isolate an absolute variability in the distribution of >>>trufos? >>Have I answered this above? >You've covered the issues, but I'm still sceptical that we could >discriminate between the hypotheses of interest to us - or more >accurately, to Maurice Woolf. >Yes, you can do a regression with three or maybe four variables >if the data are rich enough and this could refine the >correlation, but we would probably still only know that there is >(or is not) a small tendency for more reports to come from areas >where there are nuclear and other strategically important sites >(proving grounds, air bases, industry, sea ports etc), not why >this is so. >I think we agree that it would take a very cunning analysis >indeed - and also a heck of a lot better data - to tease out >some subtlety which would turn this correlation from 'ho hum' to >'aha'! Well, as I stated in a separate post it makes a helluva lot of difference how you define a datum. Garbage in, garbage out. Once you define and desctribe some standards for the data to be considered in a study of correlations between UFOs and atomic sites, you will be able to conduct meaningful analyses. Nothing particularly cunning about it. But this reminds me of a basic astronomy course I took at Tulane University in a previous lifetime. Prof. Frazer Thompson (I think I have that right) was the sole astronomer and had a small
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:02:15 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:02:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Friedman >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:58:23 -0600 >Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:13:44 EST >>Subject: Ufology & Evidence [was: Apology to Dick Hall] >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:49:44 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Apology To Dick Hall ><snip> >>The problem with Feschino isn't that he didn't record his >>interviews; as you know, he did. The problem is with the >>questions he asked, and how he asked them - as an enthusiast, or >>believer, not as an objective observer. That doesn't make him a >>bad guy (in fact, I admire his persistence); it just means that >>his work is seriously flawed, and requires the reader to sift >>through it all carefully. >'Seriously' flawed? I think not. >I don't think a sincere (making that presumption) accounting by >a reasonablely intelligent person is going to be 'seriously' >flawed. And no one puts into the interviewing equation the >interviewee that _won't_ be lead. I'm disheartened how quickly >some folks are willing to toss the baby with the bathwater in >the name of appearing to be non-credulous. Bottom line, ones >'credibility' or 'reputation' is what the individual concerned >thinks it is, and not what has been portentously assigned by >conflicted assessors. For illustration, you think I give a rat's >barking patoot what Andy Roberts thinks of me? >I trust that Mr. Feschino will learn from his mistakes and move >on. Moreover, 'flawed' may not be _altogether_ useless. Right on Alfred. Frank didn't go to Journalism school or to law school. His interview with Leavitt came quite early on in his investigation when he knew far less about Flatwoods than he did by several years later..... But he got an interview. Nobody else did. I am sure that many people wish that Zapruder had used a better camera and a better lens and had different angles... but he got footage of the Kennedy assasination. One learns to make do with what one has rather than be down because of what he doesn't have. Frankly I don't think a retired Colonel who had been in WW II had words put in his mouth by Frank. Even though I am a Dodger fan, I am not about to suggest that Barry Bonds was a poor player because over his entire career, he
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:12:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:11:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Balaskas >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >Source: Space.Com >http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >01-14- 2005 >ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >By Leonard David >Senior Space Writer <snip> >Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical >discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst >of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they >argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some >evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial >visitors might just be found there. >The researchers make their proposal in the January/February 2005 >issue of the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society >(JBIS). <snip> According to physicist Claudius Gros, the author of another UFO related paper (in press) soon to be published in the same Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS), a _single_ advanced spacefaring civilization in our galaxy could colonize nearly the entire Milky Way, including our stellar neighbourhood, in as little as 1 million years. The fact that we have not yet detected their presence (Gros ignores oral traditions and the written histories of various peoples and cultures from all over the world which describe visitations of beings from the heavens and makes no reference to modern UFO sightings as evidence) suggests to me that we are unique and alone in the galaxy, if not the entire universe. This is a very sobering thought indeed. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501119 Gros' paper was discussed at York University's Astronomy Journal Club meeting, in Toronto, today where I was also present. Very few of those at this meeting, including myself, could find much support for the popular belief expressed by fellow physicists Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold Puthoff in their JBIS paper that not only many advanced civilizations do exist among the hundreds of billions of stars which make up our galaxy but some of these civilizations are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:58:55 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:51:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:19 -0600 >Subject: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal <snip> >I have published his proposal as an HTML page (with his >permission) and I really believe the UFO community at large >should sit up and take notice. I feel this is just the kind of >real-time approach that Ufology needs if it's to ever be >considered as a serious science. Hi Terry I agree this is a very interesting idea and I have already said so to Peter Davenport. As I pointed out on the List a few months ago, meteor detection networks using exactly this passive multistatic system have been in use for many years. They are very successful and economical. I think this proposal deserves support and encouragement.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:22:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:58:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Lehmberg >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:02:15 -0400 >Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:58:23 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence <snip> >>I trust that Mr. Feschino will learn from his mistakes and move >>on. Moreover, 'flawed' may not be _altogether_ useless. >Right on Alfred. Frank didn't go to Journalism school or to law >school. His interview with Leavitt came quite early on in his >investigation when he knew far less about Flatwoods than he did >by several years later..... But he got an interview. Nobody else >did. And strain that unpracticed and unprofessional interview through all the Monday morning Quarterback filters you care to, I'm betting, and it's still enough of an interview to rip your lips off, n'est ce pas? >I am sure that many people wish that Zapruder had used a better >camera and a better lens and had different angles... but he got >footage of the Kennedy assassination. One learns to make do with >what one has rather than be down because of what he doesn't >have. Frankly I don't think a retired Colonel who had been in >WW II had words put in his mouth by Frank. Yeah! What was Zapruder thinking! He should have know to be down there closer to that street sign... [g]., and you've touched, again, on the subject of the interviewee who _won't_ be lead. >Even though I am a Dodger fan, I am not about to suggest that >Barry Bonds was a poor player because over his entire career, he >only got a hit 30% of the times he went to bat. Not a good home >run hitter either - only 8% of his official at bats..... ...Only useful 30% of the time, and _less_ than one in ten of those home-runs... sheesh... I'll bet he thinks he should get in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Four Objects Photographed Over Lancashire From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:30:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:30:28 -0500 Subject: Four Objects Photographed Over Lancashire Source: Preston Today - Lancashire, UK http://www.prestontoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?sectionid=3D73&articleid=3D923= 876 01-19-05 Have we been visited by aliens? Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Or is just a smudge on a windscreen? Keen photographer Stephen Ratcliffe of Woodstock Close, Lostock Hall, near Preston, reckons he has seen something sinister in the skies above Ribchester. The 49-year-old claims to have unwittingly snapped four UFOs hovering over the Ribble Valley when he took his digital camera to photograph the snow-covered landscape around the village. The prints, which he says he does not remember taking, show orb- like objects appearing to fall from the sky. But an astronomer at the University of Central Lancashire has cast a shadow over the authenticity of the picture, saying the lighting is not right. Professor Donald Kurtz, professor in astronomy at the university, said: "Things fall from the sky, bits of space rock and such like, but seldom will someone see it. "There are certainly no aliens flying around Lancashire in their flying saucers." Prof Kurtz added that the UFOs appear to be lit from the top whereas the shadows in the photograph are cast from behind. But Stephen, who works for Goss Graphics in Preston, is convinced the photos were a result of some kind of paranormal happening. He said: "I bought the camera for =A3129 last year and it has never had anything like this happen before. I can't remember taking the picture. I am convinced the camera did it on its own. "I was parked on a car park in the middle of the village and it looks like the picture was taken from behind the wheel of my car. "There was nobody else around so I don't know if anybody else
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:14:30 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:14:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:58:55 -0000 >Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:19 -0600 >>Subject: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal ><snip> >>I have published his proposal as an HTML page (with his >>permission) and I really believe the UFO community at large >>should sit up and take notice. I feel this is just the kind of >>real-time approach that Ufology needs if it's to ever be >>considered as a serious science. >I agree this is a very interesting idea and I have already said >so to Peter Davenport. As I pointed out on the List a few months >ago, meteor detection networks using exactly this passive >multistatic system have been in use for many years. They are very >successful and economical. I think this proposal deserves support >and encouragement. Hi Martin, You are correct. An example of such use can be found at http://aquarid.physics.uwo.ca/ Peter says, "I discovered that Prof. Peter Brown, at the University of Western Ontario, is tracking meteors with some type of system, funded by NASA. Since he has failed to respond to four messages and queries from me, I wonder whether I might have hit too close to home. I suspect they are detecting anomalous targets, and the meteor angle might be a cover of why NASA funded the project in the first place." It's possible that the UWO would not be as forthcoming with the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:40:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:40:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Lehmberg >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:12:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >>Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>Source: Space.Com >>http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >>01-14- 2005 >>ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >>By Leonard David >>Senior Space Writer ><snip> >>Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical >>discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst >>of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they >>argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some >>evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial >>visitors might just be found there. >>The researchers make their proposal in the January/February 2005 >>issue of the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society >>(JBIS). ><snip> >According to physicist Claudius Gros, the author of another UFO >related paper (in press) soon to be published in the same >Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS), a _single_ >advanced spacefaring civilization in our galaxy could colonize >nearly the entire Milky Way, including our stellar >neighbourhood, in as little as 1 million years. Yeah yeah... but there are some pretty broad assumptions in there if not blatantly homocentric ones... Consider, a race of galaxy spanning beings might be able to look ahead better than we can, presently, and realize that an overpopulated galaxy is a lot worse than an overpopulated planet... and taken steps to keep its population under better control than we have demonstrated to date? It's an insult to common sense that a race just a little smarter than we are wouldn't see that their long term health and quality of life was predicated on a rational size to their population... especially given the life extensions that _we're_ even breathing on. Moreover, it is allegedly from them that the no 'interference' "Prime Directive," comes as it was relayed to Wilbert Smith by the aliens, he reports. This would explain their caginess and insrutibility with regard to us. Besides, just a little smarter than us, and a little less ruled by their sociopathy and fear...(?), and the space-farers wouldn't try to pack themselves into every available corner like _we_ do. Overpopulation is not a 'given'. No... Fermi was right. If they existed they'd be here. They're here. UFO are real and the ET Hypothisis the least ludicrous explaination based even the little science we know... >The fact that we >have not yet detected their presence (Gros ignores oral >traditions and the written histories of various peoples and >cultures from all over the world which describe visitations of >beings from the heavens and makes no reference to modern UFO >sightings as evidence) _That_ was like tripping over a footstool enroute to some verity verification for Dr. Gros, yea and verily! [g]. Mr. B. provides a parenthesis that just _screams_ "Hey! Wait a minute", like he's flicking the microphone and saying, "Is this thing on," ...And it is. The point - the statement intimates much that is lacking in Dr. Gros' wan pontification... the observation an intellectual deal breaker. "He hasn't considered the evidence." What's the difference between him and Phil Klass, but maybe a mean streak? >suggests to me that we are unique and >alone in the galaxy, if not the entire universe. ...Right. Just like my evidence suggests to me that family Lehmberg is the sole resident of the Lehmberg household. Jesus Doctor! Space, time, surface area! >This is a very sobering thought indeed. Yeah - just likely inaccurate, based, just to start, on Mr. B.'s parenthetical comment above. >http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501119 >Gros' paper was discussed at York University's Astronomy Journal >Club meeting, in Toronto, today where I was also present. Very >few of those at this meeting, including myself, could find much >support for the popular belief expressed by fellow physicists >Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold >Puthoff in their JBIS paper that not only many advanced >civilizations do exist among the hundreds of billions of stars >which make up our galaxy but some of these civilizations are >even located in our very own backyard of space. I guess only >radio SETI and time will tell us which belief is correct. Ack! Really? That "leap of faith" and "wild speculation" suggesting, earnestly, that aliens still communicated with smoke signals (or _ever_ did?)? Dude! [g]. Space-time-surface area... what _can_ happen likely _has_ happened because what _can_ happen _will_ happen, given time and opportunity. There's been a lot of time and a lot of area. I'd say that makes for some opportunity
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:55:35 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:41:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Reason >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Yes, you can do a regression with three or maybe four variables >if the data are rich enough and this could refine the >correlation, but we would probably still only know that there is >(or is not) a small tendency for more reports to come from areas >where there are nuclear and other strategically important sites >(proving grounds, air bases, industry, sea ports etc), not why >this is so. >I think we agree that it would take a very cunning analysis >indeed - and also a heck of a lot better data - to tease out >some subtlety which would turn this correlation from 'ho hum' to >'aha'! Hello Martin, As you know, I emailed you off-List to ask for clarification about something - I did this because there is another point I wanted to raise here, but I wasn't sure if it was trivial or non-trivial. After reading your reply I think it's probably non- trivial, so I'm posting this to Updates. Firstly, perhaps I should be clearer about what techniques such as analysis of covariance and log-linear analysis actually do. As you know, we can investigate correlations by regressing some target variable, say Y, against some other variable, say X, to examine how much of the variance in Y can be attributed to X. We can do this either for one X (one-dimensional or simple regression) or for multiple X (N-dimensional or multiple regression). However, Ancova allows us to go further than this and (in effect) to calculate simultaneous regression lines for different groups. The upshot is that, where we have a correlation between two variables which are themselves correlated with some other variable or variables (the covariates) we can partial out the variance attributable to the covariates and test the null hypothesis that no variance remains. For example, if UFO sightings are correlated with atomic reactors, we can partial out the effects due to population density, differential reporting channels etc and see how much remains. If the data aren't rich enough for Ancova, one can use log-linear analysis - this can be thought of as a kind of glorified chi-squared test, the difference being that, when more than two variables are involved, log-linear analysis will allow you to separate to some extent the effects of the different variables, which of course simple chi-squared does not. I mention this because, while of course I agree that all corelations are subject to interpretation (one cannot infer causation from correlation no matter how strong the correlation is) it seems to me that the various alternative hypotheses you propose above which involve additional covariates are, in principle, testable. Even where reliable estimates of the covariates are unobtainable there may be ways round the problem - for example, one could test the hypothesis that the apparent higher number of UFO sightings near to reactors is due to more sensitive monitoring near strategically important sites by confining one's analysis to sightings made in the vicinity of the reactor by people unconnected with the reactor, and which were not reported through government or official channels. In other words, I think this is tesetable and I don't think the analysis need be particularly cunning. Whether the problem is sufficiently interesting or important to be worth the effort is another question, and one which I obviously can't comment on.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:56:30 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:42:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:24:24 -0600 >Subject: Re: Peter Davenport's Passive Radar Proposal >It really seems like a lot of the UFO community is >apathetic to this. It's disheartening considering >this is one of the most straightforward proposals >I've ever heard. If the system were something you could buy at Best Buys or Circuit City or Radio Shack, then I am sure you would have alot of participation. But you can't expect the general UFO public to be able to design, build and fund the required circuits and computer programs, its way beyond their abilities. There is a small group of hackers and electronics enthusiasts that have the saavy and determination to do this project, but they are as likely to do it underground without notice. One reason for hackers being underground is that this technology, used at the range specified, would draw attention of the government. The government does not want its military aircraft being tracked. >I mean who wouldn't want to investigate an event as it >happened rather than waiting to do an after-the-fact >investigation. We now have the means to do it and few people >seem to care. I have thought about this and I do not think we have to have the data in "real time". What we are trying to prove using passive radar is the hypothesis that UFOs come from outer space. It does not need realtime data to do this. One postprocessed data set that shows a UFO moving from the surface of the Earth to orbital altitude would be enough to do this. Any other correlative data is unneeded and likely of little use. Even if UFOs can be tracked coming from military bases (the UFOs are ours hypothesis), it is less likely to draw government ire and suppression if the data is postprocessed rather than real time. Homebrew real time passive radar, if it falls into the hands of negative agencies, can be used to target military aircraft, not only in this country but if the system were bought or built by "bad" countries, could be used against our own troops. This is the danger of this technology. That a North Korea or other dicatorship could cheaply, safely (can't destroy radar sites with no signal) build a system to protect against intrusion by our aircraft.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:02:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:44:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Maccabee >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:12:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >>Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>Source: Space.Com >>http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html <>01-14- 2005 <>ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood <>By Leonard David >Senior Space Writer <snip> >>Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical >>discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst >>of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they >>argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some >>evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial >>visitors might just be found there. <snip> >According to physicist Claudius Gros, the author of another UFO >related paper (in press) soon to be published in the same >Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS), a _single_ >advanced spacefaring civilization in our galaxy could colonize >nearly the entire Milky Way, including our stellar >neighbourhood, in as little as 1 million years. The fact that we >have not yet detected their presence (Gros ignores oral t>raditions and the written histories of various peoples and >cultures from all over the world which describe visitations of >beings from the heavens and makes no reference to modern UFO >sightings as evidence) suggests to me that we are unique and >alone in the galaxy, if not the entire universe. This is a very >sobering thought indeed. Amusing to learn of this paper. Perhaps being presented by JBIS almost as an "antidote" to the D-H-M-P paper >http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501119 >Gros' paper was discussed at York University's Astronomy Journal >Club meeting, in Toronto, today where I was also present. Very >few of those at this meeting, including myself, could find much >support for the popular belief expressed by fellow physicists Very few? That means there were some... or one? >Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold >Puthoff in their JBIS paper that not only many advanced >civilizations do exist among the hundreds of billions of stars >which make up our galaxy but some of these civilizations are >even located in our very own backyard of space. I guess only >radio SETI and time will tell us which belief is correct.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:41:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:14:53 -0500 Subject: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma In the field of UFO study, there stands some well-known personages, experts about strange flying things in the sky (and some on the ground too). One true expert, Stanton Friedman, persists in examining and re- examining UFO episodes, because some are not resolved, at least to everyone�s satisfaction. These include the MJ-12 documents, Roswell, and others. But there are those who confirm Tocqueville�s observation (Democracy in America) that, in the United States, if one doesn�t conform to the majority view, they are ostracized, shunned by their peers. This is how it is in the UFO community: if you stray from the orthodox view that UFOs are real, and probably alien (extraterrestrial) craft, you�ll be marginalized by those who want their other-worldly view to be the prevailing one. Bizarre imaginings and speculation are verboten in the UFO community. Hegemony of the 'visitors from space but just unproven' theory of UFOs is necessary at all costs. And viewpoints which explain some UFO events as prosaic occurrences are swept under the hegemonic rug. The UFO cause has become sacrosanct for some UFO experts, and those who take an unorthodox position are pilloried, sometimes inquisitionally. UFOs (flying saucers) have remained a modern mystery for 55 years now. No one has been able to prove that they even exist, although the circumstantial evidence is palpable. New approaches to UFO investigation are encouraged but then set aside for a continuing debate, which is far easier to do than to pursue the matter from somewhere other than an armchair. Old UFO sightings are mined to the point of exhaustion because someone has already done the legwork. New sightings are noted, but that�s about all, except for the sporadic computer analysis, again from an armchair or comfortable desk setting. Shall I name the culprits, er experts who maim real UFO
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:36:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:27:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Friedman >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:12:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >>Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>(JBIS). ><snip> >According to physicist Claudius Gros, the author of another UFO >related paper (in press) soon to be published in the same >Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS), a _single_ >advanced spacefaring civilization in our galaxy could colonize >nearly the entire Milky Way, including our stellar >neighbourhood, in as little as 1 million years. The fact that we >have not yet detected their presence (Gros ignores oral >traditions and the written histories of various peoples and >cultures from all over the world which describe visitations of >beings from the heavens and makes no reference to modern UFO >sightings as evidence) suggests to me that we are unique and >alone in the galaxy, if not the entire universe. This is a very >sobering thought indeed. >http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501119 >Gros' paper was discussed at York University's Astronomy Journal >Club meeting, in Toronto, today where I was also present. Very >few of those at this meeting, including myself, could find much >support for the popular belief expressed by fellow physicists >Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold >Puthoff in their JBIS paper that not only many advanced >civilizations do exist among the hundreds of billions of stars >which make up our galaxy but some of these civilizations are >even located in our very own backyard of space. I guess only >radio SETI and time will tell us which belief is correct. It has been my experience that most astronomers consider themselves experts on interstellar travel, alien behavior, UFOs, and national security. Unfortunately, it has also been my experience that they know very little about any of these. Their past record is miserable. Astronomer Newcomb proved that it would be impossible to fly an aircraft other than a balloon - 2 months before the Wright brothers. About 20 years later Astronomer Bickerton proved it would be impossible to place a satellite in orbit. Astronomer Campbell in 1941 mathematically demonstrated that the required initial launch weight of a chemical rocket able to send a man to the moon and back would be a million million tons. He was only off by a factor of 300 million. More recently the astronomers told us the surface of Venus was probably a tropical paradise, that there had never been water on Mars, that Space Travel is utter bilge. Ignorance combined with arrogance is a terrible combination. I would be delighted to present a lecture at York University, Toronto - on an expenses only basis, or to engage in a formal public debate such as I had with former Air Force Officer McGaha at Middle Tennessee State University - Are Flying Saucers Real? If a lecture, I would be happy to appear at a colloquium, seminar, classroom or whatever. Nick, how about conveying my challenge? If they wanted to charge admission, the profits could go to Tsunami relief or their favorite charity. Maybe you could get Student Government involved. I would be happy to send background material. They might be interested in my website piece, Challenge To SETI Specialists, at: www.stanfriedman.com It has a bio as well. I realize that SETI Specialists and Astronmers think we are the "crown of creation". I think that it is much closer to the truth
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Ufology & Evidence - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:10:37 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:30:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence - Kimball >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:02:15 -0400 >Subject: Re: Ufology & Evidence Stan: You wrote: <snip> >Frank didn't go to Journalism school or to law school. His >interview with Leavitt came quite early on in his investigation >when he knew far less about Flatwoods than he did by >several years later..... But he got an interview. Nobody else >did. Actually, the Leavitt interview as recorded in the book did not come "quite early on in his investigation." Frank had already interviewed the primary witnesses, and was quite familiar with the story. Further, it's not like he just popped in on Leavitt one day and started asking questions; he had been in contact with him, both in person and over the phone, for some time. Indeed, Feschino refers in the book, at p. 52, to "repeated phone calls" to Leavitt pleading with him to tell his story in front of the camera. According to Feschino, at p. 54, "I knew the truth about the government's involvement that night, and his [Leavitt's] testimony would lend more credibility to the incident. Sounds to me like Feschino already had his mind made up. At any rate, he was hardly an objective observer by this point, if he had ever been. Somehow, to me at least, "just getting the interview" isn't the standard we should be shooting for, particularly when... >I am sure that many people wish that Zapruder had used a better >camera and a better lens and had different angles... but he got >footage of the Kennedy assasination. One learns to make do with >what one has rather than be down because of what he doesn't >have. Frankly I don't think a retired Colonel who had been in >WW II had words put in his mouth by Frank. As you might say, Stan, this is "false logic." Zapruder didn't know that Kennedy was going to be shot that day. He just happened to be there at the time, with a camera. Of course, in such situations, one is forced to take what one can get. In Feschino's case, however, he knew well in advance that he was going to be interviewing, for the record, Colonel Leavitt. If Feschino had just run across Leavitt in an airport or something, by chance, and snatched a quick interview as best he could, then I would agree that the Zapruder analogy would be apt, but his situation was entirely different, so the Zapruder analogy is, again, false, and Feschino should be held to a higher standard. Incidentally, if he had interviewed Leavitt on the fly, by chance, I would still view the testimony with caution if Feschino had asked the same questions, but I'd be less hard on him in that instance. And just because Leavitt was a retired Army colonel, doesn't mean that he couldn't be manipulated, whether intentionally or unintentionally (I believe it to be the latter) by Feschino. For example, the following exchange, found at p. 59, talking about the "oil" at the site: "Leavitt: It was all over the place. Where it sat it had some oil coming out. Whatever it was. Feschino: [lightheartedly] I guess spaceships have oil leaks too." Leavitt: [chuckling] Maybe so." Leavitt's initial statement is fine. He didn't know what "it" was, and he said so. It should have been left at that. You know, sometimes people will tell you what they think you want to hear, particularly if you win their trust, as Feschino clearly did with Leavitt. So, I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater here - I'd accept Leavitt's first statement, and ignore Feschino's joke and Leavitt's response to it. However, when Leavitt finally comes around to agreeing that there was a cover-up, and that whatever was in Flatwoods came from somewhere else, I'd treat those statements with extreme caution, because they may have been coloured by questions - both in tone and in form - asked by Feschino, and the nature of Feschino's overall approach with Leavitt. >Even though I am a Dodger fan, I am not about to suggest that >Barry Bonds was a poor player because over his entire career, he >only got a hit 30% of the times he went to bat. Not a good home >run hitter either - only 8% of his official at bats..... Now this analogy is apt, but not for the reasons you suggest. Bonds cheated to get the numbers he has, by using performance enhancing drugs (as did a number of other athletes, in baseball and elsewhere). In the minds of serious baseball fans (and, I think, most of the general public), his achievements and records will always come with an asterix attached. In the Olympics, they strip you of your medal if you get caught - just ask any Canadian about Ben Johnson. Similarly, Feschino has been caught using the interviewing equivalent of performance enhancing drugs, ie. leading questions and compromised objectivity. All I'm suggesting is that we stick an asterix next to his work, and treat it with caution. Incidentally, if I was building a nuclear power plant, I suspect you would want me to be right more than 30% of the time, and to follow proper procedures. Just a thought.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:17:32 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:33:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:38:21 +0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:56:11 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:08:14 -0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>Yes, but how would you go from establishing a significant >>>>coefficient of correlation (when the distribution is corrected >>>>for population density, as has been claimed) to an analysis of >>>>causation - within the figures? >>>You can't - not using statistical methods, anyhow. As they say, >>>correlation doesn not imply causation, and the question of >>>causal mechanisms necessarily falls outside the field of >>>statistical analysis. >>Yes, precisely so. Hence my scepticism! <snip> >>I think we agree that it would take a very cunning analysis >>indeed - and also a heck of a lot better data - to tease out >>some subtlety which would turn this correlation from 'ho hum' to >>'aha'! >Well, as I stated in a separate post it makes a helluva lot of >difference how you define a datum. Garbage in, garbage out. Once >you define and desctribe some standards for the data to be >considered in a study of correlations between UFOs and atomic >sites, you will be able to conduct meaningful analyses. Nothing >particularly cunning about it. Oh really? With due respect you are not listening. There already are analyses purporting to show a meaningful correlation between UFO reports and atomic sites. You were the person who referenced the NICAP Nuclear Connection Project in a previous post. You said it had "very good data" on such a correlation. There's not much cunning in cranking the sausage machine to churn out correlations, it's true. But if the work you cite has statistical significance (which remains to be shown as no level of significance appears to be given in the paper we were discussing) the question of its meaning then arises. You appear to imply that reasoning from correlation to causation is so obvious as to need no more discussion, but you are mistaken. That's where the cunning comes in - the design of your statistical experiment needs to anticipate and eliminate (or quantify) a great deal of ambiguity. If it's so easy to test between the various hypotheses that might account for the claimed correlation then why doesn't the study you cite do this conclusively? Why are we not already certain what these "very good data" mean? Or perhaps you are certain? Perhaps you are privy to a more refined analysis that I don't know about. If so I'd be interested to hear about it. >But this reminds me of a basic astronomy course I took at Tulane >University in a previous lifetime. Prof. Frazer Thompson (I >think I have that right) was the sole astronomer and had a small >observatory on campus, and he taught differential equations. >Quoth he one day: 'Mathematics is a low form of cunning.' Well, I'm sure Prof Thompson may have been a regular walking dictionary of quotations, but so what? What is this supposed to mean? Are you saying that mathematics has no value in science? If you are affecting a sort of lofty indifference to all this silly statistical pedantry, why is there a correlation analysis of UFO reports v. nuclear installations on the NICAP web site and why did you refer us to it with approval? Here's an anecdote for you. There was a classic piece of work in the 1950s that showed a strong negative correlation between crime rates (offences per thousand individuals) and church attendance in the US. The conclusion seemed to be that churchgoing people were less likely to commit crimes and this was accepted as obvious. But a closer analysis showed it was wrong. The data were skewed by the tendency for both large families and immigrants to be Catholic churchgoers. It was found that when the figures were corrected for the different proportions of children and immigrants the correlation turned positive - churchgoing was actually associated with an increased crime rate - appropriately enough, as has been said, since sinners are the church's target clientele!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 20 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:05:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:39:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Ledger >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:38:21 +0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Well, as I stated in a separate post it makes a helluva lot of >difference how you define a datum. Garbage in, garbage out. Once >you define and desctribe some standards for the data to be >considered in a study of correlations between UFOs and atomic >sites, you will be able to conduct meaningful analyses. Nothing >particularly cunning about it. >But this reminds me of a basic astronomy course I took at Tulane >University in a previous lifetime. Prof. Frazer Thompson (I >think I have that right) was the sole astronomer and had a small >observatory on campus, and he taught differential equations. >Quoth he one day: 'Mathematics is a low form of cunning.' Hi Dick and Martin, Have we ever discussed possible reasons why these objects show up around nuclear sites? Is their proximity to nuclear sites as common now - statistically- as they were from the 50s up until about 25 years
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 21 Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:16:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:45:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH - Ledger >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:12:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >Subject: Re: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:33:57 EST >>Subject: Top Scientists Validate ETH >>Source: Space.Com >>http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html >>01-14- 2005 >>ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood >>By Leonard David >>Senior Space Writer ><snip> >>Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical >>discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst >>of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they >>argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some >>evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial >>visitors might just be found there. ><snip> >According to physicist Claudius Gros, the author of another UFO >related paper (in press) soon to be published in the same >Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS), a _single_ >advanced spacefaring civilization in our galaxy could colonize >nearly the entire Milky Way, including our stellar >neighbourhood, in as little as 1 million years. The fact that we >have not yet detected their presence (Gros ignores oral >traditions and the written histories of various peoples and >cultures from all over the world which describe visitations of >beings from the heavens and makes no reference to modern UFO >sightings as evidence) suggests to me that we are unique and >alone in the galaxy, if not the entire universe. This is a very >sobering thought indeed. Nick, Re above, which theory does he support. Pro or con. >http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501119 >Gros' paper was discussed at York University's Astronomy >Journal Club meeting, in Toronto, today where I was also >present. Very few of those at this meeting, including myself, >could find much support for the popular belief expressed by >fellow physicists Bernard Haisch, James Deardorff, Bruce >Maccabee and Harold Puthoff in their JBIS paper that not only >many advanced civilizations do exist among the hundreds of >billions of stars which make up our galaxy but some of these >civilizations are even located in our very own backyard of >space. I guess only radio SETI and time will tell us which >belief is correct. How many of your fellow club members have any real knowledge
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 21 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:25:48 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:46:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:55:35 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >I mention this because, while of course I agree that all >corelations are subject to interpretation (one cannot infer >causation from correlation no matter how strong the correlation >is) .... If one "cannot infer causation from correlation" then why the heck do it? What the heck good is the statistical analysis if one cannot "infer causation"?? That's the whole point of doing the analysis, to try to "infer causation." No one is saying _prove_ causation, just _infer_ it. In any case, I've pointed out offline to Martin that there are a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 21 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:47:53 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:51:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:41:18 -0500 >Subject: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma Rich, >>But there are those who confirm Tocqueville's observation >(Democracy in America) that, in the United States, if one >doesn't conform to the majority view, they are ostracized, >shunned by their peers. >This is how it is in the UFO community: if you stray from the >orthodox view that UFOs are real, and probably alien >(extraterrestrial) craft, you'll be marginalized by those who >want their other-worldly view to be the prevailing one. Nah, I don't think so. It has been some time since the ETH was synonymous with ufology. The most abuse I've ever received in my long career in this field was when, about a decade and a half ago, I cautiously suggested that the ETH deserved a second look. This was not what a surprising number of people from different sides wanted to hear. In fact, the ETH has gone in and out of favor over ufology's long history. Today, in my observation, serious ufologists seem more focused on process than on theory, and no particular hypothesis (other than that UFOs seem genuinely anomalous) is paramount. As this List attests, ufologists hold a wide range of views, from the sensible to the implausible and sometimes to the stupid. Older ufologists tend to know more, simply from having been around long enough to have gone through everything that the new person (such as, I suspect, yourself) thinks he or she has thought up for the first time and is confident that blind and obtuse oldsters are trying to squelch for (of course) unworthy reasons. Sometimes it's hard for us more experienced guys to keep patient when we see a younger colleague heading (in Hank Snow's observation) 90 miles down a dead-end street, especially when the speeder is loftily informing us that we're not really trying to save the driver from unnecessary trouble; all we're doing is seeking to "marginalize" him or her for (naturally) unsavory purposes. Not so, of course, but usually the driver has to experience the resulting crack-up before he or she understands that the experienced guy was actually right. In the meantime, the experienced guy has to endure all sorts of unflattering characterizations of what he had assumed, naively, would be taken as a good faith effort. Easier, I suppose, for the accuser to do that than to pay closer attention to the road. I know that, by the way, as a survivor of some serious collisions into
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:36:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:09:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 14:26:30 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:09:11 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >Rich, I feel that you are creating a false >dichotomy: I see nothing inconsistent or contradictory about the >differing approaches you have been describing here. A variety of >attacks on any problem is always welcome in science, provided >the methodology, logic, and evidence are sound, and those issues >can be reasonably debated. We (and I) do try to pass on to >newcomers what we have learned and try to warn them of pitfalls. Richard: My dichotomy lies in the subliminal form of censorship which rears its ugly head now and then, everywhere in America (and Canada?) where anyone expressing a view not copacetic with the majority is shouted down or cast as a insensate boob. I hate censorship of any kind, unless the person being censored is a racist, vulgar, or completely insane. Sometimes people write that they believe in God or Jesus as his Son, and those people are shunned like they have leprosy. Their beliefs are not scientific. But UFOs as ET craft or radar-blips are. You're not one of those censoring, nor is Jerry Clark, nor is Errol and the UFO UpDate guys (so far, with me anyway). But there are some here and everywhere who would impose their thinking, flawed or not, on all comers, hoping they'll conform to the "group think" as one eloquent UFO UpDater wrote me. For me, the history of UFOs is important, and should be known by newbies unless the sighting or case is so rife with investigation proving it erroneous or bogus that to further it would be criminal. But that doesn't mean that one should get bogged down in the past, which hasn't proved very useful in solving the UFO mystery. So new (and some old, abandoned) approaches should be looked at (again). And I would hope that everyone here would encourage those new approaches, without being smug in their expertise, their "we know better than you because we've been at it a lot longer." You know that I have the greatest respect for you and your thought processes, and Jerry Clark in a font of wisdom and knowledge. And Stan Friedman is just marvelous, as is Kyle King, Alfred Lehmberg, Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Terry Groff, Frank Warren and others. But others unnamed? Well, you know...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:38:12 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:12:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:12:10 -0600 >Subject: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >Source: The News-Press - Fort Myers, Florida >http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID05501210329 >01-21-05 >Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >By Mark S. Krzos >One of the greatest unsolved mysteries of the 20th century will >land at the Southwest Florida Museum of History on Saturday. >For the first time since the July 2, 1947, crash of an alleged >unidentified flying object, artifacts, sworn affidavits and >government documents will be seen somewhere other than Roswell, >N.M. >Get ready history buffs, conspiracy theorists, UFO fanatics and >space cadets, because "The Roswell Exhibit" promises to be a >unique close encounter of the otherworldly kind. <snip> >And at the heart of this mystery is Stanton Friedman. >Friedman is a nuclear physicist who worked for McDonnell Douglas >on classified, and eventually canceled, projects - think of >nuclear aircraft, fission and fusion rockets and you get the >picture. His standard spiel. A rocket scientist or a nuclear physicist must (so the public will assume) know what he is talking about when lecturing, or exhibiting, on Roswell. >He also was the civilian investigator of the Roswell Incident >who then co-wrote "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Study of the >Roswell Incident." >Friedman is not a "Spooky" Mulder, the FBI agent who >investigated the unexplained on the TV series "X-Files." >Friedman does not believe in every UFO sighting, close encounter >or abduction. >Friedman says the federal government has its reasons for keeping >the Roswell incident and others under wraps. The subtitle of the Friedman-Berliner book, Crash At Corona, is certainly not 'The Definitive study of the Roswell Incident'. It is 'The U.S. Military Retrieval and cover-up of a UFO'. At least that is the case in the original 1992 edition. At what point did it get transformed into "The definitive study...."? And why? My dictionary defines 'definitive' as "positive; final; most authoritative, expert or complete". It requires a great leap of faith to describe Crash At Corona thus, and the description is almost an insult to other Roswell authors & investigators. Example: On the back cover of the first edition there is a quote from an official document. This quote is taken from p.24 -25 of the book, in which it is stated that the said document was written in 1947 but was kept secret until 1985. The authors then tell us that this document, a memorandum, could have changed the course of history had it been common knowledge in 1947. Unfortunately the document is now known to be a forgery, a fake done to bolster credence to Roswell as the crash of an alien craft. (It is in fact a 1985 rewrite of the original, with certain phrases changed or added, including one phrase highlighted by the authors). No book including such a fake can possibly deserve the title 'definitive' and I assume the authors corrected this in the second edition. (Or did they?)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:46:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:55:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:17:29 -0800 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >Oh heck Rich, go ahead and name the names. Who is maiming real >UFO investigation? >Don't keep us in suspense. Larry: I will name, on our Blog-site, those I think who thwart or try to control the UFO argument, for various Machiavellian reasons.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:49:45 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:02:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - >From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:22:16 -0500 >Subject: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II <snip> >I will throw out this additional challange to all on the list. >Please go see the movie "Hotel Rwanda". It has nothing to do >with UFOs, but after you've seen it, you'll understand how >important it is that the Spaceships land now, not later... Mike, EBK and List, One thing that really irks me are the incessant ravings by those who rely on the false notion that a mass landing of 'spaceships' will in some way save us from destruction. The only thing that will "save" us is ourselves. It would be more important to enlighten the masses on the numerous injustices being perpetrated on us, than to rely on alleged benevolent alien beings from outer space. They don't give a damn about us, and if they do, it is for their own benefit. IMO, if they did give a damn about us, we wouldn't be in the nuclear, social, and environmental, just to name a few, predicaments that have been thrust upon us. I do plan to see "Hotel Rwanda", but after seeing it, I'm sure
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 FOIA Appeal To HQ USAF From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:20:04 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:05:18 -0500 Subject: FOIA Appeal To HQ USAF From: overtci.nul To: mary.walker.nul FOIA Appeal to HQ USAF TO: Secretary of the Air Force ATTN: General Counsel (FOIA Appeals Coordinator) The Pentagon Washington, DC 20330 FROM: Larry W. Bryant 3518 Martha Custis Drive Alexandria, VA 22302 DATE: January 22, 2005 Referring to the below-quoted e-correspondence between me and the Lackland Air Force Base's FOIA manager (see enclosed printout), I hereby formally appeal Ms. Barbara Strayer's Jan. 21, 2005, decision not to grant me a records-search-fee waiver in her processing of my FOIA request of Dec. 16, 2004. If and when this case reaches the judicial-review stage, ample evidence of my FOIA-requester status as an independent writer cannot but convince the court of Ms. Strayer's error in denying my request. My publication credits extend back to the 1960's (including articles/essays in FACT Magazine, the Realist Magazine, FATE Magazine, US Magazine, etc.). What's more, my recent work as a volunteer content provider for various weblogs/newspapers' discussion-board websites rounds out my experience with and ability for disseminating the fruits of my research-and-writing effort. By itself, Ms. Strayer's obvious willingness to prolong and/or obstruct any good-faith processing of my request testifies to the sought-for records' significant value in contributing to the public's understanding of government activity/inactivity. Indeed, her out-of-hand dismissal of my request not only disserves the spirit of the U. S. Freedom of Information Act; it also affirms and contributes to the unconstitutional restraint of my First-, Fifth-, and Fourteenth-Amendment rights as regards the Lackland public affairs officer's censorship of my proposed ads submitted for publication in the "Talespinner" -- ads, by the way, that in themselves constitute evidence of my intent, experience, and ability to widely disseminate the results of my related research and writing. If Ms. Strayer persists in her conclusion that whistleblower- derived information fails to qualify as a matter of keen interest to the tax-paying public, then you should take immediate steps to remove her from the FOIA-processing program. Ms. Strayer's e-message to me of Jan. 21, 2005, also indicates her intention to withhold certain records (or portions thereof) surfaced during the processing of my request; but she fails to itemize those redactions, and to provide me any acceptable reason for the withholding. I therefore appeal that tantamount denial of access to any records that by their First Amendment- related nature would be releasable via the routine discovery process upon my pursuit of judicial redress to restore and protect my (and the public's) First Amendment rights in this matter. By snail-mail, I'm sending to you a signed printout of this e- formatted letter. LARRY W. BRYANT Copy furnished to: Jonathan L. Katz, Esq. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TEXT OF THE SUBJECT E-CORRESPONDENCE: Mr. Bryant Allow me to address certain issues regarding your 16 Dec 04 FOIA request (below). This request was received in our FOIA office on 5 Jan 05. The 37th Contracting Squadron (37 CONS) and 37 TRW Public Affairs (37 TRW/PA) offices were tasked to provide records responsive to your request. While 37 TRW/PA is still processing your request, 37 CONS has provide this office with a response. Upon review of the response provided by 37 CONS, I take note that some information might not be releasable under the provisions of the FOIA. Therefore, to avoid forwarding this request/responsive records to higher headquarters for processing (as required when some requested information might not be releasable), would you agree to accept releasable information only? Agreeing to this would allow me to delete any words/passages that might not be releasable under FOIA. If so, then I would be able to complete processing action for this portion of your request and provide you with these records (copy of contract) now. Remaining portion of your request (for PA records) will continue to be processed. In reference to your request for fee waiver; the standard is whether disclosure of the requested information would fall within the public interest, rather than the requester's commercial interest, because the information sought could likely contribute significantly to the public understanding of government operations or activities. You have asked for waiver of fees for reasons of national security, "whistle-blowing", and censorship. You have implied that pubic interest rather than commercial interest motivates this request. However, you have not demonstrated how the requested information will increase the public at large understanding of national security issues or censorship. Therefore, since you have failed to demonstrate how requested information will contribute to the public's understanding of the issues involved, your request for fee waiver is denied. I have placed you in the all other fee category and will apply applicable fee reduction (2 hours search time and 100 pages) for this category; you would be billed for any chargeable fees after this reduction. At this time, I do not anticipate chargeable fees to exceed $25 (after fee reduction has been applied). Based on this information, request you agree to reimburse for chargeable fees not to exceed $25. Provide your response (willingness to accept releasable information only and reimburse chargeable fees) to our office not later than 4 February 2005. You may reply directly to this e-mail, in writing to 37 CS/SCBR, 2261 Hughes Ave Ste 102, Lackland AFB TX 78236-9802, or FAX your reply to (210)671-4592. Final processing action will be completed upon receipt of your reply. Sincerely //SIGNED// BARBARA STRAYER -- FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT MANAGER -----Original Message----- From: overtci.nul [mailto:overtci.nul <mailto:overtci.nul> ] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 11:01 PM To: 37cs.scbr.nul Subject: [Fwd: RE: [Fwd: RE: Additional Ad-review Submission for the Lackland AFB "Talespinner"]] TO: FOIA Manager, Lackland AFB, Texas: Please process this message as a formal FOIA request for a copy of the "Talespinner" publishing contract identified below, as well as for a copy of all the Lackland-generated and Lackland- received records pertaining to my two ad-submissions processed by Lt. Col. Kemper -- said records to include the following material: (1) All correspondence (including snail-mail, e-mail, faxed letters/memos/reports, teletype messages, document-transmittal slips, FONECON memoranda, and memoranda for record, along with their enclosures) exchanged between any and all offices of your command and between any and all external government offices, as well as between any and all officials/employees of the "Talespinner's" contract printer. (2) Agenda for, and all participants' notes/reports deriving from, all relevant staff meetings, briefings, and planning sessions. Since I make this request as an independent writer focusing on matters of national-security interest, information-access policy/practice, whistleblower culture, and First Amendment jurisprudence, I ask that you waive all records-search fees incident to your fulfillment of this request. -- Larry W. Bryant Subject: RE: [Fwd: RE: Additional Ad-review Submission for the Lackland AFB "Tal espinner"] From: "Kemper Antoinette T Lt Col 37 TRW/PA" <Antoinette.Kemper.nul> Date: Thu, December 16, 2004 3:14 pm To: overtci.nul ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mr Bryant
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 18:47:58 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:07:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:16:28 EST >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:25:36 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:25:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>I think the cases we mentioned off-line are very interesting - >>specifically Oak Ridge (Oct 1950 cluster) and Los Alamos (Green >>Fireballs). I take your point that there were some challenging >>cases from Oak Ridge at this time of far more interest than the >>numerous trivial-seeming reports in the FBI file. Nevertheless >>these trivial reports also exist, so reports of all levels of >>strangeness and quality do seem to have spiked at this time. >Hi Martin, >Well maybe the "trivial" cases are still Unknowns just of poor >quality. Hi Brad, Well, maybe, maybe not. This is a difficult argument to sustain unless it is known on independent grounds that extraordinary trufos were around to generate poor quality reports that happen to resemble trivial phenomena. And I know you want to talk about specific cases - I'll come to that momentarily - but in the context of the discussion hitherto, the evidence for extraordinary trufos is coupled to the claim of intelligent "intent" based on a statistical argument (that an excess of reports cluster around special sites) which was cited as part of the NICAP Nuclear Connection Project evidence - see below. As I understand this thesis, it goes far beyond saying that there have been some historical flaps around sensitive atomic sites - this is not in itself necessarily remarkable. After all there have been plenty of flaps around the world in the last 60 years that were not anywhere near such sites, and it's quite likely, a priori, that a flap would happen near a place like Oak Ridge or Sandia or wherever at some time or other (if it never did we would perhaps have evidence of intentional avoidance, which would be interesting). The argument offered is _essentially_ statistical, because it is saying that there are _more_ (or scarier or stranger, or something) flaps at such sites than there ought to be as a proportion of all flaps. >My impression is that the security agencies were >discussing very few "trivial" cases. When they would provide >short lists of sightings, a surprising "most" or all of them were >Unknowns. Very few could be rejected as aircraft, astro, >balloons, etc. My impression of the 1950 Oak Ridge flap is different, but perhaps we are not referencing the same body of material. I should justify my impression: The NICAP site lists about 17 or 18 cases in the area for October - December, with one or two scattered reports in earlier and later months or years. These are all reports collected by the FBI (published in Clear Intent), some civilian, some military. These are reports I looked at when compiling my RADCAT radar catalogue because there were several radar incidents. These first: A quick tally shows that radar at McGhee-Tyson Airport, Knoxville, reported anomalous echoes in the area on some 7 occasions, ranging from groups or clusters or a "blanket" of echoes (either moving slowly or in one or two cases possibly not moving at all) to "unintelligible readings". In four of these cases fighter interceptions were attempted. In no case, despite repeated passes and "perfect interceptions", did any pilot either make AI radar contact with any target or make visual contact with any object - except once, when on Dec 21 an F-82 was vectored to a "very very slow" and "small" echo and "made a perfect interception and orbit surrounding [a] small smoke cloud". I would not carry any of these reports as Unknowns or even as particularly interesting on the evidence available. Of the other incidents most are rather vague visuals, like a scintillating or red/green flashing light moving back and forth in the distance, or a stationary bright white light that dwindled, or a couple of cases where witnesses described what they thought were probably balloons. There is no clear case of radar-visual simultaneity, or even approximate corroboration. In one case radar echoes were reported in the approximate same area as an unfamiliar "balloon" described by the Oak Ridge X-10 Security Superintendent (he said he could see "wrinkled" fabric and something hanging below). But again, nothing at all was seen or detected by an intercepting fighter. In a couple of other cases people reported hearing "intermittent noises" or "peculiar sounds" - presumably seeming to be in the sky. Given that Unknowns tend to be of "good" quality relative to Knowns, which tend to be "poor" (a justifiably oft-cited result of BB SR14), I'd expect an increase in true Unknowns to look much more impressive than this. >One has to dig through more complete >collections of reports in the BB files to try to find a few of the >usual IFO's. For example, the Project TWINKLE Final Report >and Holloman Unexplained Phenomena report discuss maybe >a dozen UFO incidents, out of which maybe the one at >Corona is clearly just the moon low on the horizon, and that's >about it for the IFO's! One out of a dozen. (I would have to go >re-read the reports and see if maybe another IFO can be >found in them.) Likewise with Lincoln LaPaz's reports on the >Green Fireballs, 100% Unknowns, 0% IFO's. Sure, you can >find other incidents in the same time frame and location, but >then you are spiking the sample yourself with IFO's that the >agencies investigating were able to fairly easily decide were to >be ignored. I don't disagree that the Green Fireballs are a clearly distinct and genuine cluster of Unknowns. I'm far from denying that such clusters happen, and I don't think I've said anything that could give that impression. Here are phenomena having a unique phenomenology, very carefully reconstructed by experts who were themselves sometimes witnesses, and proveably restricted to a small area of the SW USA in a narrow time window. As you say, there were concerns expressed at the time about apparent "inquisitiveness" with respect to Sandia etc, and a possible hostile intent, based on the fact that trajectory reconstructions showed the objects overflying sensitive sites more often that ought to have been the case if they were some sort of unexplained meteors. If this analysis was reliable, as seems to have been the case, then one can say that La Paz & co made a good statistical case for "intent" in respect of atomic sites and the Green Fireballs. But in my opinion this doesn't transfer automatically to any cluster of reports around any other atomic site, and doesn't of itself demonstrate a general tropism on the part of UFOs towards atomic weapons areas (after all, if you are overflying the vast desert ranges what _else_ is out there that are you likely to be "interested in" if you are looking at human technical activities rather than the geology?). Still less does it suggest evidence of "UFO portals" or whatever. >If you are investigating effects of publicity on >sighting waves that is one thing, and that would require >checking the newspapers, an entirely different activity than >armchair statistical analysis, which would have to be done >before such analysis so that you have all the IFO's being >reported in the press. Well, quite! >>We can argue that more trufos caused more vigilance/reporting >>which generated more trivial cases too. But the case for UFOs >>being "interested" in Oak Ridge is maybe not clearly >>demonstrated by the statistics, which might be equally >>consistent with the challenging reports being the undigestible >>tail-end of a distribution of "knowns" generated by heightened >>security (or some similar factor we haven't identified). If we >>can't try prove this is not so without appealing to details of >>this or that report then I think it's a shame, because it is the >>failure in 50 years of this or that report to carry the case for >>UFO-strangeness that leads me to be interested in statistical >>patterns such as the claimed correlation with nuclear sites. ><snip> >See above. I think the statistical analysis you've been referring >to is one by Don Johnson on UFOCAT and I think it is swamped >with too many IFO's. I also think it requires a number of >control studies to see if similar correlations can be found to any >industrial population zones, any military bases, which are >where many nuclear power plants are located. Again I think >the nuclear power plant alleged correlation is a waste of time >because there are few if any UFO sightings demonstrating >specific intent on such plants. That is indeed the paper I was referring to. Until a few days ago it was linked as item NCP - 11 on the NICAP Nuclear Connection Projection page, as referenced by Richard Hall. It has now disappeared from the NCP page, but the paper is still accessible at: http://www.cufon.org/contributors/DJ/Do%20Nuclear%20Facilities%20 Attract%20UFOs.htm We evidently agree that this probably isn't fine tuned enough and doesn't constitute a strong argument for a significant correlation (i.e., one indicating "intent" or some analogue) anyway. Re the Oak Ridge flap, I suspect that you'll now point me towards a number of significant cases from 1950 that I wasn't aware of and show that they are of high strangeness. But as of now I remain to be convinced.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:06:28 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:09:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >Okay, I know you told me "enough" about the Socorro sighting. >What I'm saying is that some sightings should not be dismissed >as unresolved, leaving the impression that they are good >sightings, because subsequent checking provides other answers >perhaps. That's all I'm saying. Seems to me what you've been saying for some time is that too
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 UK UFO Documents From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 20:26:53 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:11:43 -0500 Subject: UK UFO Documents Britain's Freedom of Information Act came fully into force on 1 January 2005. While this enables people to access numerous UFO documents, it has also led to the National Archives proactively releasing a number of UFO files. The following list details these files, which mainly consist of reports from members of the public: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/releases/2005/januaryfoi/list4.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: FYI: Does Your Meteor Physics Group Log From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:33:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:13:15 -0500 Subject: Re: FYI: Does Your Meteor Physics Group Log >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:10:28 -0600 >Subject: Re: FYI: Does Your Meteor Physics Group Log Anomalies? <snip> >This is nice news Eleanor. >Peter Davenport says that he has tried to contact Prof. Peter >Brown a few times but never received a reply. It's nice to know >that there is someone there that would seemingly be willing to >cooperate if an anomalous event were detected. We can only hope. >Terry Terry and Brad Sparks, who wrote me off list: I wrote them because I just got plain curious as to whether they were truly not responsive. Being someone up against the powers that be in another field of equal significance to UFOs, I know that it's at least possible that mail/email from well-known UFOlogists could be blocked. I also have found out from my activism work, that sometimes writing the boss is a good idea, but sometimes it's not. Instead of writing the boss in this case, I wrote a staffer who, from her name, may in fact be the boss's wife. If I were a Ufologist who, like Brad Sparks, is full of questions, I would hold them for a month or two, on the chance that Dr. Campbell-Brown's answer was honest. I would not rush at them with all sorts of questions. I would wait and see if they initiate some interest of their own, very possibly through one of their more imaginitive students who do the analysis of the raw data. If, say, nothing has been heard by tax time, then it might pay to contact them directly with, for example, Brad's many technical questions. Rushing their personal thought processes may not be as helpful as just standing back and seeing what happens.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:14:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rudiak >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >Let me assure you that I've perused [sic] the Rudiak response to >Larry Robinson [1999], and it is exemplary. However... For my demolition of Larry Robinson's hot-air balloon "explanation" for the 1964 Socorro case, see: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/aug/m26-016.shtml For the basic hot-air balloon physics that disproves it: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/aug/m21-007.shtml >Dr. Rudiak answered Robinson's premise, which was that a balloon >was responsible for Zamora's sighting. Since Robinson's premise >is wrong, the answer to it has to be wrong. >Since Robinson's 1999 position, we discovered, by extensive >search on his behalf, and corroborating James Easton's findings >- separate from Easton's material itself - that the Navy, using >a CIA front, did, in fact, have cross-country balloon trips, >using a hybrid balloon, one using hot-air and a LEM-like >attachment, in the early 1960s. >Rudiak hasn't addressed that issue, Rudiak hasn't addressed that issue because Rudiak has never been asked to address the issue. But changing an ordinary hot-air balloon into a mysterious Navy/CIA-front hybrid hot-air balloon/LEM-like craft does nothing to change the basic arguments against any balloon explanation. What Zamora saw was much too small to have been a balloon of any type (hot-air, hydrogen, helium, you name it) that could loft two men, the men's compartment, a balloon envelope, and any "LEM-like" propulsion attachment. I suppose the reasoning behind a balloon/LEM hybrid is thus: 1. It behaves like a "LEM" when it's taking off, to account for Zamora's account of a roaring flame plus all the physical evidence left behind of scorched soil, burned bushes, etc. 2. According to Zamora's account, when it reached 20 feet altitude, the flame shut off, the craft became silent, and sped off. Presumably the silence is supposed to be explained by the balloon part of the hybrid, i.e., the craft was now lighter than air and didn't require any propulsion mechanism to keep it aloft. Here are some BIG problems: 1. According to the 4 impressions left by the craft on the ground, the craft was very heavy. Check Ray Stanford's investigation in his book, "Socorro Saucer in a Pentagon Pantry" where he states (p. 106) that one physicist estimated that the object must have weighed 8 to 10 TONS to have created such depressions in the hard soil. 2. Thus the "balloon hybrid" weighs tons on the ground according to the physics, but magically becomes lighter-than-air when it lifts off the ground and the hot-air balloon hybrid part takes over. How does that work? If you refer back to my Updates post on physics of hot-air balloons, a hot-air balloon with the air heated to about 100 deg. C. would lose about 20% of its mass. A hot-air balloon with a volume of about 500 m^3 (about 10 m or 30 feet in diameter) would thus lose about 100 m^3 of air. At an air density of about 1.3 kg/m^3, this would displace 130 kg of air (286 pounds), enough to barely support a 130 kg payload. The payload includes everything: 2 men, men's compartment, balloon envelope, propulsion equipment and fuel, the four landing gear, etc. This weight is obviously absurdly low, but I was trying to give the hot-balloon theory every chance it could get. Even assuming tiny, light-weight men, the actual weight using very lightweight materials could easily be double, triple, or quadruple this. Let's _conservatively_ double the payload weight to 260 kg, or 570 pounds total to make it more realistic. The volume of the hot air balloon would have to be doubled to support the weight. The balloon would now have a volume of 1000 m^3 and be about 12.5 m or 40 feet in diameter. To give a balloon explanation even more of a chance, ditch the hot-air balloon and substitute a hydrogen balloon, which would provide the optimum lift of any balloon. Hydrogen is 14+ times less dense than ordinary air, therefore you can cut the volume to ~1000/14 = ~70 m^3. This would be a spherical balloon about 5.1 m or 17 feet in diameter. [To be even more realistic, one would have to be crazy to use flammable, explosive hydrogen gas near a flaming propulsion system. One would use helium gas instead, but that would be 4 times denser and require a balloon with dimensions about 1.6x greater (cube root of 4) than that for a hydrogen balloon. Again, I'm trying to give the balloon hypothesis every opportunity I can here.] Zamora described an oval-shaped craft the size of a small car, the long axis at least double the length of the craft width and height. Based on Zamora's description and the landing pad physical evidence the length of the craft was about 15 feet, call it 5 meters. Then the width and height might be 2.5 meters. The total volume of the oval would be about 16 m^3, over a factor of 4 too small. Make the hydrogen balloon an oval of these proportions instead of a sphere and its dimensions become about 8.1 m or 26.5 feet in length, and half that in width and height, or 4 m/13 ft., more the dimensions of a large delivery truck than a small car. (Or to be more realistic, make it a helium balloon. Then its dimensions swell to ~1.6 * 8 = 12.8 m or 42 feet in in length by 21 feet high and wide, which is getting house-size.) Thus even under an optimized hydrogen balloon hypothesis, one would have to assume Zamora's couldn't distinguish a truck-sized object from a small-car size, even though he got as close as 25 feet to the object, the length of a living room. (Or under a less-optimum but more realiztic helium balloon hypothesis, Zamora couldn't distinguish a house from a car at 25 feet.) Therefore, even if one assumes gross misperception on Zamora's part and literally stretches the balloon hypothesis to the max, one still can't account for those damned impressions of the landing pads in that hard soil indicating an object the weight of TONS. Where did all those tons of weight go when the "balloon hybrid" lifting off? There are also associated problems, such as the craft becoming silent after lifting off and zipping away at over 100 mph against a stiff cross-wind. What silent propulsion system was the CIA using that could do this? How could it fly a bulky balloon this fast against the wind? And there are lots more problems concerning the physical evidence at the site, such as the lack of chemical propellents when the soil was analyzed, one of the bushes being cut cleanly in half, etc., etc. >and anyone here at UFO >UpDates can find the same material, if they have the time and >patience, using Google or their library's research department. Why not just provide some links instead of just saying the material is out there. All I can find is Easton's nonsense on the hot air balloons, Socorro, and the CIA. Even if you throw the CIA into the mix, it's still a hot air balloon theory that doesn't begin to address the fundamental issues. >Rudiak squelched, effectively, Robinson's erroneous 1999 >hypothesis, but hasn't addressed the hybrid craft issue. Why >not? Because it would take too much time on a sighting which I >contend is flawed in many ways. No, again the reason I haven't addressed it has nothing to do with it taking too much time. Nobody has asked me and nobody has provided anything new. You're still talking hot air balloon. >Okay, I know you told me "enough" about the Socorro sighting. >What I'm saying is that some sightings should not be dismissed >as unresolved, leaving the impression that they are good >sightings, because subsequent checking provides other answers >perhaps. That's all I'm saying. Rich, "perhaps" isn't good enough. Either a balloon theory (of any type) explains the details of the case or it doesn't. As I've tried to demonstrate, no balloon hypothesis, no matter how optimized, comes remotely close to explaining Socorro. Socorro remains unexplained. >You have a revised encyclopedia to finish. I understand your >time is valuable. And Dr. Rudiak addressed this issue, and for >him it's over. Apparently not. Whenever I think I've gotten out, they keep pulling me back in. >For me, it's just one of many sightings which can be dismissed, >perhaps, if the Navy/CIA balloon thing can be substantiated in a >way that satisfies you, Rudiak, and others. This is what Larry >Robinson hopes for also. I'm awaiting such "substantiation." Handwaving proclamations of a viable counter-theory don't count. Please deal with the basic science issues or just give it up. >(Robinson is a decent, honest fellow, in my estimation. I've >communicated with him several times and know his background and >current status at IU. If he says he saw a magazine article which >helps explain the Socorro sighting, he indeed saw it.) >Jerry, you are a superb thinker. I ascribe no nefarious >motivations to you, or anyone else here... but there is some >faulty thinking sometimes, even by those who presume to be >faultless in their thinking, which Alfred Lehmberg alluded to >here, and with which I agree. >As the cliche goes, we must agree to disagee - about Socorro. It's all fine and dandy to give cliches about how we can agree to disagree about Socorro. I would second that if there were
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 The Sightings Of Strange Flying Objects Found In From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:18:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:18:56 -0500 Subject: The Sightings Of Strange Flying Objects Found In Source: The Independent - UK http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=603470 01-22-05 Uncovered At Last: The Sightings Of Strange Flying Objects Found In Britain's 'X-Files' By Robert Verkaik They contain Britain's very own X-Files: thousands of classified documents detailing credible observations of unidentified flying objects reported by RAF personnel, British Airways pilots and senior police officers. Now under the Freedom of Information laws, files previously held by the Ministry of Defence's special UFO department, known as SF4, are being released to the public. Among the most credible reports of a possible visit by extraterrestrial life-forms is one made by an RAF pilot and two NCOs at RAF Boulmer in Northumberland. In July 1977 Flt Lt A M Wood reported "bright objects hanging over the sea''. The MoD document adds that the RAF officer said the closest object was "luminous, round and four to five times larger than a Whirlwind helicopter". The UFOs were reported to be three miles out to sea at a height of about 5,000ft. The officer, whose report is supported by Cpl Torrington and Sgt Graham, said: "The objects separated. Then one went west of the other, as it manoeuvred it changed shape to become body-shaped with projections like arms and legs." The men who were positioned at the picket post at the RAF station were able to observe the strange objects for an hour and 40 minutes. At the same time a radar station detected the objects in exactly the same position as the men had observed them. It registered them to be between 30 to 35 degrees before they disappeared from the screen. The report describes Flt Lt Wood as "reliable and sober". It adds: "Two contacts were noted on radar, both T84 and T85, at RAF Boulmer. They were also seen on the Staxton Wold radar picture which is relayed to West Drayton... On seeing the objects on radar the duty controller checked with the SRO at RAF West Drayton as to whether he could see the objects on radar supplied from RAF Staxton Wold." This account was deemed so sensitive to the national interest that the MoD had delayed its release for an extra three years. But under the Freedom of Information Act, which came into force on 1 January, the file has been reviewed and declassified. Some of the other reports are equally compelling. A British Airways Tri-Star on a return flight from Portugal in July 1976 was involved in an incident which led to the scrambling of fighter jets. The MoD report says that the Tri-Star captain reported "four objects - two round brilliant white, two cigar-shaped" 18 miles north of Faro. The captain was so alarmed by what he and the passengers had seen that he reported the sighting to air traffic controllers at Lisbon and Heathrow. The report says that fighters were immediately scrambled from Lisbon. Shortly afterwards another Tri-Star crew on the same flight path reported a similar unexplained sighting. This time they said there was a "bright object with two contrails" between Fatima and Faro. It remained stationary before moving north and then "changing in length". In another incident in the same month two Tri-Star co-pilots and five of their cabin crew reported "passing underneath a bright white circular object". The files also contain reports compiled by police officers of their first-hand experiences of observing UFOs. On 8 April 1977, Superintendent Cooper of West Yorkshire Police described a sighting while on duty in a patrol car in Laisterdyke. He said: "I looked to my right and through the side window of the car I saw a bright silver light. At first I thought this was a bright star. It was low in the sky, a long distance away... then I thought that this light was moving. The light was visible just over the rooftops of the houses on Ferrand Avenue at the junction with Hambledon Avenue." Superintendent Cooper continued to observe the object as it moved along the rooftops until the light "suddenly vanished". He said: "The light went out and I could see nothing whatsoever in the sky where the light had been. I then contacted Operations who reported no other sightings recorded." MoD officers working at the UFO unit have often made reference to the credibility of the person making the reports. Observations made by former servicemen appear to be taken more seriously than others. An MoD report sent from RAF Cosford on 14 July 1976 noted that the 66-year-old woman from Wolverhampton, who claimed to have seen a "white, bar-shaped" object in the night sky, was married to a retired RAF pilot but later the report added dismissively: "He did not observe anything from his seated position." But the veracity of the reports is brought into question as soon as there is any suspicion of alcohol influencing the observations. Several sightings between 2 and 5 September 1977 are dismissed even though the informants are adamant they saw a "pulsating bright light, emitting a vapour trail" near Derby. The file ends: "Four witnesses had been imbibing at the local hostelry and their sightings were discounted." Scepticism creeps into the MoD reports if it emerges that it is not the first time a person has seen a UFO. Between 7 and 8 August 1976, a Rotherham man reported four sightings to his local radar station. The comment on the UFO file reads: "He evidently runs a UFO sightings club and has been logging UFOs for three years." British UFO hunters will no doubt use these sorts of comments to help support the theory that the Government has been suppressing evidence of a visit by extraterrestrial life. However, some of the sightings strike a rather salutary note. A white, bright light that caught the attention of a woman in Tenterden in September 1977 was immediately reported to Ashford police station and her observations duly noted. But in the MoD file, the officers find a more mundane explanation for her experience. The officers says: "She saw a long white light in the front with a flashing red light at the rear. The informant states: 'like a jumbo jet'." Leading article, page 42 UFO 'SIGHTINGS' Chief Superintendent Hobson, Manchester Police, 3 July 3 1976 Routine traffic patrol on A62, Manchester Road: "We watched the light for about two minutes. I then followed in a police vehicle along the A62."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:48:34 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:20:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:10:40 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:09:11 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma Peter, >The problem may well be the mistaken assumption that there is a >some single entity called the ufo phenomena. I think you mean "phenomenon." >It's more likely >that UFO reports are generated by a wide variety of external and >internal stimuli. At least part of the solution is likely to >involve the human perceptual process, memory, how we tell >stories to ourselves and others, the nature of dissociative >states etc etc. More speculatively we might learn something >about how the human brain interacts with the environment. >There's a reasonable chance that among ufo reports there are >descriptions of quite a few very poorly understood atmospheric >phenomena. All this is in addition to what ufo stories and >popular beliefs can tell us about our own deep concerns What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic is involved. Fortunately, you've reassured us that we don't have to worry about anything so troublesome or complicated or heretical. Orthodoxy is safe. Well, at least until the next puzzling UFO sighting, which should be coming up any minute now. But while this happy moment lasts, anyway, let's hear it for the affirmation of conventional wisdom and the blissfulness of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Clues To Our Birth May Be Written In Space From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 18:48:03 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:23:06 -0500 Subject: Clues To Our Birth May Be Written In Space Source: PhysOrg.com http://www.physorg.com/news2783.html 01-22-05 Clues to our birth may be written in space Extraterrestrial molecules found in meteorites may hold the key to the origin of life on Earth, according to chemistry research at the University of Leeds. Dr Terence Kee and a team from Leeds and Bradford universities are examining a particular source of phosphorus found naturally only in space to discover whether it could have helped form the building blocks of life. Phosphorus is found in all living cells, but some scientists doubt that the most common form of phosphorus -- phosphate -- helped form life on earth due to its insolubility in water. Dr Kee believes the earliest forms of DNA/RNA could have been built from other phosphorus-containing molecules called phosphonates, because they are water-soluble and more reactive. However, these phosphonates are only found on Earth as biological products -- for example, in the metabolism of certain marine creatures. The project was inspired by a 1992 account identifying phosphonates in a meteorite which crashed on earth, confirming that these had been created in interstellar space. "I've always had an interest in phosphonates but before reading work on the Murchison meteorite, I'd never considered they might have a role to play in the origins of life on Earth," said Dr Kee. These exotic molecules now form the basis of the PHOSMETIC project, refereed by the Nobel Laureate Sir Harry Kroto. The team will reproduce these phosphonates under 'extra-terrestrial' conditions in a laboratory. Important molecules called phosphaalkynes -- present in interstellar gas clouds and structurally similar to phosphonates -- will be used. They will be irradiated with UV light in the presence of water, simulating the conditions found in space. Dr Kee aims to provide the first direct chemical link between phosphorus compounds found within interstellar gas clouds and those incorporated within solar system meteorites and ice grains: "I see the PHOSMETIC project as addressing one of several major problems in origin-of-life studies in which phosphorus, and phosphonates in particular,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 23 Canadian TV Series Delves Into 'Real-Life X-Files' From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:57:05 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:27:15 -0500 Subject: Canadian TV Series Delves Into 'Real-Life X-Files' Source: CHUM Television - Toronto http://www.chumlimited.com/press/releasetelevision.asp?stationID=40&pressID=1349 12-13-04 SPACE: The Imagination Station Press Releases Beyond Premieres January 12 Paranormal enthusiasts can pack up their Ouija boards. The new Canadian series BEYOND is ready to take them deeper into the realm of the supernatural than ever before. A real-life X-Files, each half-hour episode investigates a mysterious phenomenon through a blend of sci-fi, religion, biology and physics. SPACE: The Imagination Station will premiere the series Wednesday nights at 10pm ET, beginning January 12. Each week, host William Marshall leads viewers through an exploration of topics such as poltergeists, mind control and aliens. Combining eyewitness accounts, dramatic reenactments and interviews with scientists, medical experts and religious leaders, BEYOND presents new evidence in the study of paranormal events, including those specifically related to life after death. In the season opener, the perplexing phenomenon of luminescent orbs is examined. BEYOND�s team of researchers uncovers an eerie, yet scientific explanation for the once inexplicable sightings of small glowing spheres that float through the air and even enter people�s bodies. The facts are persuasive, but it is the raw footage of such events that will leave skeptics convinced. Award-winning filmmaker Steven Rumbelow acts as writer, producer and director of the series. Joining forces with respected institutions such as the University of Toronto, Rumbelow strategically builds his case in each episode. His crew travels across Canada to visit the scenes of paranormal sightings, giving the series an original perspective that takes viewers inside the world of the supernatural and BEYOND. SPACE: The Imagination Station, a division of CHUM Television, is a 24-hour-a-day English-language national Science Fiction, Science Fact, Speculation and Fantasy channel (www.spacecast.com). CHUM Television is a division of CHUM Limited (TSX SYMBOL: CHM CHM.B, www.chumlimited.com), one of Canada�s leading media companies and content providers which owns and operates radio stations, local television stations, specialty channels and Internet properties. --- For more information and/or screening copies:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 John Tosti Case? From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 02:17:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:18:27 -0500 Subject: John Tosti Case? I came across a website today that has an alien picture that is said to have been taken by John Tosti. The image looks like a double exposure. Anyone know if this pic was indeed taken by John Tosti? If so, this cast major doubt about his case. Picture: http://sentinelfiles.tripod.com/bathrmalien.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:23:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:16:28 EST >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:25:36 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Well maybe the "trivial" cases are still Unknowns just of poor >quality. My impression is that the security agencies were >discussing very few "trivial" cases. When they would provide >short lists of sightings, a surprising "most" or all of them were >Unknowns. Very few could be rejected as aircraft, astro, >balloons, etc. One has to dig through more complete >collections of reports in the BB files to try to find a few of the >usual IFO's. For example, the Project TWINKLE Final Report >and Holloman Unexplained Phenomena report discuss maybe >a dozen UFO incidents, out of which maybe the one at >Corona is clearly just the moon low on the horizon, and that's >about it for the IFO's! Sorry to butt in here, gentlemen, but several things caught my attention as I was reading this post. Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in 1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and what's not anymore. Something else that caught my attention was your reference to security agencies discussing only cases that were hard to reject as "aircraft, astro, balloons, etc." I'm sorry, but I'm just not use to 'security agencies' being too open with information (unless it is designed to influence an intended audience). We've been lied to so many times it's hard to know when a security agency is telling the truth and when they are telling us only what they _want_ us to know/believe. Just because a report is from an "official" agency doesn't mean it is accurate or true. And just because it talks about UFO's doesn't mean we should take the information at face value. "Official" reports from "official" agencies could just as easily be crock as the truth, for all we know. And if they _did_ focus more on 'trivial' and IFO cases, would we now be paying any attention to them? I've been meaning to ask you...Do you believe the Air Force or any government agency is _ever_ going to release files or information they don't want us to read or know? Do you believe any of the information released to the public through the FOIA or any other conduit, past, present or future, contains more truth than lies? >One out of a dozen. (I would have to go >re-read the reports and see if maybe another IFO can be >found in them.) Likewise with Lincoln LaPaz's reports on the >Green Fireballs, 100% Unknowns, 0% IFO's. Sure, you can >find other incidents in the same time frame and location, but >then you are spiking the sample yourself with IFO's that the >agencies investigating were able to fairly easily decide were to >be ignored. Don't you just hate it when someone tries to tell you what you should study and what you should ignore?! How in the heck can you declare something "unknown" yet say it wasn't an IFO, at the same time? How can you say what something is or is not if you don't know what it is/was to begin with? Which brings to mind another question... Is it possible the "Green Fireballs" needed to be considered 'unknowns' otherwise some agency might be held accountable for answers or explanations? As long as you declare something unidentified, unknown or unexplained, no one is responsible for anything. Security agencies can't be held accountable for something they can't explain or stop. Militaries can't be held responsible for doing their jobs in reference to unexplained phenomena (even when these things fly over nuclear or other sensitive facilities). And scientists can't study something they can't catch. What gets me most is that the general public has accepted this for so long. <snip> >Again I think >the nuclear power plant alleged correlation is a waste of time >because there are few if any UFO sightings demonstrating >specific intent on such plants. I, for one, do not think potential correlation studies between UFO's and nuclear facilities (of any kind) are a waste of time. In fact, I think _where_ these sightings occur is just as important as what is seen, by whom, when, and how long (intensity, frequency, duration). Instead of just sticking pins in maps designating cities or countries where UFO's have been observed, correlations may also be found between UFO's, landmarks and/or geographical references. For example, ever wonder how many UFO's are sighted near highways, rivers, lakes, bodies of water, mountains, power lines and railroads? What correlations might exist between NOE, H2O, radar, geological sources and UFO's? Highways, rivers, power lines and railroads run in specific directions criss-crossing countries, connecting cities, towns and military bases. Pilots use them for navigation all the time. Could UFO's be using these as 'maps' for nap of the earth navigation as well? If so, what might these correlations tell us about their technologies, flight patterns, habits and motives? UFO's sighted near mountains might imply a need to avoid radar or remote areas to hide. And could UFO's sighted near bodies of water (H2O) have anything to do with sources of fuel? As for UFO's demonstrating "specific intent"... I would think their mere presence near secure facilities demonstrates intent - specific or vague. I doubt they are lost, need to pee or just want to ask directions. Why they are sighted in these areas is directly related to their intent. Just because we don't know their objectives does not mean they don't have any. And just
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Wither Hopkinsville Documentary? From: Trevor Page <webmaster.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:46:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:29:16 -0500 Subject: Wither Hopkinsville Documentary?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 The 2004 Anomalist Book Awards From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:35:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:35:20 -0500 Subject: The 2004 Anomalist Book Awards Source: The Anomalist Website http://www.anomalist.com/books/awards04.html The 2004 Anomalist Book Awards Books... The Anomalist Book Awards 2004 & Book List What are all those great books at the top of the page? These are books that were not considered for the Anomalist Book Awards for this year because of my role as their editor or because they were published by the company I worked for. There will probably be even more such books next year, which is why this is likely to be the last year for these awards. (I will find some other way to tell you about the books I liked best.) Although you will find a number of reprints in the the list below, reprints were not considered for these awards either. Also remember that I have not seen all the books listed below. I am at the mercy of authors and publishers in this regard; naturally, I can only present an award to a book I have seen. Many of my choices for awards this year are rather hard to get (i.e. are not available through Amazon), so I have indicated how you can obtain these titles. Please tell them the Anomalist sent you. As usual, the categories for the winning awards change from year to year. I 'd like to thank Loren Coleman (LC) and Dennis Stacy (DS) for their help in choosing a couple of awards this year. And for the first time this year, we are presenting an award for Multimedia. It's well deserved.--Patrick Huyghe (PH) <snip> Best Multimedia FADED DISCS by Wendy Conners Faded Disc is the name of Wendy Conners� delightful Audio Archive Of UFO History. Conners has done an absolutely amazing job of tracking down old tapes and rare recordings of "flying saucer" personalities, eyewitnesses, and researchers and has made them available as mp3 files on CDs that are playable on your computer and on the newer CD players. She has produced more than a handful of compilations this year alone, including "Flying Saucers & Four Guys Named George (Adamski, Van Tassel, Wiliamson and King)," "Project Magnet: Wilbert B. Smith," "CE IV: An Audio History of Alien Abduction & Animal Mutilation 1957-1976," and two of my favorites "ETH: Dr. James E. McDonald," and "High Strangeness: Men in Black, Mothman, Flatwoods Monster & Hairy Bi-Peds in UFOs." It�s one thing to read the words of James McDonald, for instance, but it�s quite another to hear the passion in his voice when you listen to the man himself. And there�s nothing like hearing someone recount an absolutely bizarre encounter. You might even be able to spot the BS - or not, in which case you�ll feel those chills down your spine. Her most recent titles include "Cops and Saucers," and "The First Ufologist: Donald E. Keyhoe." If you have a soft
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Anomalist Book Award In MultiMedia For 2004 From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:55:55 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:39:22 -0500 Subject: Anomalist Book Award In MultiMedia For 2004 Greetings to the Listarians, I would like to thank Patrick Huyghe, Loren Coleman and Dennis Stacy for this wonderful award given to the Faded Discs Archive. The archive exists because of the generosity of many fellow researchers and patrons who unselfishly support the work in the audio history of Ufology preservation project. 2005 presents the second year that compilations of recordings, by subject, will be made available to researchers. Some of the titles in production are: Saucerology: Tales of Giant Rock (2nd volume of Contactees) Ufology 101 Flying Saucers Across the Pond - Ufology in the UK UFO Crash/Retrievals Swamp Gas Fever: Dr. J. Allen Hynek and the Michigan Flap Boogie We Got a Bogie or UFO Reflections in the Cockpit The first in the full audio series being developed entitled, Special Collections Series, will be sets of especially important recordings from UFO history and which, in some cases, won't appear on the regular compilations. When I began this project I had no idea of the tremendous amount of time, effort and money it would require to preserve recordings digitally. It was a huge learning curve, but the thousand of hours I've spent listening to the audio history the more exciting Ufology became to me as it did so many decades ago. So on behalf of all the patrons who support the audio preservation effort, we all thank The Anomalist for this recognition. It encourages us to work even harder in this New Year.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Hall Web Site Back On-Line From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:59:40 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:43:12 -0500 Subject: Hall Web Site Back On-Line www.hallrichard.com After many headaches and technical problems I am pleased to report that my web site is back up and running, newly hosted by the Authors Guild. The UFO Page contains a newly uploaded copy of the prophetic paper I gave to the University of Colorado UFO Project in 1966 warning them not to get confused by the noise level, plus other analytical article on UFOs. The HallMart Page contains UFO-related materials for sale and includes a PayPal link. The Newsletter page contains news items of interest.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:06:56 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:47:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:30:33 +0100 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:06:10 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:31:42 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>Yes indeed. Even if there is a statistically significant >>clustering around such sites I don't think it is established >>that we need an exotic hypothesis to explain it. >Martin, and All >The first explanation which should come to mind, it seems to me, >is that there is a UFO surveillance of nuclear activities, both >military and civilian. Actually, it is probably one of the best >established data in ufology, worldwide, and since the 40's. >I am puzzled that it has not been mentioned yet. Hi Gildas, Well "UFO surveillance of nuclear activities" really has been "mentioned" - it looms in the air behind all of this discussion like the ghost at the banquet! Shouldn't it be our first assumption, you say? For me, it depends what angle I am coming at this from, and there are several. Speaking "between consenting adults in private", as it were, I might be happy to explore this idea of ET-type "surveillance". I'm not averse to it. I see a great deal of anecdotal evidence that can be interpreted as supporting it. But I could also interpret the same evidence in even more bizzare ways in the contex of some other more "outlandish" theory of UFO origins. In fact some of the best reports from Oak Ridge, for example, are somewhat weird and don't suggest a "surveillance" by machines so much as a haunting by shape-shifting aerial amoebas! And then there is another level on which to view all this, the level on which one is considering the type of evidence that would be helpful in expanding a consensus of interest beyond us UFO- philes, the level of objective and sceptical scientific analysis. We need to engage on all these levels, but the discussion of whether or not a correlation of reports and strategic sites can be proven, or whether a correlation can then be reliably interpreted as an "intent" with respect to nuclear weapons sites for example, are issues that have to be addressed on the last level, with our "sceptical analysis" hats on. On this level we should not assume anything, but should just do our best to allow reliable conclusions to emerge from the data. My own view is that a general correlation is not reliably established yet, but in some limited clusters (such as the green fireballs) there is persuasive prime facie evidence of one, and therefore the possibility that some UFOs have demonstrated an intent with respect to these sites should be kept in mind and investigated further. I can't think of any other reasonable position to take.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:17:14 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:50:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:33:16 -0000 >Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers -> >>Date: Friday, January 21, 2005 5:06 PM >>Subject: UFO UpDate: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>Source: The Herald, Glasgow, >>http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/31445.html >I presume what the councillors really want is the chance to >see some of the magnificent scenery of New Mexico, at council >tax payer's expense. Nope. You're wrong. Their motives are actually quite altruistic. They are desperate to put Bonnybridge on the map. Unfortunately,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Bizarre Light Show From: Robert Whitehead <robwhiteheaduk.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:18:10 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:51:59 -0500 Subject: Bizarre Light Show This is a letter which appeared in the Blackpool Evening Gazette on Thursday, 13 January, 2005: 'Dazzled By Light Fantastic' I read the letter in last week's Gazette from Mr B Byrd and asking if there were any other witnesses to a strange light show. I myself was walking through Stanley Park (Blackpool) and noticed multi-coloured lights moving through the air above the golf course. I also noticed at the time a very peculiar thing while these lights were in the sky. I heard a man walking his dog saying: "Did you see that beam of light come down on the golf course." What happened next was totally inexplicable. I thought I was seeing things at first but I have never seen anything like it. I could see what could be described as being like a light show at a local night club. I was taken aback, as was the man with his dog. Multi-coloured lights beaming down and with that just vanished into thin air. If there is something odd out there and there are any other Gazette readers who saw this, or if a photograph exists and anyone could explain what these lights are, I would be most grateful to learn more. Mr B Sparkes, Blackpool, Lancashire,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:37:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:53:31 -0500 Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:38:12 -0000 >Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:12:10 -0600 >>Subject: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >The subtitle of the Friedman-Berliner book, Crash At Corona, is >certainly not 'The Definitive study of the Roswell Incident'. It >is 'The U.S. Military Retrieval and cover-up of a UFO'. >At least that is the case in the original 1992 edition. At what >point did it get transformed into "The definitive study...."? >And why? CDA: You do know how the book business works, right? Cognoscenti know the marketing that publishers use to sell books. Don't blame Stan Friedman for any of it. Just to get a book published is a major accomplishment and sometimes a writer has to accept the machinations of the company publishing the thing. Even if Stan Friedman had one hundred errors in his works over the years, they are offset by the gazillion things he has gotten right. And he's provided information to us which we never have gotten except for his effort(s). You and I don't even deserve to polish Stan Friedman's shoes.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:23:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:55:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:33:16 -0000 >Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >Exactly what does Councillor Buchanan and his gang have to offer >the citizens of Roswell? Just what are Bonnybridge and Roswell >supposed to have in common? The ability of both to "see the >future"? >The Bonnybridge UFO events are much more recent than Roswell, >and seem to be just a number of oddly behaving night lights, >without any 'crash' or military interest or activity, and >certainly no resulting books & films. >I presume what the councillors really want is the chance to see >some of the magnificent scenery of New Mexico, at council tax >payer's expense. If Mr. Allan lives in the Roswell area, I apologize for what I'm going to say. But the magnificent scenery of New Mexico isn't found there. Some of it is in Santa Fe, four to five hours distant by car, with wonderful mountains. Roswell, by contrast, is flat and bleak. There's a national park, Bitter Lake (maybe that's not the formal name of the park, but it's what my wife calls it when she suggests we drive there), with wonderful sandhill cranes that fly in at dusk, wheeling and calling in the sky. But, appealing as the birds are, I wouldn't visit the park for its scenery. If the Bonnybridge councillors expect a scenic visit, they're in for a surprise. Footnote: If you've seen the "Roswell" TV series, well, that isn't Roswell. Anyone who knows Roswell can quickly see that the series was filmed elsewhere, maybe Arizona. The large cactuses
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:58:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rimmer >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:10:40 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >>It's more likely >>that UFO reports are generated by a wide variety of external and >>internal stimuli. At least part of the solution is likely to >>involve the human perceptual process, memory, how we tell >>stories to ourselves and others, the nature of dissociative >>states etc etc. More speculatively we might learn something >>about how the human brain interacts with the environment. >>There's a reasonable chance that among ufo reports there are >>descriptions of quite a few very poorly understood atmospheric >>phenomena. All this is in addition to what ufo stories and >>popular beliefs can tell us about our own deep concerns >What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >is involved. In that case, I think Peter and I have very different ideas about what is 'prosaic' than you do. I think that some of the ideas that Peter has suggested above are quite a challenge to the current orthodoxy, particularly issues on how the human brain interacts with the envirionment. >Fortunately, you've reassured us that we don't have to worry >about anything so troublesome or complicated or heretical. >Orthodoxy is safe. Well, at least until the next puzzling UFO >sighting, which should be coming up any minute now. No, I grant you, he's not talking about extraterrestrial spacecraft. But then you don't either, do you? You just bang on about "structured craft" which have performance characteristics beyond anything currently produced on earth? (see UpDates, ad nauseam) But the ETH? Never mentioned it, guv. >But while this happy moment lasts, anyway, let's hear it for the >affirmation of conventional wisdom and the blissfulness of >peaceful slumber.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - From: John Harney <magonia.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:02:04 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:59:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - >From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:49:45 EST >Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II >One thing that really irks me are the incessant ravings by those >who rely on the false notion that a mass landing of 'spaceships' >will in some way save us from destruction. The only thing that >will "save" us is ourselves. For such people ufology is obviously a kind of cargo cult. Many writers have noticed the similarity of such cults to some of the more extravagant notions about UFOs. See, for example
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:01:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >It's all fine and dandy to give cliches about how we can agree >to disagree about Socorro. I would second that if there were >actually a counter argument of _substance_ from those who >disagree. Where is it? David: For me the Socorro sighting is fraught with questionable elements as I re-read the account in Jerry Clark's The UFO Book (1998). When Larry Robinson wrote and asked if we might have seen his unfound magazine article (the one by the balloonists who allegedly recounted their misidentified descent in New Mexico), we searched for the magazine, and didn't find it. But we did find a vast list of balloon excursions by the government and sent that link to Mr. Robinson. I'll locate the URL and provide it here. And we found enough Picard and CIA/Navy information which would corroborate Robinson's belief, and Easton's information. To answer Martin Shough too, I only questioned the Socorro event because Jerry Clark and another person listed it as one of the best UFO sightings ever at our blog-site (where I had asked for the best UFO sighting ever). Those UFO indentations everyone says needed high-tonnage to create were not analyzed in such a way as to prove that. What was the composition of the soil? Was anything used to determine exactly what weight would be needed to produce the indentations? Or was it conjecture by those not on the scene, or late to it? When Zamora says the object looked like a balloon, I think that's relevant and interesting. I suggest that newbies and oldsters here get out Jerry Clarks UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, and read the Socorro account. And if they are satisfied that the episode is one of the best in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 24 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:02:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:06:57 -0500 Subject: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV Dear friends, A J-ROD autopsy film has been released by Japanese TV during the two-hour "live" special broadcast on December 31, 2004. The footage announced as a great exclusive awakened expectation and a controversy among the Japanese expert panel invited to analyze the cases presented during the new year's traditional UFO and Paranormal nationwide TV show. I just received a copy of the program and an alleged J-ROD autopsy film attracted my attention. As the show is in Japanese I'm in the proccess of getting an English translation from a Japanese friend to have the information and details. According to the report the story tells of a UFO crash and retrieval near the Kingman, Arizona base in 1953 where the legendary and controversial J-ROD Alien was supposedly captured and kept in custody. The existence of an autopsy film was unknown for me so this piece of footage was a surprise and I don't know if anyone of you have heard or seen it. The footage is in color and the quality is very good. The "being" is almost identical to that famous and debated photo and looks very real. The autopsy procedures performed by the two doctors are very similar to the ones in the Santilli's film but this one has some more realistic details like the moment when the doctor pulled out the alien's tongue. Some experts, including a Japanese special effects creator, were interviewed and it seems that they were impressed. Unfortunately all the information including the source was in Japanese so I just understood some things but I will try to have the english translation at once. A short piece of footage was also presented showing an alleged UFO being shot down by another UFO but because of the language I could'nt understand the connection with the J-ROD autopsy film case. As I had a colaboration in this Japanese TV special I heard some comments by a production company representative in the sense that they had a new piece of revealling footage never released before to be presented as an exclusive on new year's eve special. As a rule I don't give too much credit to these promised 'ultimate evidence' announcements because most of the time they result in the usual fiasco. But I must say that I didn't expect to see supposed J-ROD alien autopsy footage. This is going to be a good one for discussion and debate. The film is good and looks like the real thing awakens many doubts
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf From: Maurice Woolf <MauriceW.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:34:12 +0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:41:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Woolf >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:04:13 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >You've covered the issues, but I'm still sceptical that we could >discriminate between the hypotheses of interest to us - or more >accurately, to Maurice Woolf. >Yes, you can do a regression with three or maybe four variables >if the data are rich enough and this could refine the >correlation, but we would probably still only know that there is >(or is not) a small tendency for more reports to come from areas >where there are nuclear and other strategically important sites >(proving grounds, air bases, industry, sea ports etc), not why >this is so. >I think we agree that it would take a very cunning analysis >indeed - and also a heck of a lot better data - to tease out >some subtlety which would turn this correlation from 'ho hum' to >'aha'! Hi Martin, The "aha!" will not happen with regard to my speculation several reasons exist why, 1. The Statistics just don't exist. 2 The funding to gather such statistics and sensitivity of the area involved wont allow same to be gathered. 3 We have never been in contact or in possession of a Ufo or recorded any conversation with the occupants or manufacturers to verify same. With regard to portals that may lead to parallel universes or their existence the debate is still on. Nuclear power remains the most powerful tool mankind has utilized in my humble opinion what effects this may have on other universes or our own is questionable. That more advanced ET civilizations may be using the same energy source is quite possible. To be quite honest the evidence supporting most of the topics discussed here just does not exist, I can believe in UFOs till it comes out of my ears (which I do) but if the last century could not deliver any evidence to sway the general population what will. All witnesses, abductees only have words to offer not a piece of physical evidence.The animosity which exists within this community is not leading anyone any where fast, and yes everyone is still just speculating as no evidence will ever pass the peer review process. The thousands and thousands of sightings by normal ordinary folk is just that nothing special, there must be some airborne particle which is causing mass hallucinations on a wide spread scale. The fact is the greatest psychological quantum leap mankind can make is to know that he is not alone that he shares this cosmos with other conscious beings but I guess thats why we have religious and spiritual pursuits it gives us sanity. The believe
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:50:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:42:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >What correlations might exist between NOE, H2O, >radar, geological sources and UFOs? >UFO's sighted near mountains might imply a need >to avoid radar or remote areas to hide. A good point and worthy of analysis. Dr. Rutledge in his book speculates that the UFOs seen in the Piedmont, Missouri area were either due to poor aircraft radar coverage of the area and/or geological features. However, why there are temporal distributions may be too hard a nut to crack. >As for UFO's demonstrating "specific intent"... I >would think their mere presence near secure >facilities demonstrates intent - specific or vague. >And just because they haven't blown one up
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:02:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:44:05 -0500 Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - >From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:49:45 EST >Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II >It would be more important to enlighten the masses on the >numerous injustices being perpetrated on us, than to rely on >alleged benevolent alien beings from outer space. They don't >give a damn about us, and if they do, it is for their own >benefit. Right on Kelly! However, I might add that a conference regarding "the numerous injustices being perpetrated on us" by aliens/UFOs (at least, as reported) would be more appropos than speculation of nice ET UFO activities. Of course, such a conference does not appeal to the cultish believers, just gloomy Gusses who are just wet blankets to everyone's fun!. >IMO, if they did give a damn about us, we wouldn't be in >the nuclear, social, and environmental, just to name a >few, predicaments that have been thrust upon us. So true! >I do plan to see "Hotel Rwanda", but after seeing it, >I'm sure that I will only see man's inhumanity to man, >not an unfounded belief in benevolent 'space aliens' >coming here to save us. Lame. Do you or I need to have injustice thrust in our face all the time by the Media? We don't have any responsibility for
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Majority Of British X-Files To Be Released After From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:08:33 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:45:55 -0500 Subject: Majority Of British X-Files To Be Released After Source: The Journal, Newcastle upon Tyne, http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/contactus/ 01-24-05 X-files By Daniel Thomson The Journal A North pilot's close encounter with a UFO off the coast of Northumberland has been revealed in long-hidden military files. Newly-released reports contain numerous UFO sightings by British airmen, including details of a possible visit by extraterrestrial life-forms to the North, witnessed by a pilot at RAF Boulmer in Northumberland. In July 1977, Flight Lieutenant AM Wood of RAF Boulmer reported seeing "bright objects hanging over the sea" including an object that was "luminous, round and four to five times larger than a Whirlwind helicopter". North UFO-watchers last night welcomed the release of the report on the incident, which has been the subject of local rumour for years. The official reports, which have spent more than 25 years under lock and key in the Ministry of Defence's UFO department - SF4 - have just been released under new Freedom of Information measures. In the classified report, Flt Lt Wood, described by superiors as "sober and reliable", said: "The objects separated, then one went west of the other. As it manoeuvred it changed shape to become body-shaped with projections like arms and legs." The sighting of the UFOs, which were reported to be three miles out to sea at a height of about 5,000ft, was supported by a Cpl Torrington and Sgt Graham of RAF Boulmer, who were positioned at a picket post at the station. They also observed the strange objects for an hour and 40 minutes and reported the sighting to their commanding officers. The MoD report confirmed that the objects had been visible on radar at RAF Boulmer as well as the base at Staxton Wold, North Yorkshire. It said: "On seeing the objects on radar, the duty controller checked with the SRO as to whether he could see the objects on radar supplied from RAF Staxton Wold." Researcher of the paranormal Alfred Dodds, 66, of the Northumberland UFO Research Centre, said last night: "There have been quite a few sightings of UFOs in Northumberland over the years, with several in the vicinity of RAF Boulmer. "And I had heard rumours of this particular incident, so it is very interesting to hear that it has been officially confirmed. Hopefully, we will see more incidents come to light as further classified UFO documents are released under the Freedom of Information Act." The account of the sighting has been kept secret by the MoD since 1977 - but under the Freedom of Information Act, which came into force on January 1, the file has been reviewed and declassified. An MoD spokesman last night confirmed a number of classified reports had been released and explained the ministry's policy on Unidentified Flying Objects. He said: "Some reports have been released that were deemed to be in the public interest. But the majority of documents on contentious subjects will not start to be released until after February 1. "The MoD does not have any expertise or role in respect of UFOs and flying saucer matters, or to question the existence or otherwise of extraterrestrial lifeforms, about which it remains
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:49:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:10:40 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma Hi, John, >>What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >>suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >>is involved. >In that case, I think Peter and I have very different ideas >about what is 'prosaic' than you do. I think that some of the >ideas that Peter has suggested above are quite a challenge to >the current orthodoxy, particularly issues on how the human >brain interacts with the envirionment. I don't believe for a second that either of you is a closet heretic, nor would any other sensible observer. The psychosocial function of psychosocial ufology is not to add to perceptual psychology's or neuroscience's knowledge base - as has been demonstrated on this List, PSH advocates are effectively illiterate on those subjects - but to reassure us that all is well and that our lives and the universe are well in order. In other words, darkness is just daylight misperceived. That's something a whole lot of people want - need - to believe. >No, I grant you, he's not talking about extraterrestrial >spacecraft. But then you don't either, do you? You just bang on >about "structured craft" which have performance characteristics >beyond anything currently produced on earth? (see UpDates, ad >nauseam) But the ETH? Never mentioned it, guv. The notion that we ought to be intellectually modest about what we think we "know" about the UFO phenomenon's causes (as opposed to its appearances) is, I realize, an - if you will pardon the expression - alien one to the pelicanist, to whom the phrase "we do not know" is as poison to the tongue I do appreciate, however, your continuing obsession with my phrasing, which reassures me I must be on to something, "guv." For the rest of you, if you're interested in my views of why it's so hard to get a more precise handle on the questions UFOs and other anomalies raise, see the intro to my book
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:45:35 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:18:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:17:24 EST >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Ufology has _not_ spent decades studying UFOs. To say >it has makes it sound like a scientific endeavor that is >carefully and systematically building on its accumulating >knowledge. > ... if evaluated according to what normal scientific >disciplines do and what they have in the way of resources >to bring to bear on a problem (typically dozens or >say a hundred full-time high-caliber scientists living, >breathing and dreaming about their subjects 24/7) there >has only been the equivalent of about 6 months of that >in the UFO world in the past 58 years. While I agree more scientific study of UFOs is required, I think you are too restrictive on your definition of "studying". Recording of cases, preliminary identification of UFOs if possible, correlation with external locations/times/objects and even speculation based on this data can be considered "studying". 100 scientists regardless of calibre working 24/7 is not viable unless working for high profit or being backed by the government for some kind of high payoff work. Its not realistic to expect UFO research to garner such resources, especially given their elusive nature. Dr. Rutledge in Project Identification conducted a scientific study with 18 days of sky watching and an unknown number of hours of setup, preparation, planning, coordination and analysis (he provides no documentation of the time for those acitivities). I suspect more than 6 months of work went into it since it covered a 7 year period. Others, including Hynek and Maccabee and Coronet have conducted field studies. Project Hessdalen has had many hours of observation time (automated and human). And there is no guarantee that the professionals are without faults in their abilities. But thankfully the scientific method, properly applied, should be able to improve the results over time. >We see about 6 months' worth of progress >in understanding the UFO problem as of today, >which is not very much. So I think you are too pessimistic regarding the progress amount. I would be more inclined to go with 5-10 years of progress. But what does this buy us? Even with 58 or even 100 years of progress, we may STILL not have an answer to the question of UFO origin! I guess one problem is what do you mean by "progress". We have alot more cases which can be a measure of progress. We are alot smarter at analyzing cases, right? That's progress too. In creating a fusion reactor, how would you measure their progress? I would say we should have done it by now, but they keep shoving the year further and further into the future. And they have billions to play with! >Yet I often read complaints that "science >does not work" on UFOs therefore let's abandon >the scientific method, just because there has been >so little progress in 58 years when in fact there >has really been only about 6 months of concentrated >scientific study and we see just about what we should >expect to see after so little effort. You are right, we need more science, especially field studies, at least overseen/advised by scientists in relevent fields. >Amateur methods carried out by >amateurs will not solve the UFO problem because >there we do see 58 years of amateur efforts and >they have not solved it. There is some value to amateur methods of study. Namely, there are alot more amateurs than professionals, thus basic data
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:58:38 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:19:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>It's all fine and dandy to give cliches about how we can agree >>to disagree about Socorro. I would second that if there were >>actually a counter argument of _substance_ from those who >>disagree. Where is it? >For me the Socorro sighting is fraught with questionable >elements as I re-read the account in Jerry Clark's The UFO Book >(1998). The only "questionable elements" I see are the ones you insist
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Some Southern Illinois Sightings Can't Be Explained From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:00:55 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:22:13 -0500 Subject: Some Southern Illinois Sightings Can't Be Explained Source: The Southern Illinoisan http://www.southernillinoisan.com/sp_sections/story.php?pub_number=032&s=16 01-24-05 UFOs: Skylab debris, research, balloons, and some that can't be explained During the '70s, across Southern Illinois, residents were reporting UFOs flying or hovering with bright and colorful lights. One sighting near Spring Arbor Lake, south of Carbondale, was thought to be debris from Skylab II, according to a newspaper account. Another sighting turned out to be a research balloon. Others, seen at night and in broad daylight, weren't as easily explained. One article in The Southern Illinoisan detailed the experience of a Du Quoin man who said he saw a UFO hovering 20 to 30 feet above the ground as he drove to work in Carbondale that morning. The mysterious object hung "like a huge bright light with a long vapor cloud tapering behind it." Other people described images that had red and green flashing lights that sometimes turned amber. A Zeigler woman described a diskshaped object that hovered about 60 feet above her home. Its light was so bright she could not look at it for very long and her vision was affected the next day. An operating engineer at the CIPS plant near Grand Tower described a "disklike" object that glowed "with a lot of pretty high intensity lights" hovering near the plant, along the Mississippi River. He said it pulsated and changed colors from red to white. He estimated it was around 1,500 feet above the ground, the newspaper article said. The plant had been receiving telephone calls about the object that evening. The sighting followed by a day the latest in a series of reports of similar objects being seen in Piedmont, Mo., about 125 miles south of St. Louis. The newspaper article said the engineer received calls from 26 universities and media outlets from across the country, Army
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Wither Hopkinsville Documentary? - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:19:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:23:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Wither Hopkinsville Documentary? - Kaeser >To: ufoupdates.nul >From: Trevor Page <webmaster.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:46:57 -0500 >Subject: Wither Hopkinsville Documentary? >Does anyone know what the status of the Kelly-Hopkinsville >documentary film announced on the list back in May of 2004 >stands? Barcon Productions had announced plans to revisit the Hopkinsville story, and you can see some of their work if you visit http://barcon.com/mainstart.htm. I would note that the Hopkinsville Documentary isn't mentioned, and there's no indication of what's currently in production, so this doesn't help to determine the status of this documentary. I will send a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:40:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:26:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:21:16 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma ><snip> >>For me, it's just one of many sightings which can be dismissed, >>perhaps, if the Navy/CIA balloon thing can be substantiated in a >>way that satisfies you, Rudiak, and others. This is what Larry >>Robinson hopes for also. ><snip> >>Rich [sic] Reynolds >Substantiate first, dismiss second. Don't say that a case is >flawed unless you produce evidence that it is flawed. Not >opinions, not untested hypotheses. Free advice, and worth every >penny. - Dick >P.S. You can call me Dick. Most people do. Some people even mean >it in the negative way that you abhor. I don't care. Names -- The 'Alfred' didn't play well... 'Fred' was my father's name, and so out of the question. 'Al' always sounded fat and stupid to me... 'Alfred' was a ponderously tedious pompoid's name and not cool like a 'Rick', 'Rich',or a 'Steve', but the only one I had. 'Dick' -- a very cool name from my father's age somehow (though certainly reactionary) earned the connotation you allude to... 'Lehmberg' has an obvious target value... now I welcome the jibe as an excuse to eviscerate. Names, especially true names, have a certain power that goes unconsidered and unmeasured in a 'scientistic' society or 'CSICOPian' culture. Moreover, their persecution is an indication that an opponent has nothing of value to contribute, has reason to be more fearful than the object of that ridicule, and is likely on a weaker philosophical platform to begin with. Mr. Reynolds may be concerned that there has been little progress in a legitimate prosecution of UFOs in the last 50 years for all the best efforts of persons such as yourself. It may be understandable that you and these other ufological principals are going to be criticized for that lack of progress, and many of these criticized are going to slough off that criticism to those that 'they' would blame, an inappropriately maligned woo-woo crowd, I suppose, because the real targets of that irritating ignorance are so nebulous and ephemeral. This is forgetting we all know, on some level, who 'they' are. There's been some talk about 'them.' Just who _are_ 'they'? 'They' are... ...the privileged arbitrary, the unelected, and far too many of the elected. 'They' are those who _have_, and having 'had', would keep on 'having' despite an aggregate detriment to the common good of those who 'have not.' 'They' are in possession of information that would credit, or be to the advantage of, anyone who 'knew', _specifically_ outlining why most know not. 'They' are the secret keepers. 'They' are the jealous manipulators of the mainstream. 'They' are the ardent covetous who encourage bland employees while they discourage critical thinkers. 'They' are the ones with hidden agendas, duplicitous plans, and secret programs. 'They' are the _few_ willing to profit at the expense of the many. 'They' are above the law, outside reasonable ethics, practice a sociopathic amorality, and hold the many enthralled... but beneath their privileged contempt... On June 29th in 1998, Peter Sturrock, decidedly not a light- weight, was interviewed on NPRs "All Things Considered," regarding a panel he'd convened on the validity of a ufological investigation. It was the first such study since Colorado's "Condon Report" 30 years before. The interviewer tried hard to get Sturrock to admit that the finding of the board was negative in some final analysis, but the good doctor was solidly contrary. Even given the paucity of evidence to which that panel had access, it was clear... there was much promise in a scientific investigation of UFOs. Science _would_ be advanced thereby! I would suggest that the entire panel sensed that that was a promise completely open-ended... a path to a first or second level civilization, even. Humility and more than a little fear would keep them from going all the way over _there_... Humility is more than appropriate, perhaps, but why fear? Sturrock's panel addressed that too. There are four (4) reasons for fear contributing in varying co- efficiency, the panel concluded. They are very lightly paraphrased here: 1. There is _no_ institutional support for fearlessness, and real research can't be done without it. 2. A commonly held (popularly held) opinion of the institutional community is that the "Condon Study" (hereafter referred to as the _'condom'_ study) 30 years before, was the definitive and conclusive work on UFOs... Condon had nailed it: "...Science would _not_ be advanced thereby..." He was very clear and unambiguous about that. 3. A commonly held (popularly held) opinion of the institutional community is that the only evidence available with regard to UFOs is the dodgy anecdotal, a too convenient opinion excluding photographic, more traditional physical, historical, artistic, and from an individual's perspective, personal evidence. 4. ...That UFOs are a subject of ready ridicule... The first point is addressed by blatantly pointing out an unelected (on _many_ levels) leadership who has abused the privilege of a required (if it ever _is_ required) society of secrecy, expanding, presently, in tyrannous leaps and fascist bounds. Seemingly petroleum based, this culture of honor- wounding confabulation must be brought to heel by the will of those kept ignorant against their will. We heat the water of these institutions be they spiritual, educational, governmental, or scientific. These institutions are the servants of thoughtful individuals... or they should be! As to the second point, the 'Condom' Report was an unethical duplicity from start to finish. It was a biased, canted, and conflicted white-wash. It was a tragic waste of time and money. It was a crass obfuscation and a harmful lie. This is widely known and requires no citation. The institutional community needs to be disabused of this myth that the "Condom Report," a true prophylactic on rational science (and a prime reason good men like Jim McDonald had to die!), was the definitive work on UFOs. In a fathomless understatement, it was not. Point three. There are many credible and compelling levels to the evidence, forgetting even the vetted anecdotal, regarding the reality of UFOs. That that good evidence is discounted, derided, and dismissed out of hand speaks more to a problem the detractors may be having than the proponents. Moreover, in as much as this evidence is so obvious, the reluctance of institutions to engage in this research points to a more deliberate, much less innocent ignorance than was otherwise perceived. Shame heaps on the gatekeepers. Verily. Regarding the last point... Ridicule is a device for abusive control, always. Always, it is a method of coercion. Always, it will ignore the issues of contention because if the employer of ridicule can effectively argue the issue they won't _risk_ the consequences of resorting to ridicule. Anytime ridicule is used (in the manner alluded to) the user can himself be dismissed, discounted, or discharged. From where would this ridicule then come? The artful smirk of a telecaster. The derisive sneer of the paid pundit. The tone of the landed periodical. The obstinate cant of the compensated referee. The angry screed of the propagandist. The tired condescension of the pelicanist. The ready disdain of the insentient CSICOPian. The stunted bias of the constipated klasskurtzian. The lap-dog mainstream is _abundantly_ funded by the aforementioned 'they'... this predator minority. Why? The underground swell of scientific interest in this problem is obvious and just below the surface. Michio Kaku testifies to the public that there is a high level of curiosity by the best and the brightest in science regarding UFOs... still there is this cultivated reluctance to... merely investigate. Why? Fine work gets swallowed up in this culture of easy ridicule. Ted Phillips, Richard Hall, Carl Findt, and Stanton Friedman (et sig al) get swallowed up conveniently in this honor-less (but so rewarding for the few) process. Why? Mr. Reynolds, like myself, would move this process along to its denouement in his lifetime. This is a goal common to most, if not all of us, in the community. He would have a time where names are not so easily ridiculed. 'Dick', 'Alfred' and 'ufology' would be honest and respected names with the power alluded to, only. Ufology would be a name synonymous with brave intelligence and promise... not timid stupidity and folly. To that end we might remember that we're likely more on the same side of the struggle than opposing one another in the aggregate. One might notice that you never see the opponents of the issue squabble amongst themselves like the proponents do (when we do). This might be the only lesson we can take from them. We _should_
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:40:02 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:27:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >To answer Martin Shough too, I only questioned the Socorro event >because Jerry Clark and another person listed it as one of the >best UFO sightings ever at our blog-site (where I had asked for >the best UFO sighting ever). Well well, the man names me at last - even if only while speaking out of the side of his mouth (yet again) in a post addressed to someone else. But I'm not letting him get away with this bull any longer. The amazing internal inconsistency of your postings, Dick, suggests to me that your grasp on events may not be that firm, so you probably don't recall the facts. But let me remind you, in paraphrasis, that "I only questioned the [Washington National] event because Jerry Clark listed it as one of the best sightings". Yet your response to my discussion was a steady drip of snide innuendo about washed-up old pedants with nothing to do but rummage around in the past waiting to die, scared of the brave new world of "real" ufology that you and some imagined cohort of other dynamic pioneers were ready to unveil. We're still waiting. We're going to wait a long time, Dick, while we listen to you stirring the pot and seasoning the stew with your alternating dollops of vitriol and obsequy. You may be having fun, but frankly I doubt you will convert anyone to your corner (even if anyone knew where it was) by this repulsive larding of messages with ingratiating mock-humble homages to the Truly Great and your little laundry-lists of politically correct names. I suspect - indeed I hope and trust - that the targets of your sycophancy find it as disgusting as I do. I've got your number,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:57:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:30:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> Rich, why don't you just learn about the lifting capabilities of a car sized balloon and then explain how a balloon can fly against the wind and stop bothering the List with the rest of this nonsense. Stop ignoring the facts will you. Easton's theories are usually full of holes and he jumps in without any
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:17:27 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:32:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:48:34 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:10:40 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:18:30 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:09:11 -0500 >>>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>The problem may well be the mistaken assumption that there is a >>some single entity called the ufo phenomena. >I think you mean "phenomenon." >>It's more likely >>that UFO reports are generated by a wide variety of external and >>internal stimuli. At least part of the solution is likely to >>involve the human perceptual process, memory, how we tell >>stories to ourselves and others, the nature of dissociative >>states etc etc. More speculatively we might learn something >>about how the human brain interacts with the environment. >>There's a reasonable chance that among ufo reports there are >>descriptions of quite a few very poorly understood atmospheric >>phenomena. All this is in addition to what ufo stories and >>popular beliefs can tell us about our own deep concerns >What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >is involved. >Fortunately, you've reassured us that we don't have to worry >about anything so troublesome or complicated or heretical. >Orthodoxy is safe. Well, at least until the next puzzling UFO >sighting, which should be coming up any minute now. >But while this happy moment lasts, anyway, let's hear it for the >affirmation of conventional wisdom and the blissfulness of >peaceful slumber. WELL JERRY YOU HAVE JUST ADMITTED THAT YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN UFO reports as possible sources of material which could lead to developments in the human or physical sciences, only as evidences for the presence of transcendent forces breaking into the mundane world. You are by no means alone here, which is why ufologists cannot ever persuade the scientific community to examine their data, and why the subject makes no progress. By Orthodoxy I take it you mean the real, intellectually exhilarating, often wildly speculative physical and human sciences, (see the recently posted article by Michio Kaku for example) with their many disagreements and personality clashes. Curiously, even though some of these make the most vitrupative exchanges on updates look positively prim in comparison, no ever uses words like skeptibunker. Argument, debate and the challenging of established views are seen as part of the life blood of the subject not as attacks on one's personal faith. Of course there are basic rules, one being scientific naturalism which means that you don't invoke supernatural forces or unknown trans human intelligences to get you out of a tight corner. It's by playing by these rules that real knowledge is gained. It may be very difficult and take a long time but the paydirts can be very profound. Please Jerry do take on board my advice not to go using a capitalised Orthodoxy. It will give the impression, to those who don't know you, that you might be the sort of crank who writes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 NASA Database Of Balloon Flights From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:19:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:34:44 -0500 Subject: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights Here is the extensive, and I mean extensive, listing of documents which show balloon flights and related materials by NASA and peripheral agencies: http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/balloon.cat.txt Those skilled in ferreting out the documents themselves, online, can find the 1964 listing of cross-country flights sponsored by or instigated by government agencies. Those who think they are real UFO investigators should find what might pertain to the Socorro sighting.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV - From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:10:31 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:36:54 -0500 Subject: Re: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV - >From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:02:45 -0600 >Subject: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV >A J-ROD autopsy film has been released by Japanese TV during the >two-hour "live" special broadcast on December 31, 2004. <snip> >This is going to be a good one for discussion and debate. The >film is good and looks like the real thing awakens many doubts >in my opinion. However the general opinion of researchers and >collagues will mark the appropiate definition. >Santiago Yturria Hopefully it isn't this J-Rod autopsy: http://www.ufowatchdog.com/jrod.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:20:03 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:18:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:37:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:38:12 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs <snip> >>The subtitle of the Friedman-Berliner book, Crash At Corona, is >>certainly not 'The Definitive study of the Roswell Incident'. It >>is 'The U.S. Military Retrieval and cover-up of a UFO'. >>At least that is the case in the original 1992 edition. At what >>point did it get transformed into "The definitive study... ."? >>And why? >CDA: >You do know how the book business works, right? >Cognoscenti know the marketing that publishers use to sell >books. <snip> >You and I don't even deserve to polish Stan Friedman's shoes. Hi Rich, Chris' problem with the newspaper article cited is that the book, Crash at Corona, has a subtitle... "The U.S. Military Retrieval And Cover-up Of A UFO". The subtitle in the article is an invention or perhaps the opinion of the writer, not the book publisher. The writer placed the title in quotes as if it is the correct title of the book... it is not. This has little to do with Stan's legitimacy, but much to say about the writer of the article. This article was not a publisher's blurb, it was an article written by a supposed journalist in what passes these days for a "newspaper", the Fort Myers News-Press. I believe Chris was impugning... rightly... the accuracy of the most basic statement the author made... the name of the book itself. Among other things. Stan Friedman never wrote a book called "Crash at Corona: The Definitive Study of the Roswell Incident". That was an invention of the writer of the article. He could easily have said that he felt the book was the definitive study, but instead he asserted that it was the title of the book. Shameful, and sadly rather common these days. Journalists seem all too willing to state opinion as fact these days, as if the stunning quantity of news available hides the relatively lackluster quality thereof. Like, who's gonna know? And more insidious... who's gonna care? Chris is right to question any information in an article with such a ridiculous error in the most basic information. Not to mention, the error indicates a bias on the part of the author which somewhat disqualifies the remainder from legitimate consideration. He is no longer a journalist in this piece. He's an advocate. In journalism, you are only as credible as the least credible item you produce. Check out Clifford Irving, Stephen Glass, etc. for examples of how making up stories gets you a lifelong "no admittance" card to the journalism field. This item includes something completely inexcusable. The author obviously did not even read the book, or if he did, he failed to pause at the cover, to read the title. The Fort Myers News-Press deserves a raspberry for the lack of basic fact-checking, and Mark Krzos deserves a stint at Weekly World News for his brand of "journalism". If, as you say, Stan Friedman's shoes are unworthy of our elbow- grease, I'm sure you feel that he doesn't need Mr. Krzos to "improve" his work? Isn't it actually an insult that he felt the need to embellish Stan's book title? As if the real title just didn't have enough... legitimacy?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:56:39 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:20:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:16:28 EST >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:25:36 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>One has to dig through more complete >>collections of reports in the BB files to try to find a few of the >>usual IFO's. For example, the Project TWINKLE Final Report >>and Holloman Unexplained Phenomena report discuss maybe >>a dozen UFO incidents, out of which maybe the one at >>Corona is clearly just the moon low on the horizon, and that's >>about it for the IFO's! >Sorry to butt in here, gentlemen, but several things caught my >attention as I was reading this post. >Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly >just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the >IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in >1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. >But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there >were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and >what's not anymore. Hi Amy So maybe _all_ the Holloman reports were Unknowns then? <snip> >>One out of a dozen. (I would have to go >>re-read the reports and see if maybe another IFO can be >>found in them.) Likewise with Lincoln LaPaz's reports on the >>Green Fireballs, 100% Unknowns, 0% IFO's. Sure, you can >>find other incidents in the same time frame and location, but >>then you are spiking the sample yourself with IFO's that the >>agencies investigating were able to fairly easily decide were to >>be ignored. >How in the heck can you declare something "unknown" yet say it >wasn't an IFO, at the same time? How can you say what something >is or is not if you don't know what it is/was to begin with? Surely we've made our peace with the awkward epistemological status of "unknown" after six decades, haven't we? Of course it's an open-ended category, but the idea is that a UFO is not an IFO by definition, an operational definition: The information is such as we say _ought_ to be sufficient to identify the cause of the sighting in normal circumstances. So the conclusion Unknown labels an abnormal circumstance. The question of what was seen is not closed off, but remains open. >Which brings to mind another question... Is it possible the >"Green Fireballs" needed to be considered 'unknowns' otherwise >some agency might be held accountable for answers or >explanations? As long as you declare something unidentified, >unknown or unexplained, no one is responsible for anything. >Security agencies can't be held accountable for something they >can't explain or stop. Militaries can't be held responsible for >doing their jobs in reference to unexplained phenomena (even >when these things fly over nuclear or other sensitive >facilities). And scientists can't study something they can't >catch. What gets me most is that the general public has accepted >this for so long. This is a good point I think. The fact that everybody denied responsibility for the GFs doesn't of itself mean that they weren't terrestrial technology. We do have evidence that governments in different parts of the world have "allowed" UFO beliefs to cover aerospace/intelligence activities from time to time, and a concerted policy of exploitation is not impossible. On the other hand, there are all manner of questions raised here: e.g.What were these things doing streaking about exclusively over northern NM and startling commercial pilots, when instrumented secure ranges were available at White Sands in the south? And where do they fit in the evolutionary chain of known aerospace developments? This remarkable programme ought to have left _some_ trace either of its technology or its purpose - unless you take on board the whole ultra-deep black technology conspiracy theory, I suppose. >I, for one, do not think potential correlation studies between >UFO's and nuclear facilities (of any kind) are a waste of time. >In fact, I think _where_ these sightings occur is just as >important as what is seen, by whom, when, and how long >(intensity, frequency, duration). Instead of just sticking pins >in maps designating cities or countries where UFO's have been >observed, correlations may also be found between UFO's, >landmarks and/or geographical references. For example, ever >wonder how many UFO's are sighted near highways, rivers, lakes, >bodies of water, mountains, power lines and railroads? What >correlations might exist between NOE, H2O, radar, geological >sources and UFO's? I'm not familiar with "NOE". Some of the other correlations you mention have been proposed often over the decades, but usually only anecdotally. You're right, it would would be good to be able to test these quantitatively. <snip> >As for UFO's demonstrating "specific intent"... I would think >their mere presence near secure facilities demonstrates intent - > specific or vague. The earth is constantly bombarded by countless billions of solar neutrinos and high energy cosmic ray protons from the more distant universe. There's a lot of space out there. What are all these particles doing right here? Intent? On your reasoning it could look that way. >I doubt they are lost, need to pee or just >want to ask directions. Why they are sighted in these areas is >directly related to their intent. Just because we don't know >their objectives does not mean they don't have any. And just >because they haven't blown one up doesn't mean they won't >someday. Just because the conclusion Unknown is an operational defrinition that labels an abnormal circumstance, we don't know what "they" are or whether "objectives" has any meaning applied to them. But I suppose you are right on the precautionary principle to allow the possibility of a threat to nuclear sites or whatever. The question then arises: What do you do about it? Obviously the only thing you can do is attempt to convince those in charge of security that your threat analysis indicates a clear and present danger that should be prioritized along with technical failure, terrorist sabotage etc etc. Then, arguing that the "mere presence" of UFO sightings near this or that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:47:26 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:32:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:23:55 -0500 >Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:33:16 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>Exactly what does Councillor Buchanan and his gang have to >>offer the citizens of Roswell? Just what are Bonnybridge and >>Roswell supposed to have in common? The ability of both to "see >>the future"? >>I presume what the councillors really want is the chance to >>see some of the magnificent scenery of New Mexico, at council >>tax payer's expense. >If Mr. Allan lives in the Roswell area, I apologize for what >I'm going to say. But the magnificent scenery of New Mexico >isn't found there. Some of it is in Santa Fe, four to five hours >distant by car, with wonderful mountains. Roswell, by contrast, >is flat and bleak. There's a national park, Bitter Lake (maybe >that's not the formal name of the park, but it's what my wife >calls it when she suggests we drive there), with wonderful >sandhill cranes that fly in at dusk, wheeling and calling in the >sky. But, appealing as the birds are, I wouldn't visit the park >for its scenery. If the Bonnybridge councillors expect a scenic >visit, they're in for a surprise. <snip> Hi Greg: Carlsbad Caverns is not far to the South. That should lend an air of mystery to the scene at least. I wonder how much actual benefit such sister-city arrangements actually provide. It might not be enough to justify
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:04:50 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:35:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Koi >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >For me the Socorro sighting is fraught with questionable >elements as I re-read the account in Jerry Clark's The UFO Book >(1998). <snip> >I only questioned the Socorro event >because Jerry Clark and another person listed it as one of the >best UFO sightings ever at our blog-site (where I had asked for >the best UFO sighting ever). <snip> >I suggest that newbies and oldsters here get out Jerry Clarks >UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, and read the Socorro account. Hi Rich, List I hope no-one minds if I take this as an opening to provide a further set of references from the incomplete draft of the chronology I've been working on for quite a while. (See references for the Socorro sighting at the end of this email.) I will soon be past the stage of cutting and pasting long lists of references into emails to the List (which I realise will not be to the taste of, or useful to, all members of the List!). Instead, a preliminary draft of the chronology is, after about 17 months of work, now nearly in a state that I'd be content to make it available to download (free of charge) to members of the List for discussion of further work. Before I do so, I'll be asking a couple of favours of a few members of the List in relation to (hopefully minor) points. First off, I'd like to know whether it is possible to identify me from Microsoft Word's "metadata" associated with the Word file I'd be circulating. (As I've mentioned before, "Isaac Koi" is a pseudonym I use because, as a barrister, I have no desire for colleagues or clients to know about my involvement, however slight, in ufology.) I've downloaded and installed Microsoft's "Remove Hidden Data Tool" and Bitform's Bitform Discover from the following links: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=144e54ed-d43e-42ca-bc7b -5446d34e5360&displaylang=en http://www.bitform.net/ I think that these tools have done the trick but I'd like to circulate the test sample (on a confidential basis) to a few individuals that know about metadata before circulating extracts more widely. Secondly, I'd be grateful if any authors on the List could provide some comfort in relation to my use of references to their books. I presume that there is no problem with providing such references in a document which is made freely available on the Internet, but if anyone considers there is any breach of etiquette within the ufological community by providing such references please let me know. (If any authors would need to a more extensive extract of the draft Chronology in order to form a view on this issue, I'd be happy to provide further samples). All being well, I should be able to start circulating Word documents containing a short extract of the draft chronology off-list within days, with more substantial extracts (of, say, a few dozen to a few hundred pages) withn a week or two, with the full preliminary draft following a week or two later. When I circulate the chronology as a Microsoft Word document, it will be possible to sort the references for each event, document or person into alphabetical order, chronological order, or by length of discussion. In the list at the end of this email I have had to cut the columns for date and length of discussion, and simply included the list of references in alphabetical order by author. However, for ease of reference, I've sorted the references by length and included the top few entries below. (I will not duplicate the entire list of references.) 171 pages - Stanford, Ray in his "Socorro Saucer" (1976) generally, particularly at pages 13-183 of the 1978 Fonatana revised paperback edition. 32 pages - Klass, Philip in his "UFOs - Identified" (1968) at pages 194-225 (Chapter 18 generally, "Socorro Part I: Fact and Fantasy" and Chapter 19 generally "Socorro Part II : 'A classic case'") of the Random House hardback edition. 32 pages - Steiger, Brad in his "Project Blue Book" (1976) at pages 106-137 (forming the major part of Chapter Five) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. 18 pages - Randle, Kevin in his "Scientific Ufology" (1999) at pages 133-145, 156-157 (in Chapter 5), 204 (in Chapter 7), 214, 216 (in Chapter 8) of the Avon softcover edition. 17 pages - Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 3 - High Strangeness" (1996) at pages 452-465 (forming part of an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Also briefly discussed at pages 373-374 in an entry entitled "Paranormal and Occult Theories about UFOs" and at page 93 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition forming part of an entry entitled "Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 1960-1979". 16 pages - Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" (1998) at pages 545-558 of the Visible Ink Press softcover edition in an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3". Also briefly discussed at pages 96-97 in an entry entitled "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". 14 pages - Campbell, Steuart in his "The UFO Mystery Solved" (1994) at pages 118-131 (Chapter 7 generally) of the Explicit Books softcover edition. 13 pages - W T Powers in "The Humanoids" (1969) (edited by Charles Bowen) at pages 130-142 (unnumbered chapter entitled "The Landing at Socorro") of the Futura paperback edition. 12 pages - Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: The Phenomenon from the Beginning - 2nd edition" (1998), in Volume 2:L-Z at pages 856-867 (in an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. 12 pages - Emenegger, Robert in his "UFOs Past, Present and Future" (1974) at pages 62-73 (in Chapter 11 generally) of the silver covered Ballantine paperback edition first printing, at pages 71-81 of the blue covered Ballantine paperback edition eighth printing. 11 pages - Maccabee, Bruce in his "UFO FBI Connection" (2000) at pages 1-2 (in Chapter 1), 267-275 (in Chapter 23) of the Llewellyn softcover edition. Some references for the Lonnie Zamora / Socorro sighting (1964.0424) in alphabetical order by author: For links to various relevant documents and articles online see: http://www.nicap.org/zamoradir.htm Anderson, Jack in Kevin Randle's "Conspiracy of Silence" (1997) at page xii (in the Foreword) of the Avon paperback edition. Baker, Alan in his "Sci-Fi Channel: True Life Encounters: UFO Sightings" (1997) at pages 76-80 (in Chapter 3) of the Orion softcover edition. Baker, Alan in his "The Encyclopaedia of Alien Encounters" (1999) at pages 227-228 (in an entry entitled "Socorro, New Mexixo, USA") of the Virgin hardback edition. Berliner, Don with Galbraith, Marie and Hunees, Antonio in their "UFO Briefing Document" (1995) , at pages 78-80 (Part 2: Case Histories, section entitled "1964: Landing at Socorro, New Mexico") and also mentioned at page 21 of the Dell paperback edition. Berlitz, Charles in his "World of Strange Phenomena" (1988) at pages 49-51 of the Wynwood hardback edition. Binder, Otto in his "What we really know about Flying Saucers" (1967) at page 59 (in Chapter 5) of the Fawcett paperback edition. Birnes, William in his "The UFO Magazine UFO Encyclopedia" (2004) at pages 293 (in an entry entitled "Socorro, New Mexico"), 341-343 (in an entry entitled "Zamora, Lonnie") of the Pocket Books softcover edition. Bowen, Charles in "The Age of the UFO" (1984) (edited by Peter Brookesmith) at page 180-181 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Strange Encounters of Many Kinds") of the Black Cat hardback edition. The relevant chapter is an article reprinted from the weekly partwork "The Unexplained", Volume 1, pages 8-9. Boyce, Chris in his "Extraterrestrial Encounter" (1979) at pages 116-119 of the 1980 revised NEL paperback edition. Brookesmith, Peter in his "Alien Abductions" (1998) at page 11 (in the Introduction) of the Barnes & Noble hardback edition. Brookesmith, Peter in his "UFO: The Complete Sightings Catalogue" (1995) at pages 79-81 (in Chapter 4) of the BCA hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Blitz hardback edition, and in the Barnes & Noble hardback edition published under the title "UFO: The Complete Sightings"). Brookesmith, Peter in his "UFO: The Government Files" (1996) at pages 48-49, 51 (in Chapter 2), 53 (in Chapter 3) of the Parragon hardback edition. Brunstein, Karl in his "Beyond the Four Dimensions" (1979) at pages 94-95 (in Chapter 5) of the Walker softcover edition. Bryan, C D B in his "Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: Alien Abduction, UFOs, and the Conference at MIT" (1995) at pages 113-114 (in Chapter 4) of the Weidenfeld & Nicolson hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Knopf hardback edition and the Penguin Arkana softcover edition), at pages 150-152 of the Orion paperback edition. Campbell, Steuart in his "The UFO Mystery Solved" (1994) at pages 118-131 (Chapter 7 generally) of the Explicit Books softcover edition. Canadeo, Anne in her "UFO's: The Fact or Fiction File" (1990) at pages 55-58 (in Chapter 5 of the anti-UFO side of the book, i.e. the side which starts with the Chapter 1 entitled "Some Important Questions About Visitors From 'Planet Z'") of the Walker hardback edition. Canadeo, Anne in her "UFO's: The Fact or Fiction File" (1990) at pages 29-31 (in Chapter 3 of the pro-UFO side of the book, i.e. the side which starts with the Chapter 1 entitled "Visitors at Cisco Grove") of the Walker hardback edition. Cassirer, Manfred in his "Dimensions of Enchantment" (1994) at pages 47-48 (in Chapter 5) of the Breese Books softcover edition. Chalker, Bill in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at page 184 (in Chapter 3.4.1, entitled "Physical Traces") of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition. Chambers, Howard in his "UFOs for the millions" (1967) at pages 30 (in Chapter 3), 72-73 (in Chapter 6) of the Bell hardcover edition. Clark, Jerome in "Making Contact" (1997) (Edited by Bill Fawcett) at pages 31-32 (in Section 1) of the Morrow hardback edition. Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" (1998) at pages 545-558 of the Visible Ink Press softcover edition in an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3". Also briefly discussed at pages 96-97 in an entry entitled "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 3 - High Strangeness" (1996) at pages 452-465 (forming part of an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Also briefly discussed at pages 373-374 in an entry entitled "Paranormal and Occult Theories about UFOs" and at page 93 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition forming part of an entry entitled "Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 1960-1979". Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: The Phenomenon from the Beginning - 2nd edition" (1998), in Volume 2:L-Z at pages 856-867 (in an entry entitled "Socorro CE2/CE3") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. Cohen, Daniel in his "The World of UFOs" (1978) at pages 68-71 (in Chapter 9) of the Lippincott hardback edition. Cousineau, Phil in his "UFOs: A Manual for the Millenium" (1995) at pages 92-93 (in Chapter 4) of the Harper Collins paperback edition. Darling, David in his online encyclopedia, "The Encyclopedia of Astrobiology, Astronomy and Spaceflight" (2003), in the entry entitled "Socorro Landing". The relevant entry is available online at: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/S/Socorro.html Denzler, Brenda in her "The Lure of the Edge" (2001) at pages 38-39 (in Chapter 2), 192, 193 (in the Notes) of the California hardback edition. Devereux, Paul and Brookesmith, Peter in their "UFOs and Ufology - The First 50 Years" (1997) at page 50 (in Chapter 4) of the Blandford softcover edition. Dolan, Richard M. in his "UFOs and the National Security State: Volume 1" (2000) at pages 362-365 (in Chapter 7) of the Keyhole softcover edition, at pages 273-275 of the 2002 revised Hampton Road softcover edition. Edwards, Frank in his "Flying Saucers - Serious Business" (1966) at pages 105-108 (in Chapter 7), 136-137 (in Chapter 10) of the Bantam paperback edition, at pages 112-116, 142-143 of the Mayflower-Dell paperback edition. Emenegger, Robert in his "UFOs Past, Present and Future" (1974) at pages 62-73 (in Chapter 11 generally) of the silver covered Ballantine paperback edition first printing, at pages 71-81 of the blue covered Ballantine paperback edition eighth printing. Evans, Hilary in his "From Other Worlds" (1998) at page 101 (in Chapter 4) of the Carlton hardback edition. Fawcett, George and Greenwood, Barry in their "Clear Intent" (1994) at pages 139-141 (in Chapter 9) of the Spectrum softcover edition (with the same page numbering in the Fireside softcover edition published under the title "The UFO Cover-Up"). Flammonde, Paris in his "UFO Exist!" (1976) at pages 353-356 (in Chapter 18) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. Forstchen, William in "Making Contact" (1997) (edited by Bill Fawcett) at pages 203-204 (in Section 3) of the Morrow hardback edition. Fowler, Raymond E. in his "UFOs: Interplanetary Visitors" (1974) at pages 174-177 (in Chapter 11), 269-270 (in Chapter 14) of the Exposition Banner hardback edition, at pages 169-172, 261-262 of the Bantam paperback edition. Fowler, Raymond E. in his "Casebook of a UFO Investigator" (1981) at pages 31-32 (in Chapter 3) of the Prentice-Hall hardback edition. Friedman, Stanton and Berliner, Don in their "Crash at Corona" (1992) at pages 33-34 (in Chapter 3) of the 1997 Marlowe Company softback edition. Fuller, John G in his "Incident At Exeter" (1966) at pages 30-31 (in Chapter 4), 161 (in Chapter 11) of the Berkley paperback editions. Gaddis, Vincent in his "Mysterious Fire And Lights" (1967) at pages 8-9 (in Chapter 1) of the Dell hardback edition. Garrett, Richard in his "Aliens From Outer Space" (1983) at pages 77-83 (in Chapter 6), 130, 131 (in Chapter 10) of the Piccolo paperback edition. Gelman, Rita and Seligson, Marcia in their "UFO Encounters" (1978) at pages 49-50 (in Chapter 10) of the Scholastic softcover edition. Goldsmith, Donald and Owen, Tobias in their "The Search for Life in the Universe" (1980) at pages 415-416 (in Chapter 21) of the Benjamin Cummings softcover edition, at page 492 (in Chapter 20) of the 1992 Addison Wesley softcover revised second edition. Good, Timothy in his "Above Top Secret" (1987) at pages 339-341 (in Chapter 14), 367-370 (in Chapter 15) of the Sidgwick & Jackson hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Pan paperback edition). Good, Timothy in his "Beyond Top Secret" (1996) at pages 409-411 (in Chapter 16) of the Sidgwick & Jackson hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Guild Publishing hardback edition and the Grafton paperback edition). Graeme, Jack in "Flying Saucers : Twenty-One Years of UFOs" (1968), published by the editors of Cowles and UPI, at pages 58-61. Graeme, Jack in "Flying Saucers: A Look Special" (1967) published by the editors of United Press International and Cowles Communications Inc, at page 16. Greenfield, Irving in his "The UFO Report" (1967) at pages 22-23 (in Chapter 2), 27-28 (in Chapter 3), 98 (in Chapter 11) of the Lancer paperback edition. Gurney, Gene (USAF Lt Col) and Clare Gurney in their "Unidentified Flying Objects" (1970) at pages 47-52 (in Chapter 4) of the Abelard-Schuman hardback edition. Hall, Richard in "The Encyclopedia of UFOs" (1980) (edited by Ronald Story) at pages 341-344 (in an entry entitled "Socorro (New Mexico) landing") of the NEL hardback edition. Hall, Richard in "The UFO Evidence: Volume 2 - A Thirty Year Report" (2001) (edited by Richard Hall) at pages 2 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Master Chronology"), 177-182 (in Section 5) of the Scarecrow Press hardback edition. Hall, Richard in his "Uninvited Guests" (1988) at pages 147 (in Chapter 9), 214 (in Chapter 14) of the Aurora Press paperback edition. Hansen, Kim in "UFO: 1947-1987" (1987) (edited by Hilary Evans with John Spencer) at pages 62-66 (Chapter 2.3.2, entitled "UFO Casebook") of the Fortean Tomes softcover edition. Harbinson, W A in his "Projekt Saucer" (1995) at pages 143-152 (in Chapter 8) of the Box Tree hardback edition. Hesemann, Michael in his "The Cosmic Connection" (1996) at page 116 (in Chapter 11) of the Gateway Books softcover edition. Holiday, F W in his "The Dragon and the Disc" (1973) at page 129 (in Chapter 9) of the Futura paperback edition. Holzer, Hans in his "The UFOnauts" (1976) at pages 105-106 (in Chapter 4), 153 (in Chapter 6) of the Fawcett Gold Medal paperback edition. Hopkins, Budd in his "Missing Time" (1981) at pages 2-4, 5 (in the Introduction) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. Huyghe, Patrick in his "The Field Guide to Extraterrestrials" (1996) at page 4 (in the Introduction) of the Avon softcover edition (with the same page numbering in the NEL softcover edition). Hynek, J Allen in his "The Hynek UFO Report" (1977) at pages 213-219 (in Chapter 9) of the Barnes & Noble hardback reprint (1997), at pages 223-229 of the Dell paperback edition (with the same page numbering in the Sphere paperback edition). Hynek, J. Allen in his "The UFO Experience" (1972) at pages 142, 144-145 (in Chapter 10) of the Henry Regnery hardback edition (with same page numbering in the Abelard-Schuman hardback edition), at pages 162 and 165-167 of the various Ballantine paperback editions, at pages 181 and 184-186 of the Corgi paperback edition. Included in a table indicating an assessment of Strangeness Rating/Probability Rating of 5/6 as CEIII-1 in Appendix 1 at page 240 of the Henry Regnery hardback edition (with same page numbering in the Abelard-Schuman hardback edition), at page 270 of the various Ballantine paperback editions, at page 294 of the Corgi paperback edition. Jacobs, David in his "The UFO Controversy in America" (1975) at pages 189-191 (in Chapter 7, "The Battle for Congressional Hearings") of the Indiana hardback edition, pages 167-169 of the Signet paperback edition. Johannes Von Buttlar in his "The UFO Phenomenon" (1980) at pages 158-161 (in Chapter 14) of the Book Club Associates hardback edition. Kanon, Gregory M in his "The Great UFO Hoax" (1997) at page 70 (in Chapter 5) of the Galde Press softcover edition. Keel, John in his "Disneyland of the Gods" (1988) at pages 26, 28-29 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "A Short History of Boobery") of the I-Net softcover edition. Keel, John in his "UFOs: Operation Trojan Horse" (1970) at page 175 (in Chapter 9) of the Souvenir Press hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Abacus softcover edition). Keyhoe, Donald E. in his "Aliens from Space" (1973) at pages 47-48 (in Chapter 3), 196-197 (in Chapter 13), of the Signet paperback edition, page 62-63 and 223-224 of the Panther paperback edition. Klass, Philip in his "UFOs - Identified" (1968) at pages 194-225 (Chapter 18 generally, "Socorro Part I: Fact and Fantasy" and Chapter 19 generally "Socorro Part II : 'A classic case'") of the Random House hardback edition. Klass, Philip in his "UFOs: The Public Deceived" (1983) at page 267 (in Chapter 28) of the Prometheus softback edition. Klass, Philip J. in his "UFOs Explained" (1974) at pages 105-114 (Chapter 12 generally, "The 'Landing' at Socorro") of the Random House hardback edition / pages 124-134 of Random House paperback edition. Knight, David C in his "UFOs: A pictorial history from antiquity to the present" (1979) at pages 99, 114-117 (in Part 4) of the McGraw Hill hardback edition. Lore, Gordon and Harold Deneault in their "Mysteries of the Skies" (1968) at page 170 (in the Epilogue) of the Prentice-Hall hardback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their "Encounters with UFO Occupants" (1976) at pages 8-11 (in Chapter 2), 199 (in Chapter 10), 244-245 (in Chapter 14), 332-333 (in Chapter 16) of the Berkley paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their "Flying Saucer Occupants" (1967) at pages 26-28 (in Chapter 1), 132-133 (in Chapter 7), 149-150 (in Chapter 9) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their "UFOs Over the Americas" (1968) at page 104 (in Chapter 7) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral and Lorenzen, Jim in their "UFOs: The Whole Story" (1969) at pages 182 (in Chapter 8), 241 (in Chapter 11) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral in "Flying Saucers: the Startling Evidence of the Invasion from Outer Space" (1966) (an enlarged version of her "The Great Flying Saucer Hoax" (1962)) at pages 218-222 (in Chapter 14) and mentioned at pages 85 and 86 (in Chapter 7) of the Signet paperback edition. Lorenzen, Coral in "The Humanoids" (1969) (edited by Charles Bowen) at page 164 (unnumbered chapter entitled "UFO Occupants in United States Reports") of the Futura paperback edition. Maccabee, Bruce in his "UFO FBI Connection" (2000) at pages 1-2 (in Chapter 1), 267-275 (in Chapter 23) of the Llewellyn softcover edition. Mallan, Lloyd in "The Official Guide to UFOs" (1968) (edited by the editors of Science & Mechanics) at pages 25-29 (in unnumbered chapter entitled "The Mysterious 12") of the Ace paperback edition. Marrs, Jim in his "Alien Agenda" (1997) at pages 144-146 (in Chapter 5), 201 (in Chapter 7) of the Harper Collins paperback edition. Moseley, James and Pflock, Karl in their "Shockingly Close to the Truth!" (2002) at pages 187-188, 189 (in Chapter 8) of the Prometheus hardback edition. Ortzen, Len in his "Strange Stories of UFOs" (1977) at pages 80-84 (in Chapter 11) of the Coronet paperback edition. Parker, Barry in his "Alien Life" (1998) at page 218 (in Chapter 13) of the Plenum Trade hardback edition. Peebles, Curtis in his "Watch The Skies!" (1994) at pages 148-153 (in Chapter 11 in sections entitled "The Socorro Landing" , "The Socorro Investigation" and "Aftermath") of the Smithsonian hardback edition, pages 178-185 of the Berkley paperback edition. Picknett, Lynn in her "The Mammoth Book of UFOs" (2001) at pages 78-82 (in Chapter 2) of the Robinson softcover edition. Quintanilla, Major Hector in his unpublished manuscript entitled "UFOs: An Air Force Dilemma" at pages 29-33 of the NIDS version available free on-line on various websites, including at the following link: http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/quintanilla.pdf Quintanilla, Colonel Hector J (retired) in "UFO: 1947-1997" (1997) (edited by Hilary Evans and Dennis Stacy) at pages 111-116 (Section entitled "The 1960s", unnumbered chapter entitled "Project Blue Book's Last Years") of the John Brown hardback edition. Randle, Kevin and Estes, Russ in their "Faces of the Visitors" (1997) at pages 7-8 (in Part 1) of the Fireside softcover edition. Randle, Kevin and Estes, Russ in their "Spaceships of the Visitors" (1997) at page 82 (in Part 3) of the Fireside softcover edition. Randle, Kevin D. in his "The UFO Casebook" (1989), at pages 113-118 (entry entitled "April 24, 1964: Socorro, New Mexico") of the Warner Books paperback edition Randle, Kevin in his "Conspiracy of Silence" (1997) at pages 158-162 (in Chapter 8) of the Avon paperback edition. Randle, Kevin in his "Project Bluebook Exposed" (1997) at pages 21-22 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "In the Beginning."), of the Marlowe softcover edition. Randle, Kevin in his "Scientific Ufology" (1999) at pages 133-145, 156-157 (in Chapter 5), 204 (in Chapter 7), 214, 216 (in Chapter 8) of the Avon softcover edition. Randles, Jenny and Hough, Peter in their "50 Years of UFO Encounters" (1996) at page 42 (in unnumbered section entitled "1964: Alien Contact") of the Encounters Magazine softcover edition. Randles, Jenny and Warrington, Peter in their "Science and the UFOs" (1985) at pages 134-135 (in Chapter 10) of the Blackwell hardback edition. Randles, Jenny in her "Aliens" (1993) at pages 34-36 (in Part 1) of the Hale hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Sterling softcover edition published under the title "Alien Contacts and Abductions"). Randles, Jenny in her "UFO Reality" (1983) at page 143 (in Chapter 10) of the Hale hardback edition. Randles, Jenny in her "UFO Study" (1981) at page 37-38, 39 (in Chapter 2) of the Hale hardback edition. Randles, Jenny in her "UFOs and How to See Them" (1992) at page 25 (in Chapter 1) of the Brockhampton Press hardback edition. Redfern, Nick in his "A Covert Agenda" (1997) at pages 277-279 (in Chapter 19) of the Simon & Schuster hardback edition. Redfern, Nick in his "The FBI Files" (1998) at pages 123-128 (in Chapter 6) of the Simon & Schuster softcover edition, with the same page numbering in the Pocket Books paperback edition. Ridpath, Ian in his "Messages from the Stars" (1978) at pages 208-209 (in Chapter 13) of the Fontana paperback edition. Rogo, D Scott in "UFO Abductions" (1980) (edited by D. Scott Rogo) at page 2 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Introduction") of the Signet paperback edition. Rux, Bruce in his "Architects of the Underworld" (1996) at page 48 (in Chapter 2) of the Frog softcover edition. Sachs, Margaret in her "The UFO Encyclopedia" (1980) at pages 298-299 (in an entry entitled "Socorro, New Mexico") and included in a list entitled "Chronological list of UFO sightings" at page viii of the Corgi softback edition. Salisbury, Frank B in "The Official Guide to UFOs" (1968) (edited by the editors of Science & Mechanics) at pages 61-62 (in unnumbered chapter entitled "The Scientist and the UFO") of the Ace paperback edition. Salisbury, Frank in his "The Utah UFO Display: A Biologist's Report" (1974) at pages xviii-xix (in the Preface) of the Devin Adair hardback edition. Salisbury, Frank in his written statement to the Roush Hearing (the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics "Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects" on 1968.0729) at page 243 of the transcript of the Ninetieth Congress, Second Session, Number 7. Complete transcript available free online at the following links: http://ncas.sawco.com/ufosymposium/contents.html http://www.project1947.com/shg/symposium/contents.html Schnabel, Jim in his "Dark White" (1994) at page 96 (in Chapter 6) of the Hamish Hamilton softcover edition. Science & Mechanics (the editors of ) in "The Official Guide to UFOs" (1968) (edited by the editors of Science & Mechanics) at pages 150-151 (in unnumbered chapter entitled "Complete Directory of UFOs") of the Ace paperback edition. Shuttlewood, Arthur in his "The Flying Saucerers" (1976) at page 34 (in Chapter 3) of the Sphere paperback edition. Spaceage in its "UFO USA - A Traveler's Guide" (1999) at pages 123-124 (in the chapter entitled "New Mexico") of the Hyperion softcover edition. Spencer, John and Spencer, Anne in their "Fifty Years of UFOs" (1997) at pages 49-54 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "1957-1967") of the Boxtree hardback edition. Spencer, John and Spencer, Anne in their "True Life Encounters - Alien Contact" (1997) at pages 200, 201-202 (in Chapter 12) of the Millenium paperback edition. Spencer, John in his "The UFO Encyclopedia" (1991) at page 333 (in an entry entitled "Zamora, Patrolman Sergeant Lonnie") of the Guild hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Avon softcover edition), at pages 393-394 of the Headline paperback edition. Spencer, John in his "UFOs: The Definitive Casebook" (1991) at pages 46-47 (in the unnumbered section entitled "North America", in the chapter entitled "Database") of the Hamlyn hardback edition. Stanford, Ray in his "Socorro Saucer" (1976) generally, particularly at pages 13-183 of the 1978 Fonatana revised paperback edition. Stanton, L Jerome in his "Flying Saucers : Hoax or Reality?" (1966) at page 131 (in Chapter 8) of the Belmont paperback edition. Steiger, Brad in his "Project Blue Book" (1976) at pages 106-137 (forming the major part of Chapter Five) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. Stemman, Roy in his "Mysteries of the Universe: Great Mysteries" (1978) at page 221 (in Chapter 11) of the Book Club Associates hardback edition. Stone, Reuben in his "UFO Investigation" (1993) at pages 32-34, 37 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Encounters with the Unknown") of the Blitz Editions hardback edition. Story, Ronald in his "UFOs and the Limits of Science" (1981) at pages 72-77 (Chapter 3) of the NEL Hardback edition. Sutherly, Curt in his "UFO Mysteries: A Reporter Seeks the Truth" (2001) at pages 22-24 (in Chapter 2) of the Llewellyn softcover edition. Tansley, David in his "Omens of Awareness" (1977) at page 267 (in Chapter 14) of the Abacus paperback edition. Thompson, Keith in his "Angels and Aliens: UFOs and the Mythic Imagination" (1991) at pages 73-77 (in Chapter 7) of the Fawcett softcover edition. Time-Life (Editors of) in "The UFO phenomenon: Mysteries of the Unknown" (1987) at page 73 (in Chapter 3) of the Time-Life Book hardback edition. Trench, Brinsley Le Poer in his "The Eternal Subject" (1973) at pages 121-122 (in Chapter 21) of the Souvenir Press hardback edition, at pages 122-123 of the Day Book paperback edion (published under the title "Mysteries Visitors: The UFO Story"). Trench, Brinsley Le Poer in his "The Flying Saucer Story" (1966) at pages 49-50 (in Chapter 5) of the revised Tandem paperback edition. US Air Force in its fact sheet on this incident, entitled "Unidentified Flying Object Report, Socorro, New Mexico, 24 April 1964" quoted in its entirety by Ray Stanford in his "Socorro Saucer" (1976) at pages 95-97 (in Chapter 5), 179 (in Chapter 11) of the 1978 Fonatana revised paperback edition. Vallee, Jacques and Janine Vallee in their "Challenge to Science : The UFO Enigma" (1966) at pages 43-45 (in Chapter 2) of the Ballantine Books paperback edition. Vallee, Jacques in his "Anatomy of a Phenomenon" (1965) at page 138 (in Chapter 6) of the Henry Regnery hardback edition (with the same page numbering in the Tandem paperback edition), page 150 of the Ballantine Books paperback edition, pages 193-194 of the 1966 revised and enlarged Ace Star paperback edition. Vallee, Jacques in his "Dimensions" (1988) at page 23 (in Part 1, Chapter 1) of the Souvenir Press hardback edition. Vallee, Jacques in his "Forbidden Science: Journals 1957-1969." (1992) at pages 102, 103, 111 (in Chapter 8, journal entries for 1964.0428, 1964.0430, 1964.0508, 1964.0510, 1964.0929), 286-287 (in Chapter 15, journal entry for 1967.0630) of the North Atlantic Books hardback edition, at page 109, 110-111, 118-119, 290-291 of the 1996 abridged Marlowe paperback edition. Vallee, Jacques in his "Passport to Magonia" (1970) at page 16 (in Chapter 1) of the Tandem paperback edition. Vallee, Jacques in his "The Invisible College" (1975) at page 105 (in Chapter 4) of the Dutton hardback edition, at pages 111-112 of the Panther paperback edition (published under the title "UFOs: The Psychic Solution"). Van Dyk, Gregory in his "The Alien Files" (1997) at pages 55-57 (in Chapter 3) of the Element paperback edition. W T Powers in "The Humanoids" (1969) (edited by Charles Bowen) at pages 130-142 (unnumbered chapter entitled "The Landing at Socorro") of the Futura paperback edition. Watts, Alan in his "UFO Visitation" (1996) at pages 21-22 (in Chapter 2) of the Blandford softcover edition. White, Dale in his "Is Something Up There?" (1968) at pages 93-95 (in Chapter 8) of the Scholastic Book Services paperback edition. Wilson, Clifford in his "The Alien Agenda" (1988) at pages 10-11 (in Chapter 2) of the Signet paperback edition. Wilson, Clifford in his "UFOs And Their Mission Impossible" (1974) at pages 10-11 (in Chapter 2) of the Signet paperback edition. Wilson, Colin in his "Alien Dawn" (1998) at pages 102, 103, 114 (in Chapter 4) of the Virgin softcover edition (with the same page numbering in the Virgin paperback edition). Wright, Susan in her "UFO Headquarters" (1998) at page 53 (in Chapter 3) of the St Martin's Press softcover edition.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:56:12 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:38:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:16:28 EST >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:25:36 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>Well maybe the "trivial" cases are still Unknowns just of poor >>quality. My impression is that the security agencies were >>discussing very few "trivial" cases. When they would provide >>short lists of sightings, a surprising "most" or all of them were >>Unknowns. Very few could be rejected as aircraft, astro, >>balloons, etc. One has to dig through more complete >>collections of reports in the BB files to try to find a few of the >>usual IFO's. For example, the Project TWINKLE Final Report >>and Holloman Unexplained Phenomena report discuss maybe >>a dozen UFO incidents, out of which maybe the one at >>Corona is clearly just the moon low on the horizon, and that's >>about it for the IFO's! <snip> >Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly >just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the >IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in >1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. >But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there >were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and >what's not anymore. I have little time now to respond to these kinds of posts, but will quickly respond to this. The Corona sighting was in exactly the same direction as the moon, and low on the horizon. You are sidetracking my point. >Something else that caught my attention was your reference to >security agencies discussing only cases that were hard to reject >as "aircraft, astro, balloons, etc." I'm sorry, but I'm just not >use to 'security agencies' being too open with information >(unless it is designed to influence an intended audience). We've >been lied to so many times it's hard to know when a security >agency is telling the truth and when they are telling us only >what they _want_ us to know/believe. Just because a report is >from an "official" agency doesn't mean it is accurate or true. >And just because it talks about UFO's doesn't mean we should >take the information at face value. "Official" reports from >"official" agencies could just as easily be crock as the truth, >for all we know. And if they _did_ focus more on 'trivial' and >IFO cases, would we now be paying any attention to them? The security agencies were _not_ repeat _not_ telling all this to the public ("us") as you seem to mistakenly assume. They were telling this to _each other_ in classified meetings and in classified documents which they never expected would ever see the light of day (some 16 years before the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 1966). >I've been meaning to ask you...Do you believe the Air Force or >any government agency is _ever_ going to release files or >information they don't want us to read or know? Do you believe >any of the information released to the public through the FOIA >or any other conduit, past, present or future, contains more >truth than lies? Such a narrow-minded and simplistic view. Do you believe the AF can perfectly control what the CIA releases about the AF, and vice versa? Do you believe the govt agencies never make mistakes in releasing documents? Intelligence agencies are usually more candid with each other behind classified walls than they are with the public. The FBI files have wonderful pieces of CIA info that the CIA would not release directly. The FBI does not understand CIA secrets and frankly does not much care about them. The CIA likewise does not care much about AF secrets so the CIA did not care about releasing to me the true "Ghost of the Estimate," which directly quoted from the SIGN Interim Report of Nov. 30, 1948, saying that UFO's might be "interplanetary" spaceships. This is something the AF has never released and cannot be found anymore in the available AF files. I could multiply the examples, FBI not understanding or caring about NSA secrets, the Navy not caring about AF secrets (it was a Navy document in CIA files that revealed the AF secret about the SIGN conclusion), etc. etc. If we adopted your viewpoint we would have to force ourselves to "ignore" these interagency revelations and only accept what an agency directly releases to us about itself. Don't you just hate it when someone tells you to ignore something?? >>One out of a dozen. (I would have to go >>re-read the reports and see if maybe another IFO can be >>found in them.) Likewise with Lincoln LaPaz's reports on the >>Green Fireballs, 100% Unknowns, 0% IFO's. Sure, you can >>find other incidents in the same time frame and location, but >>then you are spiking the sample yourself with IFO's that the >>agencies investigating were able to fairly easily decide were to >>be ignored. >Don't you just hate it when someone tries to tell you what you >should study and what you should ignore?! Don't you just hate it when someone tries to steer you onto colossal wastes of time, pleading and begging to give "fair" consideration to "every possibility" no matter how remote, and to just give up on critical thinking, stop evaluating relative degrees of merit, probability and where to place priorities of research effort? This is typical of the funadmental lack of judgment that is seen so often in this field. >How in the heck can you declare something "unknown" yet say it >wasn't an IFO, at the same time? How can you say what something >is or is not if you don't know what it is/was to begin with? <snip> You are wasting my time and everyone else's with semantic games. An Unknown is defined by eliminating the IFO's. If that was not possible, as you erroneously suggest, then you will have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:49:32 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:42:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rudiak >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>It's all fine and dandy to give cliches about how we can agree >>to disagree about Socorro. I would second that if there were >>actually a counter argument of _substance_ from those who >>disagree. Where is it? >For me the Socorro sighting is fraught with questionable >elements as I re-read the account in Jerry Clark's The UFO Book >(1998). Such as? Let's stop the handwaving and get down to specifics. >When Larry Robinson wrote and asked if we might have seen his >unfound magazine article (the one by the balloonists who >allegedly recounted their misidentified descent in New Mexico), >we searched for the magazine, and didn't find it. >>But we did find a vast list of balloon excursions by the >government and sent that link to Mr. Robinson. I'll locate the >URL and provide it here. And we found enough Picard and CIA/Navy >information which would corroborate Robinson's belief, and >Easton's information. This is all completely irrelevent, since simple balloon physics proves that no balloon the small size of the Socorro object could have buoyed up a crew of two plus the weigbt of everything else. Also no hot air balloon could possibly account for the impressions on the ground. >To answer Martin Shough too, I only questioned the Socorro event >because Jerry Clark and another person listed it as one of the >best UFO sightings ever at our blog-site (where I had asked for >the best UFO sighting ever). >Those UFO indentations everyone says needed high-tonnage to >create were not analyzed in such a way as to prove that. What is your source for making such a statement? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part because you just don't want to face facts that conflict with your contrarian view? You seemingly want a hybrid craft that is weightless and floats like a balloon to explain the Socorro silent flight phase, yet simultaneously heavy enough or hitting hard enough to account for the substantial pad impressions on the ground. You want your cake and to be able to eat it too. But the real world doesn't operate like that. Magical thinking isn't enough. >What >was the composition of the soil? Was anything used to determine >exactly what weight would be needed to produce the indentations? >Or was it conjecture by those not on the scene, or late to it? Do you honestly think a "balloon-hybrid" weighing almost nothing at all could make such indentations, or break a large imbedded rock at the edge of one of the landing pads? Now imagine something like a car dropping down on hard desert soil. Yeah, something like that would do it, but that is an object with substantial weight to begin with. Martin Shough just emailed me and asked if a lightweight craft dropping the last few feet could account for the soil indentations. So I did a simple calculation for a metric ton (1000 kg) car vs. a lightweight "hot air balloon" only 260 kg (the example I used in my post yesterday for a hypothetical hybrid balloon). The car dropping about only a foot and coming to rest in 1/10th second would have an impact force of nearly 3 tons, about 1/3rd the force calculated by the physicists cited by Ray Stanford in his Socorro book. It would impact at 2.6 m/s, or a little under 6 mph. The corresponding calculation for a 260 kg hot air balloon of _zero_ buoyancy, so that's its full mass will contribute to the impact, will have to drop from a height of 17 feet and impact at 10 m/s or 22 mph to form the same impression as the car dropped from 1 foot. Again, this is a hot air balloon with zero buoyancy and dropping like a rock. How do you think the balloon and crew would fare in such an impact? If one assumes the physicists calculation of 8-10 tons was more correct, then the "balloon" would have to impact at a speed about 3 times as great or at over 60 mph! The drop height would increase to about 150 feet to achieve such a speed! A true LEM-like craft, the lunar LEM, weighed about 15 metric tons on Earth, and 1/6th this on the Moon, or about 2.5 metric tons. It was designed to survive an impact up to 3 m/s using crushable, one-time only honeycomb shock absorbers. It was also designed to drop from about only 1 meter when the engines cut out. Note we are again talking about TONS of weight, not some imaginary, unworkable hot-air hybrid weighing only a few hundred pounds. The true LEM situation is similar to the one ton car example dropping from a small height, but not at all similar to an ultra-light weight craft dropping from a much greater height. >>When Zamora says the object looked like a balloon, I think > that's relevant and interesting. Yeah, about as relevant and interesting as saying some water towers or radar domes look like balloons. That only tells us they are shaped like balloons, not that they _are_ balloons. I am still waiting for you or Easton or Larry Robinson to deal in actual specifics rather than making these sweeping, handwaving arguments. I want you to explain to me how an object as small as the Socorro craft could have the necessary buoyancy to loft two men, and everything else, if it were a balloon. >I suggest that newbies and oldsters here get out Jerry Clarks >UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Edition, and read the Socorro account. >And if they are satisfied that the episode is one of the best in >UFO terms, or free of questionable aspects, I'll eat one of >Larry Hatch's hats... with catsup, of course. Oddly you don't seem to stop for a second to examine the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:45:17 -0500 Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The This is just one site found by way of the Goddard Library which shows one variant balloon type, which is far different than that debated by David Rudiak http://www.nott.com/Pages/design.php Listers can go to: http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/ for the Goddard Library site, using some of the document listings in the database presented in an earlier post, for specific documents which may (and I mean perhaps) explain some UFO sightings, even Socorro. David Rudiak and Jerry Clark would wish for me to scour the database for information which might confirm the Larry Robinson Socorro hypothesis, which I seem to be defending. Neither Jerry nor David think the material is there. But even a cursory glance at the Goddard material and document listings from the database show that balloon hybrids existed in the early 1960s which were similar to that which Lonnie Zamora described... and they were heavy too! My general position, over the years, is to lead persons to the watering hole so they can drink for themselves. My telling people that their thrist is quenched doesn't convince them that is is. But if they dig out information on their own, they will know that it's valid...or not. My argument here is that David Rudiak and Jerry Clark seem to have dismissed the balloon possibility for Socorro. The matter
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:51:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:49:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - >From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:49:45 EST >Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II >>From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 00:22:16 -0500 >>Subject: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II >One thing that really irks me are the incessant ravings by those >who rely on the false notion that a mass landing of 'spaceships' >will in some way save us from destruction. The only thing that >will "save" us is ourselves. Kelly, considering that I don't post to UFOUD very often, I'm not sure if my post really qualifies as "incessant raving". >It would be more important to enlighten the masses on the >numerous injustices being perpetrated on us, Maybe this is where we fail as a planet, that we do not teach the truth in our schools? >They don't give a damn about us, and if they do, it is for their own >benefit. And what truth exactly is this statement based on? >IMO, if they did give a damn about us, we wouldn't be in the >nuclear, social, and environmental, Now you're blaming our planetary problems on the UFOs? I thought you thought that Earthlings are the master and commander of our own problems? As to your first point above, what I meant by "I want the spaceships to land now", was more that I would like them to show themselves. This doesn't have to include a "Mass Landing". What might be a safer approach from their perspective, is just a "mass showing". What if 1000 sizeable spaceships hovered at 200,000 feet all along the prime meridan from the north pole to the south pole, at 12 oclock noon on a given Sunday afternoon in say October 14 ? What if after 1 hour, they all shifted west to the next meridian line that was "noon". Then an hour later, shift again, and again, etc... After 24 hours, the whole world would know that UFO's exist. The beauty of this is that not one shot would be fired, not one city would be blown up. It would all be visual. Almost like a movie, only we wouldn't have been charged $20 including popcorn. Then the ships should just leave... for maybe 40 years... the next move would be up to planet Earth... it would be based on what everybody had seen, and not about what we have been told. You can call me a fool, a dreamer, both or neither. It doesn't matter to me what you think of me. What I don't see is planet Earth figuring it's way out of it's own stupidity, none too soon. This has been our history and it is not working. Like 2000 years later it is still not working and a special person had to be sacrificed in the process. Some people lean on God for the answers to Earths problems. I don't happen to believe in God anymore, but I know that UFO's exist, because I've seen two. Nobody can take my sightings away from me. And I've read a lot. The data doesn't lie. Take pilot and police testimony alone, and the case is closed! All my intellect tells me that the sooner our planet knows that we are not alone, is the day that we really start to deal with the problems that have plagued us for thousands of years. That's why I support and encourage others to support what Steven Bassett is doing. Maybe see some of you in Washington D.C. in April?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:15:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:05:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Maccabee >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >To answer Martin Shough too, I only questioned the Socorro event >because Jerry Clark and another person listed it as one of the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:32:03 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:11:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:06:56 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:30:33 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:06:10 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:31:42 -0600 >>>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >><snip> >>>Yes indeed. Even if there is a statistically significant >>>clustering around such sites I don't think it is established >>>that we need an exotic hypothesis to explain it. >>Martin, and All >>The first explanation which should come to mind, it seems to me, >>is that there is a UFO surveillance of nuclear activities, both >>military and civilian. Actually, it is probably one of the best >>established data in ufology, worldwide, and since the 40's. >>I am puzzled that it has not been mentioned yet. >Hi Gildas, >Well "UFO surveillance of nuclear activities" really has been >"mentioned" - it looms in the air behind all of this discussion >like the ghost at the banquet! Shouldn't it be our first >assumption, you say? For me, it depends what angle I am coming >at this from, and there are several. Martin and All, One of the reference texts I was relying upon was the article published in IUR of Summer 2002 (I still have paper references): "Do nuclear activities attract UFO's?", by Donald A. Johnson. And you gave the reference on the web yourself: http://www.cufon.org in the "contributors" section This article answers positively to the question ! The statistical analysis, based on the UFOCAT database, seems clear to me, establishing higher percentages in the counties with nuclear plants and facilities. But the statistical approach is not the main point. The study of credible documents and testimonies is much more revealing, and spectacular, as the article shows: "The UFOCAT 2002 database lists 289 reports at sites coded as "missile" or "nuclear" facilities. These reports range from March 1944 (an aerial encounter near Yakima, Washington, not far from the huge World war II plutonium production plant at Hanford) to another aerial encounter in October 2001 over a nuclear power plant in Kent, England." One of the first observations, in 1945, has also been fully reported in the Mufon UFO Journal of December 1996: "UFO sighting over Hanford nuclear reactor in 1945", by Rolan D. Powell, Byron D. Varner, and Walter Andrus. One of the merits of the article of Donald Johnson is to give exemples outside ot the United States, thus stressing that it is a world wide affair. What about Bentwaters, at the end of 1980, with a UFO hovering over a nuclear storage area? See "You Can't Tell the People" of Georgina Bruni. The article also mentions "light rays or energy beams focused on nuclear materials": "Multiple, independant accounts state that beams of light weredirected downward from the UFOs onto the nuclear storage bunkers and underground missile silos, perhaps penetrating them benethy the surface." Lets's mention again here the testimony of Robert Salas, which first appeared in the Mufon UFO journal of January 1997: "Minuteman Missiles Shutdown", in the srping of 1967 at Malstrom AFB, Montana. And what about Russia? The article quotes the book of Paul Stonewell "The Soviet UFO Files" on the observation of a UFO over Chernobyl. This case remains to be corroborated, but there are other more reliable cases, such as the famous Kapustin Yar case (see for instance "The UFO Briefing Document", available in the Dell Books, pocket edition). And here is another one, cited by Boris Shurinov in his remarkable book "UFOs in Russia" (1995, in French, not translated in English, unfortunately): In October 1983, a UFO appeared over an intercontinental missile base near the village of Belokorovitchi in Ukraine. During 15 seconds, the lamps of the control panel of the missiles were lighted, showing the activation of the launching codes. the experts were not able to find a rational explanation. This case rivals with the one at Malstrom AFB in 1975, where missiles were, in turn, disabled after the passage of a UFO. We could go on, an on... >Speaking "between consenting adults in private", as it were, >I might be happy to explore this idea of ET-type "surveillance". >I'm not averse to it. I see a great deal of anecdotal evidence that can be interpreted as supporting it. But I could also interpret >the same evidence in even more bizzare ways in the contex of some >other more "outlandish" theory of UFO origins. In fact some of the >best reports from Oak Ridge, for example, are somewhat weird and >don't suggest a "surveillance" by machines so much as a haunting >by shape-shifting aerial amoebas! And then there is another level >on which to view all this, the level on which one is considering >the type of evidence that would be helpful in expanding a >consensus of interest beyond us UFO-philes, the level of objective >and sceptical scientific analysis. Yes, there are also strange phenomena. Another instance was over the nuclear storage base of Killeen , in Texas. But that does not weaken the main data, which is that there is a sort of surveillance of nuclear activities. And this may be twofold: te see, and to be seen...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Chupacabras Behind Avian Deaths In Chile? From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:59:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:32:14 -0500 Subject: Chupacabras Behind Avian Deaths In Chile? INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology January 25, 2005 Source: Diario El Austral (Chile) Date: 01.24.05CHILE: Chupacabras Behind Avian Deaths? Perfect incisions left no trace of blood Two families of the commune of Victoria were shocked after finding almost all of their farm birds dead inside their henhouses.These two cases attracted our attention: the first one occurred on a property located a few blocks away from the city's town square in the early morning hours of Sunday. It was still possible to see the feathers of the dead birds scattered throughout the site. People who were in the sector at the time of the attack stated that they had gone to bed around 04:00 hrs without hearing any strange sounds. The first dead specimens were locked in a double-gated cage that was kept shut at night to keep poultry safe from predation by mice or cats. But this "creature" opened the gates to the cage, killing 10 birds. Afterwards, the strange mammal toured the two henhouses in the area killing everything in its way, leaving feathers in its path. The second case occurred in housa located 3 blocks from the municipal marketplace in the downtown area of Victoria. This time, the birds showed clean wounds -- puncture marks in their extremities and under their wings, leaving their heads completely purple, without stains of blood on their plumage. Luis Gonzalez, owner of the property, remarked that there was no need for guard dogs, since the rooster played that role. The rooster kept strangers from approaching the henhouse, and its aggressiveness was such that the owners considered killing it more than once. But the cock's natural violence did not keep it from being killed by the "wild animal" together with six hens. There are other strange cases that have drawn the attention of residents of La Araucan=EDa, this time in the vicnity of Angol. One such case occurred while the city's jail was being built in 2000. A night watchman was doing his rounds when he saw a strange animal land on the hook holding the streetlight, bending it. The watchman managed to see "something" with wings measuring 1 meter, red eyes and completely covered in fur. Oddly enough, after recording the presence of this animal,. reports of strange animal deaths from areas adjacent to the construction site -- on Javiera Carrera street -- began to be recieved. This went on for a week. The trail went could for a while until the attacks were renewed, this time in the Nahuelbuta National Park. Many larger animals were found dead there, such as horses, sheep and cows. According to Erasmo Mera, president of IFOV (Victoria UFO Phenomena Research), "we have had five cases attributable to the Chupacabras and the incisions we found were on the wings. Other characteristics of these attacks are the absence of spilled blood. If you see one animal killing another, the killer shakes it, spilling blood everywhere. There were no traces of blood on the floor," he stressed. What is strange about the events in Victoria and neighboring communities is that this animal, which allegedly attacks rural areas, is now acting in densely populated areas, namely
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Secrecy News -- 01/25/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:01:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:33:41 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/25/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 8 January 25, 2005 ** US ASSERTS STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE AGAIN ** PROLIFERATION SECURITY INITIATIVE ** SOME MORE CRS PRODUCTS US ASSERTS STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE AGAIN The Department of Justice last week formally asserted the state secrets privilege in seeking to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Maher Arar, a Syrian-Canadian who was detained in the U.S. in 2002 and sent against his will to Syria, where he says he was tortured until his release a year later. The state secrets privilege was invoked "in order to protect the intelligence, foreign policy and national security interests of the United States," wrote Acting Attorney General James B. Comey in a January 18 declaration in the lawsuit Maher Arar v. John Ashcroft in the Eastern District of New York. "Litigating... plaintiff's complaint would necessitate disclosure of classified information," Mr. Comey wrote, including disclosure of the basis for detaining him in the first place, the basis for refusing to deport him to Canada as he had requested, and the basis for sending him to Syria. Tom Ridge, Secretary of Homeland Security, concurred in another sworn declaration submitted to the court. See both declarations here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/arar-notice-011805.pdf "The state secrets privilege is an absolute bar to civil litigation that would require disclosure of protected information," the Justice Department wrote in an accompanying memorandum. See "Memorandum in Support of the United States' Assertion of States Secrets Privilege," January 18, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/arar-memo-011805.pdf "Use of the state secrets privilege in courts has grown significantly over the last twenty-five years," wrote William G. Weaver and Robert M. Pallitto of the University of Texas at El Paso in a forthcoming study. And "recent cases indicate that Bush administration lawyers are using the privilege with offhanded abandon." Whatever its intent or justification, the consequence of increased reliance on the state secrets privilege is to curtail judicial review of controversial government activities in an area where oversight is already lacking or ineffective. The state secrets privilege was invoked last year to block the lawsuit of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds (SN, 05/18/04). That matter will be heard on appeal in the DC Circuit Court in April. Maher Arar is represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights (www.ccr-ny.org). PROLIFERATION SECURITY INITIATIVE The Bush Administration's Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) is a rather bold counterproliferation effort that seeks to promote international cooperation to stem global traffic in weapons of mass destruction-related materials. It functions not simply through enforcement of existing controls but also, and more controversially, through the interdiction of illicit commerce. The purposes and limitations of the PSI are summarized in a new report from the Congressional Research Service, "Proliferation Security Initiative," January 14, 2005: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/RS21881.pdf A State Department Fact Sheet on the Proliferation Security Initiative, newly updated on January 11, 2005, is here: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/01/psi011105.html More detailed background is provided in "Overcoming Challenges to the Proliferation Security Initiative" by Herbert N. Warden IV, a masters thesis prepared at the Naval Postgraduate School, September 2004: http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/warden.pdf SOME MORE CRS PRODUCTS Some new or newly updated reports from the Congressional Research Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following. "Border Security: Fences Along the U.S. International Border," January 13, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS22026.pdf "Terrorism and Security Issues Facing the Water Infrastructure Sector," updated January 5, 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL32189.pdf "Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces: Facts and Issues," updated January 10, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS21073.pdf "Capital Punishment: An Overview of Federal Death Penalty Statutes," updated January 5, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL30962.pdf "Security Classification Policy and Procedure: E.O. 12958, as Amended," updated January 7, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/97-771.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:50:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:35:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:17:27 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:48:34 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:10:40 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >>>It's more likely >>What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >>suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >>is involved. >>Fortunately, you've reassured us that we don't have to worry >>about anything so troublesome or complicated or heretical. >>Orthodoxy is safe. Well, at least until the next puzzling UFO >>sighting, which should be coming up any minute now. >WELL JERRY YOU HAVE JUST ADMITTED THAT YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED >IN UFO reports as possible sources of material which could lead >to developments in the human or physical sciences, only as >evidences for the presence of transcendent forces breaking into >the mundane world.... [etc., etc.] >Of course there are basic rules, one being scientific >naturalism which means that you don't invoke supernatural forces >or unknown trans human intelligences to get you out of a tight >corner. It's by playing by these rules that real knowledge is >gained. It may be very difficult and take a long time but the >paydirts can be very profound. The only "rule" of interest to pelicanists, of course, is the tradition of disbelief, to which they are touchingly faithful. >Please Jerry do take on board my advice not to go using a >capitalised Orthodoxy. It will give the impression, to those who >don't know you, that you might be the sort of crank who writes >600 pages letters in green ink explaining why the world is >hollow. We have here another reason I don't take pelicanists seriously. In his excitement Rogerson fails to note that I capitalized "orthodoxy" only because the word was at the beginning of the sentence. The rest of you may now reread the quoted paragraph above and indulge yourself not only in a horse laugh but in a new appreciation of the wildly self-righteous silliness of the disbelief-believer.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:15:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:39:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:57:12 -0400 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >Rich, why don't you just learn about the lifting capabilities of >a car sized balloon and then explain how a balloon can fly >against the wind and stop bothering the List with the rest of >this nonsense. Stop ignoring the facts will you. Easton's >theories are usually full of holes and he jumps in without any >supportable evidence. Most of his attempts at debunking are ill >informed and outright laughable. Don: We found an interesting thing about balloons and gondolas, which we put online at out blog-site (which is missing in action I'm told, but will fix if I can). You can see the material at http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com (maybe).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:16:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:43:24 -0500 Subject: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies I was thinking more about Brad Sparks' lament about almost non- existent scientific UFO research. After reviewing the literature, I think he has a point. But his point is aggravated by the large amount of work done in the psychic phenomena area. The number of academic, scientific, government funded research into psychic phenomena has been tremendous and has been going on for at least a century, but what has it to show for itself, the issue is STILL not settled by any stretch of the imagination, even though you can LOOK at the studies and see that there is some odd effect going on. So here we have an opportunity to view how a similar phenomena to UFOs can be treated in the scientific community. It can be taken seriously and be studied out the wazoo and get mixed, slightly positive results but make no effect on the world or society!!! This is astounding in my mind! The ramifications of REAL psychic phenonena are huge, with a substantial impact on world events, but positive scientific results make no apparent impact on our lives or "proving" the phenomena. So we may use this benchmark to examine the effects of scientific UFO study. We may get some "mild" positive results (like current and past representative UFO projects like Project Identification and Hessdalen), nothing dramatic like chunks of alien craft or bits of alien to analyze, but the net effect of this is neglible on the world.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:10:45 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:44:49 -0500 Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Hall >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:19:43 -0500 >Subject: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >Here is the extensive, and I mean extensive, listing of >documents which show balloon flights and related materials by >NASA and peripheral agencies: >http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/balloon.cat.txt >Those skilled in ferreting out the documents themselves, online, >can find the 1964 listing of cross-country flights sponsored by >or instigated by government agencies. >Those who think they are real UFO investigators should find what >might pertain to the Socorro sighting. >(We'll input some of what we found at our Blog and the other >web-sites we have.) >Rich Reynolds Rich, What is this list supposed to prove? It would be a tremendous waste of time to go through it all looking for anything relevant. Are you asserting that NASA (and peripheral agencies, whatever that might mean) conducted flights possibly relevant to Socorro? If so, please point out which reports you are citing. Otherwise why should anyone spend countless hours looking for something
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 New Varginha Case Revelations From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:15:12 -0200 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:53:54 -0500 Subject: New Varginha Case Revelations The Varginha Case, Brazil, 20 January 1996 - New revelations One of the physicians who treated the deceased policeman after the capture and contact with the ET of varginha makes new revelations. Source: Brazilian UFO Magazine # 102 http://www.ufo.com.br http://www.casovarginha.com.br Article of A.J. Gevaerd (gevaerd.nul), Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues (ubirajararodrigues.nul) Translation by C Sannazzaro, and summary by G. Bourdais Foreword by Gildas Bourdais In August 2004, was revealed in Brazil a long interview of researcher Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues with Dr Cesario L. Furtado, one of the physicians who had attempted, without succes, to heal the young policeman Marco Eli Chereze, deceased less than a month after having been in contact with one of the mysterious beings captured in Varginha, in January 1996. This interview has been published in the magazine UFO Brazil of A.J. Gevaerd (# 102), and on its web site http://www.ufo.com.br. It has been translated in french by Christian Sannazzaro, and published on the web site of GREPI http://www.ovni.ch. That interview being very long, and containing some repetitions as the conversation proceeded, Gildas Bourdais proposes here a shorter, adaptated version, in an effort of clarification. It is preceded by a presentation of the Varginha case by A.J. Gevaerd which is maintained here almost entirely. This new testimony comes in addition to those presented already in the French version of the book of Dr Roger Leir, published in France in January 2005 (before the American edition) under the title Des Extraterrestres captures a Varginha in Brazil. The New Roswell ("Extraterrestrials captured in Varginha, Brazil. The New Roswell"). One of the most remarkable testimonies in that book, also quite new, is the one of a doctor who had been commended by the military to perform an urgent surgery on one of the captured beings. A most intriguing aspect, which renews the picture of the Varginha case, is that this surgeon reveals he had an intense telepathic communication with that being at the end of the surgery. He has also made a precise description of the being, whose extraterrestrial nature seems beyond doubt. It is obviously an important reading as well. I =96 Presentation by A.J. Gevaerd One of the most serious facts of the "Varginha case" =96 and one of the most appalling =96 was the death, on February 15, 1996, of Corporal Marco Eli Chereze, who was then aged 23. As we know, he was part of the secret service of the Military Police (P2) which participated in the capture of the second creature in the night of January 20, 1996. The news of his death spread very fast, during the first months of the investigations, according to other sources, which revealed that a policeman had died because of a generalized infection after having been in contact with the ET. Faced with the gravity of the situation, the subject was treated with extreme caution by the investigators concerned with the case, while the lawyer, and consultant to the UFO review - Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues =96 was still searching for new information. Rodrigues managed to check with the City Hall that a policeman had really found death shortly after the capture of the creatures. The ufologist even obtained a copy of the death record, by which he was able to locate the family of the boy. The same witness who alerted the investigators about the death of Chereze also declared that the creature, at the moment of the capture, would have attempted a light reaction, obliging the policeman to touch his left arm without his gloves. For some of his colleagues, he would have been contaminated one way or another. Marco Eli Chereze The family of Marco Eli Chereze managed to have an inquiry opened by the local police precinct in order to establish eventual medical responsibilities for his death. At that time, searches seemed to be doomed to failure, but they are still under way at the present time. The parents did that because, a few days after January 20, a small tumor, similar to a furuncle, appeared under one of the armpits of Chereze. That tumor, according to what was learned at the time, would have been rapidly extracted by the doctor in charge, at the very premises where he was serving. We know today that nothing like happened. But what most drew the attention of the boy's family was the lack of informations about his health condition and, later, about his tragic death. Even months after his burial, nobody knew exactly the cause of his death. Autopsy refused The police superintendant himself, who lead the inquiry, was not able to be present at the autopsy of the policeman, in spite of his insistance in the face of the police corps in which Chereze served. The retention and/or dissimulation of information regarding that subject were purely and simply an affront to the family of Chereze and to the laws of the Nation. Even worse, such an affront was commited by the Military Police itself. It's only one year after the event of Varginha, on January 20, 1997 that things began to move, after the dissimulation of the facts had been denounced publicly with insistance, both by ufologists and all the press. Among the most disquieting facts put forward by the investigators, there was precisely the absence of informations regarding the death of Chereze, the most important piece of the headache named the Varginha Case. Thus, in the middle of a press meeting at the first anniversary of the event, investigators denounced the silence and obtained that the family, the police superintendant and the press had at last access to the autopsy file. From its contents, soldier Chereze would have died from a generalized infection. The policeman would have arrived at home, a certain night after the capture of the creature, suffering from a strong pain in the back. After the ablation of the tumor, he would have shown a gradual process of paralysis and fever which, becoming more serious, obliged him to go to the hospital Bom Pastor where he remained confined and practically isolated from his family during several days. Close relatives of the policeman, especially his sister, Marta Antonia Tavares, the one who went the most frequently to the hospital, could not have contact with him and had great difficulty to meet the doctor responsible for the treatment ; and it was even more difficult for them to discover what the illness was. Little time after his entry at the hospital Bom Pastor, the policeman was transfered to the hospital Regional Do Sul de Minas, also located in Varginha, the same where he would have brought, in the night of January 20, the creature he had captured. Chereze was led directly to the center for intensive care of the establishment and taken in charge by the very physician who reveals today publicly what he knows. This is where Chereze passed away at exactly 11 am on February 15, 26 days after his implication with the extraterrestrial. (Note by G. Bourdais: the following interview of the doctor gives a slightly different story) "Although all the tests and exams possibles were applied in the search of a diagnosis, he could not be saved in time", was to declare the superintendant in charge of the inquiry, in the course of his deposition before the judge of the "COMARCA". It was just discovered that the physicians who took care of Chereze at the time did not have the faintest idea of how to fight the illness which was striking him down. After the decease of the boy had been unveiled before the press present at the meeting of January 1997, the commander of the Military Police of the state of Minas Merais denied the facts immediately, including the presence of Chereze during that night of january 20. But, in order to protect such an absurd story, they invented an even more crude one. The family of Marco Eli Chereze confirmed that he was indeed on duty that night. Furthermore, he did not die alone because of his professional activities after the contact with an alien, but the creature he had captured died also after that contact, and much faster than Chereze. "It seems clear that the death of the policeman has become the less controlable and the most dangerous piece of the process of dissimulation imposed by the military of ESA and the brazilian Army", has acknowledged Marco Petit, co- editor of the magazine UFO, who participated actively in the inquiry. A.J. Gevaerd then presents the interview of Dr Cesario Lincoln Furtado by Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues, stressing the considerable research of Ubirajara on Varginha, and the "extreme importance" of this document. Here is now the interview. II =96 What was the cause of the death of policeman marco Eli Chereze? Interview of Dr Cesario Lincoln Furtado by Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues (summary by Gildas Bourdais) Dr Cesario Lincoln Furtado Ubirajara Franco Rodrigues (Ubirajara hereafter) asks Dr Cesario Lincoln Furtado (Dr Furtado hereafter) what was his role in the treatment of policeman Chereze in the hospitals of Varginha in 1996. The following is the summary of his answers to several questions, condensed in chronological order: Dr. Furtado =97 Marco Eli Chereze was first admitted in the Department "Prontomed" (emergency ward) of the hospital Regional by my colleague Armando Martins Pinto (cardiologist), on February 12, 1996. He entered there because of an intense pain in the lumber area. Dr Armando directed him to the hospital Bom Pastor where he was rapidly taken in charge by Dr Rene, who was cardiologist, general practitioner, and head of the Department of cardiology, and who ordered some exams. I was then involved, being at the time the supervisor (sort of coordinator) of cardiology at Bom Pastor. Questioned by Ubirajara, Dr Furtado explains that he worked in both hospitals. However, during that month of January, he did not work at the hospital Regional. He went every morning at the Bom Pastor. The reason why Chereze was sent to Bom Pastor is not clear to him: perhaps because of lack of room at the Regional, or rather because Chereze would have military medical coverage there. Dr. Furtado =97 The next day, at the hospital Bom Pastor, we asked for new exams because Chereze was still suffering in the lumber area. We asked for urine analyses, radios of the column, of the lumber and sacrum areas, in addition to an examination by an orthopedist because the pain was intense and we suspected the presence of an herniated disc. Dr Rogerio Lemos, in charge of orthopedy, examined him and said that there was no alteration and that the problem did not come from there. He told us to continue our search of the cause of the pain, as fever began to appear at that time. The blood analyses, which arrived in the afternoon, showed an hemogram with a leucocytosis, a deviation to the left and toxic granulations in the neutrophils. This was the sign of an important infection, highly capable of provoking a poisoning (toxemia) =96 because there were those toxic granulations. We then administered two antibiotics: penicillin and gentamicin, because we thought that there could be a pneumonia, owing to the localisation of the pain, or an urinary infection. His case was evaluated again on February 13: same condition. The next day, still at the hospital Bom Pastor, he spent the day with fever and pains, but at an "acceptable level". Until the morning of the 15, where he woke-up very tired and in a state of torpor, with signs of cyanosis. These symptoms seemed to confirm a general poisoning vehiculated by the blood, with a possible outcome in septicemia. He was then immediately transferred to the CTI (Intensive Care) of the hospital Regional, where he was put under medication. At the CTI of the hospital Regional, one of the first exams was for HIV, with a negative result. His state of health deteriorated rapidly and he died in a few hours, although he had been given antibiotics soon after his admission. This intrigued everybody and an autopsy was performed. It did not confirm an urinary infection, but that was later confirmed by the urine culture which had been ordered at the Bom Pastor. He also had a mild pneumonia. Said Dr. Furtado =97 "In my opinion, the urinary infection was the cause of septicemia, because the pulmonary infection was so minimal that it could not have been responsible for such a state". The close relatives of Chereze, mainly his sister Antonia, says Dr Furtadoo, suspected that the abcess Chereze had in the left armpit, after the military operation, had not been properly treated, which may have caused infections. But Dr Furtado denies that, because, when Chereze was admitted at the hospital, the abcess was practically cured. Furthermore, the abcess was due to another bacteria, a staphylococcus, which is normal for any small infection on the skin. The main point, insists Dr Furtado, is that the cause of his death =96 the causa mortis - has not been clarified. A few days before, the boy was in very good health, and at the beginning the infection looked relatively simple. He never had in the past any difficult treatment which could have caused an immunodeficiency. And it could not be congenital either because, if such had been the case, he would not have reached the age of 23 years in good health. This is why we can affirm that his immunodeficiency was "acquired", but we don't know how. His death was not caused by a pneumonia, neither by an urinary infection, nor by the abcess. Dr Furtado also says: At the beginning, the diagnosis of an urinary or kidney infection prevailed because of the presence of "enterobacteria". But, in less that 20 days, three bacterias attacked the policeman. THREE ! This is a very rare thing in the world. When Marco had a pulmonary infection, he already no longer had any immune defense. In that case, any bacteria can take control of a person. At the request of Ubirajara, Dr Furtado gives more medical details. Ubirajara asks: =AB In the hemogram sent by the laboratory of Bom Pastor, it is said: "Presence of cytoplasmic vacuoles. Presence of 8% of thin toxic granules in the neutrophils. Discret polikilocytosis". How can you, as a physician, interpret the presence of 8% of those small toxic granulations in the neutrophils? Dr. Furtado =97 They appear in the neutrophils of a person who is victim of the agression of a very virulent bacteria. This provokes a "battlefield", if we may say, which could reach 50% ou 60%. The file mentions 8% because it refers to the first blood analysis. And that already demonstrates that there is an infection, which led to the prescription of antibiotics. Their presence denotes an important and serious infection. It is not frequent, except in serious cases. Ubirajara =97 in ufological circles, when some researchers will read this statement in the results of the hemogram, they are going to interpret that those 8% of toxic granulations were "unknown things", the presence of a new substance, or yet something else. Dr. Furtado =97 No, nothing like that, absolutely nothing. As I said already, they don't appear in other infections but are frequent in serious infections. Ubirajara =97 During the time that you took care of the policeman, did you notice, at the Bom Pastor as well as the Regional, the presence of any unknown physician, from outside? Dr. Furtado =97 No, I did not notice any. I did not see either the superiors of Marco Eli Chereze, whether of the police or the army. They did not look for me, not even to collect the least information regarding the boy, during the two or three days. Ubirajara =97 There is, in the medical inquiry following Marco's death, the deposition of a dermatologist. He mentions a blood infection, in which red cells would have been attacked by white cells. According to this dermatologist, those 8% in the blood examination could have denoted a contagion by the skin of an eventual toxic substance which would have attacked the red cells. What do you think of that? Dr. Furtado =97 This has nothing to do. There is no connection between these elements.The report also says that a few days could have passed before the process materialized, but it is not so. If there were such a contagion by the skin, it's effect would be blazing. We would be decimated everyday that way. Ubirajara =97 Could you see the body? Dr. Furtado =97 No, I could not. It is not usual. After the death, the body is taken for the autopsy and there is no other recourse. After a person is deceased, you inform the family =96 and in the case in question, I was not even the person who did that, because when they took him to the CTI, I transferred my responsabilities to the other doctor at the CTI. Ubirajara =97 Did the family think of asking for an exhumation of the body? Dr. Furtado =97 Not that I know of. In fact, an exhumation would not have brought any proof of what really caused the death. As for the death certificate, the cause of the death was not mentioned because there was not the faintest element permitting to guarany anything. Ubirajara =97 You mentioned that a member of his family had affirmed that he wanted to know what this illness was about, because the policeman had participated in the capture of something strange. Was this told to you before, or after his death? Dr. Furtado =97 A few days later, when his death was still recent. I don't remember very well, but his sister was in great shock, and she came to talk with me. Ubirajara =97 let's stick to the facts regarding this interview. But, did you notice any other movement at the time, in one of these hospitals? Dr. Furtado =97 I heard of many things, but I did not witness any particular movement. However, rumors were thriving at the maternity ward of the hospital Regional, but I never worked there, being not an obstetrician. Furthermore, the maternity was somewhat separate, the entrance and the rest of it. As for the hospital Humanitas, where I also worked at the time, I did not notice anything. Not even comments between doctors, nurses, and office personnels. Ubirajara asks further if there could be isolated areas in those hospitals. Dr Furtado explains that, at the Regional, there was also a reserved aisle, used for contagious patients. At the Humanitas, there were few movements, and there wee many rooms without activity. But, in 1996, there were no longer isolation premises, except in hospitals specialized in contagious illnesses. Ubirajara =97 Do you see other interesting aspects to mention about that episode? Dr. Furtado =97 Listen, there is that story reported by the family (regarding the capture of the being), about which I don't know anything. But, we don't find any rational explanation for the death of this boy. Because it was terribly fast, you understand? Ubirajara =97 Could it be caused by a totally unknown bacteria, however improbable? Dr. Furtado =97 Yes. Well, if we talk of something completely unknown, it is obvious that we could not risk any conjectures. There is no answer possible. Now, could something have penetrated inside his organism, something equally unknown, which would have deprived him of his immunity system? This is another question without answer. Ubirajara =97 Could you tell what type of thing would be susceptible to provoke that, for instance? Dr. Furtado =97 I don't know. That might be an injectable "poison", an infection of injured skin, at the face or foot. It might be an injury caused by a nail, which would provoke tetanos, etc. But we know tetanos. A multitude of things, I might say, and this is just to enumerate some examples of what might have contaminated that boy and deprived him of immune resistance. I repeat that I say that it 'could be'. Ubirajara =97 Are you telling me that the death of Marco Eli Chereze was a strange death? Dr. Furtado =97 A strange death, without rational explanation. In the course of my professional life, I have seen already two persons, aged about 25, die of an infection, but we knew that both had immune deficiency. Both of them, if I recall well, had had removal of the spleen (splenectomy) following a past
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Recent UK Press Articles From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:23:04 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:57:14 -0500 Subject: Recent UK Press Articles I submitted the following to the Letters Page of the Independent. I have no idea if they will publish it, or if they do, how much they will cut out of it, but they might take an interest. Joe ----- On 22nd January, The Independent published an article by Robert Verkaik (Uncovered At Last: The Sightings Of Strange Flying Objects Found In Britain's 'X-Files) about the recent release at the National Archives of various UFO documents. In it, he made an error, describing the MoD department which dealt with UFO reports as "SF4", which ought to have been S4f(Air) - he may have thought that the department was the official Science Fiction (SF) department at the Mod, which in some ways might be considered more apt. The following day, The Mail On Sunday published a similar article by Glen Owen ("A close encounter with Britain's X-Files"). In fact, it was remarkably similar, right down to the the identical error relating to the MoD's Science Fiction department. Not to be outdone, The Journal, a local newspaper in the North of England, published another article on the same theme the following day by Daniel Thomson, and yes, it contained an identical error. Isn't it astounding that three different journalists working for three different newspapers all made identical errors on three consecutive days! I wonder if this has anything to do with the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 NASA Database Of Balloon Flights From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:27:59 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:00:53 -0500 Subject: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:19:43 -0500 >Subject: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >Here is the extensive, and I mean extensive, listing of >documents which show balloon flights and related materials by >NASA and peripheral agencies: >http://library.gsfc.nasa.gov/Databases/Balloon/balloon.cat.txt >Those skilled in ferreting out the documents themselves, >online, can find the 1964 listing of cross-country flights >sponsored by or instigated by government agencies. >Those who think they are real UFO investigators should find >what might pertain to the Socorro sighting. >(We'll input some of what we found at our Blog and the other >web-sites we have.) Tell you what, Rich, it's your unsupportable theory, so why don't you waste your time trying to disprove it by poring through these documents. Let's see your investigative ability at work. If we went that route every time some one came up with one of these half baked theories you would next have us trying to eliminate car sized albatrosses [checks with the Audubon society] freakish meteorites [checks ad nausea through meteorite data bases] that have the power to lift off after having impacted the ground. And what about the databases that must exist on low volume, car sized balloons though they unto fore must have been labeled "top secret" due to their extraordinary capability of lifting two human bodies, plus the burner and the fuel and the basket off the ground and then leave the area against the wind. And don't forget to throw in the mini-USAF pilots while you are at it. You see Rich, this is the usual debunker's ploy of accusing the researchers of not supporting their data with research, when in fact it is debunker's innate laziness that is the culprit. You are not the first. You can't just throw these theories out when your theory doesn't fit the scenario to begin with. Come back when you can find something that fits the bill rather than hanging on Easton's tattered coattails. The next thing you will be trying to convince us of is that the Earth is only 6,000 years old or some other such nonsense.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re-Hashing Old UFO Reports - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:10:08 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:08:02 -0500 Subject: Re-Hashing Old UFO Reports - Warren Fellow Listerions, There has been much talk lately, traversing various threads on time spent revisiting/researching/reinvestigating old UFO/Flying saucer reports etc. Much has been bandied about, and I have been reading the posts with great interest, surprise and frustration; to that end I thought I would put my two cents in from my own perspective: First and foremost, the reason to revisit old cases, for me, is to do my own research! If I am drawing a hypothesis from someone else's work, then I at the very least would like to check that work. For example; one of my ongoing cases is The Maury Island Incident. This case is viewed as a hoax by most Ufologists and lay people alike; however, most haven't done their own research, and have come to that conclusion from the work of others, or even worse the opinion of that person from the work of others etc. Most people aren't aware of the fact that MI was a multi-witness case (aside from Dahl and Crisman); most people aren't aware that the last survivor of the ill-fated B-25 which took the lives of the first publicly known military UFO investigators (Davidson & Brown) actually handled the disk bits [sic] that was on the plane, given to D & B by Crisman. Most people don't know that Davidson was found in the plane wreckage still strapped in his seat with his feet on the peddles. Most people don't know that Dahl was pro-UFO until he took his last breath. (As reported to me by his daughter). Most people don't know that one of the wealthiest men in Washington state knew Harold Dahl well and attended his funeral. Most people don't know that within a couple weeks of Dahl's sighting there was another reported in the newspapers describing a craft very similar to Dahl's account. Most people don't know that the paper's were informed of Dahl's sighting by another witness to the event. I could go on with this particular case and then start on a few others that I am involved in, but I think you get the point. As younger folk become attracted to Ufology, what are we to say to them? Just take what I say about past events as the gospel, and wait for new reports to pop up? Another point about historic UFO reports/sightings etc., is that early on, everyone paid attention! That is it was front page news, and the military was investigating the phenomenon! It wasn't tabloid fodder, or whispers by the water cooler with jibes and guffaws--it was serious business! I might add our beloved government, in my view wasn't as good as it is today (after much practice) in being so covert. Much fell through the cracks. As a researcher of Historic UFO events, for the most part there isn't a month that goes by where my eyebrows aren't raised by something I wasn't aware of. In my view it should be a prerequisite for newbies to study their UFO history before entering the field. A prime example of the need to know our history is evidenced on our List on a daily basis, that is the same heated debates, arguments etc., that go on today, took place more then 50 years ago! We must realize, that the present state of things is a consequence of the past and to know that past is the navigational tool for our future. Finally, UFOs, flying disks [sic], saucers etc., in history are damn fascinating!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:10:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:00:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 >Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma] <snip> >My argument here is that David Rudiak and Jerry Clark seem to >have dismissed the balloon possibility for Socorro. The matter >is closed for them, pretty much. But I'm thinking it may not >be... that's all. Rich, Larry Robinson wasn't able to defend his theory very well when this debate heated up in the late 90's and Easton continues to promote it. David Rudiak and Jerry Clark have dismissed the theory, as have numerous others who've looked at it, and yet it seems to come around again and again and again. At what point do we finally decide the theory has been debated as much as necessary? Or perhaps more importantly, at what point do we agree to disagree on our theories with regard to the event? I think it's important to note that the Socorro case was one that Project Blue Book spent some time and effort on, but wasn't able to resolve what Lonnie Zamorra had seen. While Hot Air Balloons were relatively unknown in the mid 60's, I would strongly suspect that the Air Force would have had some idea of what they were and wouldn't have been confused by them. This is a mystery that will not be resolved without a grand revelation of some sort, or the use of a time machine. Larry's (and Easton's) theories are as relevent as the reader interprets them to be, but they obviously aren't supported by many in this
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:19:19 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:05:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >>>What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >>>suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >>>is involved. >>In that case, I think Peter and I have very different ideas >>about what is 'prosaic' than you do. I think that some of the >>ideas that Peter has suggested above are quite a challenge to >>the current orthodoxy, particularly issues on how the human >>brain interacts with the envirionment. >I don't believe for a second that either of you is a closet >heretic, nor would any other sensible observer. The psychosocial >function of psychosocial ufology is not to add to perceptual >psychology's or neuroscience's knowledge base - as has been >demonstrated on this List, PSH advocates are effectively >illiterate on those subjects - but to reassure us that all is >well and that our lives and the universe are well in order. In >other words, darkness is just daylight misperceived. That's >something a whole lot of people want - need - to believe. >>No, I grant you, he's not talking about extraterrestrial >>spacecraft. But then you don't either, do you? You just bang on >>about "structured craft" which have performance characteristics >>beyond anything currently produced on earth? (see UpDates, ad >>nauseam) But the ETH? Never mentioned it, guv. >The notion that we ought to be intellectually modest about what >we think we "know" about the UFO phenomenon's causes (as opposed >to its appearances) is, I realize, an - if you will pardon the >expression - alien one to the pelicanist, to whom the phrase "we >do not know" is as poison to the tongue I do appreciate, >however, your continuing obsession with my phrasing, which >reassures me I must be on to something, "guv." >For the rest of you, if you're interested in my views of why >it's so hard to get a more precise handle on the questions UFOs >and other anomalies raise, see the intro to my book >Unidentified! (2nd ed., 1998) and "From Mermaids to Little Gray >Men" in The Anomalist 8 (2000), pp. 11-31. I assume you mean the following from The Unexplained: "Anomalies of the highest strangeness dwell in a twighlight zone of ambiguity. To say that you have "seen" one is not necessarily to say that the anomaly lives on in the world when it is not briefly occupying your vision and scaring the daylights out of you. We may experience unbelievable things, but our experiences of them tell us nothing about them except that they can be experienced. You can "see" a mermaid or a werewolf but how impressive the experience may be to you, the rest of us cannot infer from that the mermaids or werewolves are "real". In fact we can be certain that they are not. And that is all we can be certain of, becauce all we have done here is tom remove one explanation (that mermaids and werewolves live in the world)from consideration while failing to put another in its place" - page xxv of the 1998 edition There is nothing that John Rimmer or I would disagree with in that paragraph. But when it comes to trying to start thinking about just how we might see things that aren't actually there, and suggesting some lines of enquiry you start shouting pelicanist, ranting on about Orthodoxy, and hinting about resurrecting the late Scott Rogo's "The Phenomenon" If you object to my human and prosaic explanations (but personally I would never ever describe humans or their imaginations or cultures as prosaic) what is your presumably non
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:23:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:08:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:49:32 -0800 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:04:15 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:40:41 -0500 >>>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>Those UFO indentations everyone says needed high-tonnage to >>create were not analyzed in such a way as to prove that. >What is your source for making such a statement? Or is it just >wishful thinking on your part because you just don't want to >face facts that conflict with your contrarian view? >You seemingly want a hybrid craft that is weightless and floats >like a balloon to explain the Socorro silent flight phase, yet >simultaneously heavy enough or hitting hard enough to account >for the substantial pad impressions on the ground. >Do you honestly think a "balloon-hybrid" weighing almost nothing >at all could make such indentations, or break a large imbedded >rock at the edge of one of the landing pads? >Note we are again talking about TONS of weight, not some >imaginary, unworkable hot-air hybrid weighing only a few hundred >pounds. The true LEM situation is similar to the one ton car >example dropping from a small height, but not at all similar to >an ultra-light weight craft dropping from a much greater height. >I am still waiting for you or Easton or Larry Robinson to deal >in actual specifics rather than making these sweeping, >handwaving arguments. I want you to explain to me how an object >as small as the Socorro craft could have the necessary buoyancy >to loft two men, and everything else, if it were a balloon. David: We've placed online at: http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com a piece from NASA about balloon gondolas - experimental gondolas - used by various government agencies. These gondolas were heavier than the one you presume is being argued in the Socorro case. Seek out the piece, it's a PDF and takes a while to load. If will either confirm your physics in the matter, or open the door to the possibility that Zamora experienced something akin to what the gondola piece describes...in detail, with the math, and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:44:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:10:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:50:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>UFOs sighted near mountains might imply a need >>to avoid radar or remote areas to hide. >A good point and worthy of analysis. Yes, and there is more to consider than what little I have indicated in my reply/post. One of my primary contentions is we need, above all, to sort the wheat from the chaff. Since we may be facing a combination of man-made UFOs, misidentifications and true unknowns (I consider a true unknown to be unidentified to the military _as_well_as_ the civilian population = a real UFO), we must at least make some attempt to sort UFOs according to various categories rather than just "ours" and "theirs". It is just not that simple yet has basicaly been the status quo for UFO lists, UFO organizations as well as researchers and investigators for many years. We need to look at the data with less bias and more objective analysis of possible patterns whether we like what we find or not. >Dr. Rutledge in his book speculates that the UFOs >seen in the Piedmont, Missouri area were either due >to poor aircraft radar coverage of the area and/or >geological features. However, why there are >temporal distributions may be too hard a nut >to crack. We must also be careful not to engage in too much speculation. When I mentioned geological features, I was referring to areas which offer suitable camouflage or features that are more adaptable to the technological aspects of CC&D. We must not ignore any geological resources but until we see a UFO mining for gold or whatever, I'd stay focused on the surface attributes. >>As for UFOs demonstrating "specific intent"... I >>would think their mere presence near secure >>facilities demonstrates intent - specific or vague. >>And just because they haven't blown one up >>doesn't mean they won't someday. >Ah, my favorite hypothesis! Yes, we can't count on ET-type UFOs >to be nice guys. However, the data seem to mostly illustrate >observation rather than intervention. So far. But remember, the terrorists that rammed those planes into the Twin Towers probably "hovered" around the buildings doing observation for some time before they finally attacked. Lack of aggression does not preclude lack of intent. I'm sure that if any of those UFOs hanging nuclear facilities, weapons storage facilities or anywhere in our air space are not ours, our militaries are not just sitting around saying, "Oh, yawn, their are just taking a little look-see. Nothing to worry about."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:55:36 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:18:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell - >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:47:26 -0800 >Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:23:55 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:33:16 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Bonnybridge Mission To Twin With Roswell >>>Exactly what does Councillor Buchanan and his gang have to >>>offer the citizens of Roswell? Just what are Bonnybridge and >>>Roswell supposed to have in common? The ability of both to "see >>>the future"? >>>I presume what the councillors really want is the chance to >>>see some of the magnificent scenery of New Mexico, at council >>>tax payer's expense. >>If Mr. Allan lives in the Roswell area, I apologize for what >>I'm going to say. But the magnificent scenery of New Mexico >>isn't found there. . . . If the Bonnybridge councillors expect a >>scenic visit, they're in for a surprise. ><snip> >Carlsbad Caverns is not far to the South. That should lend an >air of mystery to the scene at least. >I wonder how much actual benefit such sister-city arrangements >actually provide. It might not be enough to justify >intercontinental junkets. Larry, Greg & Chris What's in it for Councillor Buchanan is the opportunity to selflessly serve his community by promoting a massive Disney- style "UFO theme park" fronted by (I think) a Dutch development company. I would not like to be misunderstood as doubting anybody's altruism when I say that the land being considered has the same street address as property owned by Billy Buchanan and his brother (I'm sure that's coincidence). Yes, there will be those intercontinental junkets to sweeten the bitter pill of all the hard work involved, but if we're talking scenic visit I venture to suggest, based on the above, that the Mayor of Roswell may get the better end of the deal. Living as I do not a million miles away from Bonnybridge, I can reassure him that the presently-snowy mountains and glens of Highland Perthshire, beginning at the highland boundary fault only about 20 miles north of Bonnybridge, are very picturesque and well worth a visit. Better than a dodgy theme park anyway. Frankly I'll be amazed if the thing ever gets built, as the "UFO capital" status of Bonnybridge is the merest bubble of promotional gas as Chris Allen said.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:40:18 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:21:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:15:18 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:57:12 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma ><snip> >>Rich, why don't you just learn about the lifting capabilities >>of a car sized balloon and then explain how a balloon can fly >>against the wind and stop bothering the List with the rest of >>this nonsense. Stop ignoring the facts will you. Easton's >>theories are usually full of holes and he jumps in without any >>supportable evidence. Most of his attempts at debunking are ill >>informed and outright laughable. >Don: >We found an interesting thing about balloons and gondolas, >which we put online at out blog-site (which is missing in action >I'm told, but will fix if I can). >You can see the material at http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com (maybe). >Thanks for the note. I take your advice seriously. Rich, I'm not sure what a blog site is but I went there anyway and downloaded the PDF file. I found nothing in there that addresses your theory that a car sized balloon could lift said gondola, crush pads, 6061-T6 mil-spec'ed aluminum channel framing-which I have in my homebuilt BTW-the sandbags, rope-loops, ropes, parachutes, fuel cannisters and nozzle system. If you added in a couple of standard sized pilots at 175 pounds [that's the old standard for men] and their gear and possibly oxygen, I'll garauntee you that that thing will sit anchored to the ground until it rots because it could not lift off. Remember there is burnt bushes in this event as well which denotes [from your balloon theory] that this would have to have been a hot-air balloon. An even greater impossibility. And Zamora gave the direction of the UFO's departure which was against the prevailing winds at a good rate of speed. Balloons drift with the wind at the wind's speed, not against it. Unless you can get these two facts, the volume of the balloon as being only automobile sized and the wind problem, there is no way this was a balloon. IYou are trying to prove an orange is a tomato because both are the same shape.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 25 Re: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV - From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:47:04 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:23:55 -0500 Subject: Re: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV - >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:10:31 -0800 >Subject: Re: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV >>From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:02:45 -0600 >>Subject: 'J-ROD Autopsy' Film Released By Japanese TV >>A J-ROD autopsy film has been released by Japanese TV during the >>two-hour "live" special broadcast on December 31, 2004. ><snip> >>This is going to be a good one for discussion and debate. The >>film is good and looks like the real thing awakens many doubts >>in my opinion. However the general opinion of researchers and >>collagues will mark the appropiate definition. >Hopefully it isn't this J-Rod autopsy: >http://www.ufowatchdog.com/jrod.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:05:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 05:57:38 -0500 Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Reynolds Richard: I've put links to some documents online at UpDates. But here they are for you: http://www.nott.com/Pages/design.php http://www.nott.com/Pages/Aerostat_AN_1-2.pdf And go to our blog-site at http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com and click on the Rudiak title. The material is a PDF and will load slowly perhaps, and it's pretty dry stuff, but seems to indicate that Rudiak didn't cover all the bases in his rebuttal of Larry Robinson's and James Easton's hypotheses that Zamora may have seen a experimental balloon.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 4 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 20:56:06 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:00:35 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 4 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 4 January 26, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ UFOs DOMINATE SKY OVER HAWKE BAY, NEW ZEALAND A major UFO flap has broken out in the Hawke Bay area of New Zealand's North Island, with dozens of sightings in the past few weeks. On Christmas Day, Saturday, December 25, 2004, "there was a sighting of a yellow-orange ball out at sea near Bay View, Napier. The witness said it gleamed through the clouds. However, he also claims that it might have been a Thai 'wish lantern.'" On Boxing Day, Sunday, December 26, 2004, "at Waimarama, a really bright orange-red UFO was spotted by a Havelock North resident and his brother. The light brightened before moving downward slowly and reportedly shooting out of sight." On Monday, December 27, 2004, "a witness reported seeing a 'reddy-orangey gleaming ball' over Cape Kidnappers," 25 kilometers (15 miles) north of Waimarama. "The UFO zigzagged across the sky before stopping and then moving straight up, out of sight. The sighting lasted 15 minutes. That night, witnesses on the beach at Cape Kidnappers "watched an object in the sky for 20 minutes with binoculars. One witness described it as 'the size of a kitchen table or bigger,'" after observing the UFO through binoculars. On Tuesday, December 28, 2004, at 3 p.m., "a Havelock North man inadvertently captured an image of a UFO while taking photographs in the Maraekakaho area. Discovering the object in one photo, he enlarged the image, and it showed a distinctive flying-saucer shape." "That same Tuesday, at 10 p.m., a Waimarama man and his son-in-law saw an orange object in the sky. The object remained silent the entire time before moving off." On Friday, December 31, 2004, "a Hastings resident and her husband saw an unblinking orangey-red light in the sky. Her husband said the light looked something like a hot-air balloon but did not behave as a balloon would." "Another Hastings resident at a different location saw a big bright orange object coming down from under the clouds at 9:30 p.m. The object remained for 15 minutes and was photographed five times" by observers on the ground. "The photos did not come out and the date on the digital camera was mysteriously re-set." "Another Hastings man also spotted the object while at the service station. He said it moved around in a long arc and was following a course through the sky." "Also in Hastings," located 100 kilometers (60 miles) northwest of Waimarama, "yet another resident saw a red- orange glowing ball at 9:20 p.m. while doing the dishes. His son-in-law also spotted the object and thought it could have been a MiG fighter jet he had heard of that was owned by a Hawke Bay man." "Just before midnight, a real estate manager claims to have seen three UFOs from a Taupo crossing guard. They appeared from the western horizon. The UFOs were glowing too brightly to be aircraft," he said. "They headed towards the south before he lost sight of them." On Monday, January 3, 2005, "two witnesses photographed a red object in the sky from Waimarama. This was the second UFO one of the witnesses has seen in recent weeks. The object appeared to be hovering over the back fields before heading northeast" over Hawke Bay "and then heading up." (See the New Zealand newspaper Hawke Bay Today for January 15, 2005. Many thanks to ufologist Tony Lucas for this newspaper article.) MORE UFOs SIGHTED IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA On Wednesday, January 19, 2005, at 2:55 a.m., Justice Doherty saw something strange in the sky over Redondo Beach, California (population 63,261). "Since before Thanksgiving, I have been witnessing strange anomalies in the sky," he reported, "Many of the laser lights being shined at aircraft are coming from space or satellites. I had concentrated my attention at 12 o'clock high (directly overhead--J.T.) with my focus on the whole sky above me. The sky was clear except for the crisscrossing of large aircraft plumes (Chemtrails?-- J.T.)." "I was looking for the lower dots of light that I've been seeing a lot of lately when this very bright white object came from my right, almost north, to my left, almost south. At arm's length, it was just a size smaller than a golf ball. The object came very fast and, as it reached" five stars of the constellation Ursa Major, "it slowed as it passed the third star, stopped, and then it went out in front of the fourth star. I saw that it was a black circle (sphere) because the last star on the left (south) was the brightest in the sky. It illuminated the periphery of the black object for a full second at least. Then it was all over." Redondo Beach is on Highway 1, the Pacific Coast Highway, approximately 14 miles (21 kilometers) southwest of the Los Angeles Civic Center. A UFO was seen in Carpinteria, Calif. (population 14,194), close to Santa Barbara and the beaches of the "squid invasion," on Saturday, January 22, 2005. That Saturday, at 3 a.m., eyewitness D.L. Green reported, "I took some video of this strange object, which was in the southwest part of the sky. I am not used to "the technology so I made need help to download an image to you." "It was a flashing bright light, moving horizontally in the sky. I woke my husband up to confirm it. The video camera was on a stationary tripod so no external motion was induced. We were watching its movement for five minutes, then it blinked out. It was a bright light rotating in the sky, changing color from bright white to green and back. It was also changing shape from a pinpoint to a large sphere and then back. Occasionally shifting in the sky in a triangular pattern while suddenly changing color and shape." Carpinteria is on Highway 101 approximately 12 miles (19 kilometers) southeast of Santa Barbara. (Email Form Reports) COUPLE SEES A UFO IN CHINO VALLEY, ARIZONA On Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 8:30 p.m., eyewitnesses Leslie and Marc were at their home in Chino Valley, Arizona (population 7,835). As they looked northeast "towards the San Francisco Peaks," they "saw glowing luminous objects on the horizon. Towards Chino Valley, we heard a humming sound. There were light misty clouds that obscured the view above the (San Francisco) mountains. We saw blue lights pulsing strobe-like. Lit up the entire valley." "After a while, Marc called 911, which referred him to the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration--J.T.)." "And I left a message," Marc added, "Nobody called me back. There was also the sound of two jets flying over that area. We looked in the local newspaper, but there was nothing. Does anyone know about this?" Chino Valley is on Arizona Highway 89, approximately 15 miles (25 kilometers) north of Prescott. (Email Form Report) LUMINOUS UFO SIGHTED IN POTTSVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA On Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 6:45 p.m., Mike C. was driving home in Pottsville, Pennsylvania (population 15,549) when he saw "something what I first thought was a small plane approaching from the southeast. But there was no sound or movement from it. The object was bright, small and round with no clear definition. I stopped and looked at it through binoculars but I could not make out any details." "However, the light from it was like looking at the North Star (Polaris --J.T.) For one minute, it was very bright, and then it started fading, then disappeared. It appeared stationary at first, and then it moved slightly downward without stop for two minutes." Pottsville, Pa. is on Route 61 approximately 32 miles (53 kilometers) north of Reading. (Email Form Report) IAF SAYS RAIGAD EVENT WAS A "SONIC BOOM" "A mysterious fireball said to have shaken the earth in India this week is now being blamed on a sonic boom created by a low-flying fighter jet." "The Indian Air Force (IAF) is claiming responsibility for the incident, which panicked residents out of their homes on Tuesday night," January 11, 2005. "'We monitored the news on the electronic media,' Wing Commander Tarun Kumar Singha told the (newspaper) Mumbai Mid-Day. 'Gradually, when news coverage started coming in, we felt it necessary to inform the masses about the incident.'" "Singha identified the plane as a Sukhoi Su-30 Mach 1 fighter aircraft" which was "flying at low altitude while on a routine flight exercise in the Panvel-Khopoli area." "The jump to supersonic speed was not part of the exercise." "'A departmental inquiry will be conducted to determine what led the pilot to increase the speed by going supersonic. Even the pilot does not know the impact that was felt on the ground,' Singha said." Authorities believe the sonic boom was caused by a low-flying Sukhoi Su-30 "said to have flown from Pune to Mumbai between 8:30 and 8:45 p.m." Raigad district commissioner "Sunil Tatkare said police have dispatched teams to the area 'to find out if there was a boom.'" "Khalapur police said teams had left for Vawashi village where there were complaints of a deafening boom. Meanwhile, there was some confusion regarding the possible crash of an aircraft in the Raigad district." (See the Indian newspaper Mumbai Mid-Day for January 15, 2005, "Earth-shaking fireball said to be sonic boom." Many thanks to Daniel Wilson for this newspaper article.) (Editor's Note: For more on the Panvel-Khopoli fireball, see UFO Roundup, volume 10, number 3 for January 19, 2005, "Fireball and sky boom frighten many in India," page 2.) TWO FLASHING UFOs SEEN AT WARRINGTON, CHESHIRE On Sunday, January 16, 2005, at 8:42 p.m., Bill Carr and his girlfriend were driving through Warrington, Cheshire, UK when the lady spotted something very unusual in the night sky. "My girlfriend first saw two fire-like objects flashing in the sky. They were very big and appeared to be very wide," Bill reported, "I looked and they appeared to be heading towards Liverpool from Winwick. The objects blinked and moved very fast across the horizon at low altitude. I turned and saw two of the objects flashing in separate areas of the sky." "I tried to pull the car over to the side of the motorway for a better view, but the objects disappeared quickly. There were bright orange at the centre. Very wide and oval-shaped. They floated in several directions through the sky before vanishing. I'd say they were 200 feet above ground. Too fast to describe." (Email Form Report) STRANGE WORLD OF TITAN "New pictures of Saturn's moon Titan and other observations show that the Huygens spacecraft landed on a spongy surface like wet sand or soft clay, possibly saturated with liquid methane." "The sky was orange, with patches of ground fog. Even the fist-sized lumps of ice were a dusty orange. Beyond the (landing) site, deep drainage channels appeared to lead to a shoreline in the distance." "But a 'shore' to what? Scientists, in their first reports on Saturday," January 15, 2005, "on results of the successful Huygens landing, said the flat, dark area beyond the bright drainage terrain might still hold hydrocarbons, presumably methane, that can remain liquid in Titan's climate of minus 290 degrees Fahrenheit." "'This is a view, an aspect of Titan we had never seen,' Martin Tomasko of the University of Arizona, leader of the imaging team, said at a news conference at the European Space Operations Center" in Darmstadt, Germany. "'I have to say I was blown away by what I saw,' says ESA science director David Southwood." "In landing on Titan, the most distant locale ever touched by humankind (Titan is 1.3 billion miles from Earth--J.T.), 'Huygens shows Europe can deliver when it comes to space,' Southwood says." "Unblemished data transmitted by Huygens exceeded scientists' wildest hopes, despite a glitch that disabled one of the probe's radio channels. ESA plans an inquiry." "Huygens entered Titan's atmosphere Friday," January 14, 2005, "a milestone long anticipated as the highlight of the $3.27 billion international Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its 31 moons. The probe left the Cassini on Christmas Eve," December 24, 2004. "Burning through the (Titanian) clouds at more than 13,000 miles per hour (20,000 kilometers per hour), the craft slowed and floated on three parachutes for more than two hours in the thick atmosphere, carried by surprisingly strong winds. On landing, the probe sent images and data for 70 minutes before Cassini moved out of transmission range." "Images show an orange-tinted world where channels and gullies run down to what may be a methane lake. Huygens landed in what appears to be a channel bed, surrounded by fist-sized ice blocks." "The landing site was covered with a thick crust. Underneath that is material with the consistency of wet sand or clay, or perhaps 'creme brulee,' says mission scientist John Zarnecki of the United Kingdom's Open University." "'Outside Earth, Titan is clearly the most exciting place in the solar system,' says planetary geologist David Kring of the University of Arizona-Tucson, home of the Huygens imaging team. 'We have to remember that seeing the surface so well is kind of a bonus. Huygens was primarily designed to study the moon's atmosphere as it floated down to the surface.'" "The thin crust at the landing site indicates arid weather, Kring suggests. Methane rain probably falls only rarely, he says, perhaps percolating through the crust to the wetter material below." "Titan's haze also is somewhat thicker than anticipated, Zarnecki says, which has hindered attempts by the Cassini orbiter to get a good look at the moon." (See USA Today for January 17, 2005, "Images of Titan amaze scientists," page 5D and the Duluth, Minn. News-Tribune for January 16, 2005, "Snapshots from Titan: Orange sky, mysterious shore," page 14A.) OPPORTUNITY FINDS A METEORITE ON MARS "One of NASA's Mars rovers, Opportunity, has bumped into what is probably an iron meteorite lodged in the Martian sand, mission scientists say." "Opportunity landed nearly a year ago in the Meridiani Planum region of Mars and soon discovered evidence of water in the planet's past." "In a presentation at the American Astronomical Society meeting in San Diego last week, mission chief scientist Steve Squyres of Cornell University said the rover's discarded heat shield bounced to a landing next to what could be the first iron meteorite seen on another planet." "'I've told my team we shouldn't linger at this spot. It's clear this is where metal falls from the sky on Meridiani,' Squyres joked." Squyres "noted that the rover has analyzed the heat shield, discarded as the probe landed, and found that it performed well during its fiery entry into the Martian atmosphere." The shield "protected the rover from temperatures of up to 2,000 degrees (Fahrenheit) during the landing on Mars" in January 2004. "Opportunity's twin mobile geology lab, Spirit, is exploring the other side of Mars." (See USA Today for January 17, 2005, "Opportunity knocks up against meteorite," page 4D.) Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more UFO, Fortean and paranormal news from around the planet Earth--and occasionally, Titan and Mars--brought to you by "the paper that goes home--UFO Roundup." See you next time! UFO ROUNDUP: Copyright 2005 by Masinaigan Productions, all rights reserved. Readers may post news items from UFO Roundup on their Web sites or in news groups 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.nul> or use the Sighting Report Form at: http://www.ufoinfo.com/submit/sightings.shtml -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Website comments: John Hayes <webmaster.nul> UFOINFO: http://www.ufoinfo.com Official Archives for UFO Roundup, AUFORN Australian
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:21:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:01:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:16:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >I don't understand this. What level of scientific results is >needed to make any difference to the world? Why bother since it >seems all the effort is ignored or cannot compete against the >nominal paradign or status quo? The problem, as I see it, after 63 years on the planet, is that the elite who run the planet publicly ridicule topics they don't want known to the general public. And they have plenty of power to paralyze all the underlings. Stats show lots of people believe UFOs are real and quite a few see them as ET craft as well. The problem is not selling the public, the problem is the leaders who actively discredit, harass, and neutralize any mainstream
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Socorro & Balloons - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:00:25 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:03:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - King >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 >Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma] <snip> >Neither Jerry nor David think the material is there. But even a >cursory glance at the Goddard material and document listings >from the database show that balloon hybrids existed in the early >1960s which were similar to that which Lonnie Zamora >described... and they were heavy too! Rich, The craft noted on the Nott site are indeed heavy...and they have enormous envelopes to carry them. If you are implying that Zamora somehow confused a giant gossamer gas-filled envelope for an overturned car, I think you are trying to shoe- horn an explanation, and not even that...you want others to find the shoe-horn. And I would sincerely like to see the hybrid balloon which is similar to that which Lonnie Zamora described. Nothing I have found thus far fits. >My general position, over the years, is to lead persons to the >watering hole so they can drink for themselves. My telling >people that their thrist is quenched doesn't convince them that >is is. But if they dig out information on their own, they will >know that it's valid...or not. Rich, the danger of this approach is that you haven't found such evidence, and pointing others to a voluminous database and saying "there ya go" is a weak substitute for saying the case isn't closed. And if you have evidence that is compelling, the evidence will quench the thirst, not your telling. Produce the evidence. Don't just throw a bone and yell "fetch". >My argument here is that David Rudiak and Jerry Clark seem to >have dismissed the balloon possibility for Socorro. The matter >is closed for them, pretty much. But I'm thinking it may not >be... that's all. Rich, I think David and Jerry, and Ray Stanford for that matter, listened to Lonnie Zamora's report. If he says he saw something that "looked like a balloon", then he obviously knew what a balloon looked like, and that what he saw was not a balloon... but something that looked like one. Kenneth Arnold didn't see saucers flying in the air. He saw something that looked like saucers, since he knew what a saucer looked like. In fact, he didn't say they looked like them, but that they moved like them (when skipping across a pond). From then on though, he saw "flying saucers". Zamora saying the thing he saw looked like a balloon is a similar statement in my view. How would you describe what he saw except by way of that with which you are familiar. His reactions were not that of a person who saw a balloon. Zamora didn't say it was a balloon, but that his first impression was of an overturned car. I would accept a balloon hypothesis if there were a balloon of any era that could carry two men and a substantial undercarriage with an envelope that could in any circumstance be termed as appearing as an overturned car from even a few hundred feet away. I will add that this is assuming that the balloon was not being launched. When the envelope is laid out for filling, there is a period where the envelope has such an appearance, but it is far from the gondola, and in the Zamora sighting, the balloon had touched down only minutes before... the envelope was obviously not mostly deflated, since the platform and the men would have literally hurtled to the ground if so. And if it was only partially inflated, it could not have taken off as described in the time alotted. Remember that these early balloons were extremely fragile. Two men couldn't deflate it in the field and refill it in minutes, on hard rough-scrabble terrain without damage. I have gone over the database you cited, plugging in many different search terms. I have found no record of any balloon able to carry what was required, without having an envelope too large to be mistaken for an overturned car. And I mean much too large. Zamora would more likely have described a huge silver ball bearing, a gigantic one-cup brassiere, or an enormous chrysalis or cocoon than a car. Again, the balloons cited in your database which could have carried the required payload would have been enormous at ground level. If not in girth, then in length. I find it beyond comprehension that someone could see such a thing and confuse it for an automobile in any condition. Was the Socorro sighting a balloon? Maybe. Is the answer in the database you cite? Well, I don't know, but I am fairly certain that no balloon has yet flown which exhibits the characteristics noted by Zamora. Your database does not seem to reveal one that I can locate. One thing is clear. New Mexico is one balloon-laden state. I read in your database where even balloons launched from Japan crossed over New Mexico. And of course the largest annual balloon event is held there. New Mexico obviously seems a good place for balloons. Maybe what's good for the ballooning "goose" is good for the UFO "gander".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:17:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:06:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Reynolds >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:10:12 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 >>Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma] >I think it's important to note that the Socorro case was one >that Project Blue Book spent some time and effort on, but wasn't >able to resolve what Lonnie Zamorra had seen. While Hot Air >Balloons were relatively unknown in the mid 60's, I would >strongly suspect that the Air Force would have had some idea of >what they were and wouldn't have been confused by them. >This is a mystery that will not be resolved without a grand >revelation of some sort, or the use of a time machine. Larry's >(and Easton's) theories are as relevent as the reader interprets >them to be, but they obviously aren't supported by many in this >genre. Whether there's an advantage to re-debating the issue has >yet to be seen. Steve: Let me suggest this.... The slate is clean for me in the Socorro case, here at UFO UpDates. No one has read through, as far as I can tell, the NASA- sponsored PDF at our blog-site, which is enlightening. And I have today received new material from Larry Robinson, an Indiana University engineer, about his balloon hypothesis and Socorro. But this is not the venue to discuss the matter further. It's an unexplained sighting, Blue Book was flummoxed by it (uh-huh),
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:23:01 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:08:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' >From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:08:06 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' Observatory >Source: RIA Novosti, Russian News & Information Agency >http://ww2.newslookup.com/cgi-bin/storedoc.cgi?rec_id=399672535&DM=Sun%2C+09+Ja n+2005%2C+01:46:58+EST&DS=24091&L=en&CS=ISO-8859-1&DU=http:%2F%2Fen.rian.ru%2Fri an%2Findex.cfm%3Fmsg_id=5269426&CT=text/html&q=extraterrestrial >12-30-04 >2004-12-30 >Russia, Uzbekistan Resume Construction Of Radio Astronomy >Observatory >MOSCOW (Yuri Zaitsev, Expert, the Institute of Space Research, >for RIA Novosti) - Scientists long ago learned to integrate >ground-based radio telescopes into so-called interferometers, >whose resolution is equivalent to that of a radio telescope with >the antenna diameter equal to the distance between telescopes. >The bigger the distance between telescopes (the system's base), >the higher its resolution. The method was first suggested and >substantiated by scientists of the Soviet Academy of Sciences in >the 1960s. <snip> >At the same time, scientists prepared for the RadioAstron >project, which entailed placing a radio telescope nearly >400,000km in space that would expand the base of the >interferometric system to hundreds of thousands of kilometers. >Such a telescope would see in detail the smallest radio sources >in the universe, in particular, quasars, the active galactics >nuclei, and space around black holes, helping scientists to >understand many cosmological events that cannot be explained >now, and to try to detect signals from extraterrestrial >civilizations. <snip> Hi Everyone! York University (Toronto, Canada) radio astronomers Alexandre Novikov, Wayne Cannon and Norbert Bartel are directly involved with this Russian/Uzbekistan long baseline radio astronomy project. Two other York U. researchers and myself have also proposed using the ground based 70 metre radio telescope to emit a strong radio pulse towards two gravitationally balanced points in space 60 degrees in front and 60 degrees behind the Moon's orbit and to listen for an echo (more of an active rather than a passive radar experiment). I have reasons to believe that there is a debris field in this region of space consisting of meteoroids and other ET garbage left over since the creation of the Earth- Moon system. None of us here at York U. have heard of any intentions of using the RadioAstron project described in the article above for SETI purposes and we suspect that this is little more than a media
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:44:50 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:11:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:16:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >I was thinking more about Brad Sparks' lament about almost non- >existent scientific UFO research. After reviewing the >literature, I think he has a point. But his point is aggravated >by the large amount of work done in the psychic phenomena area. >The number of academic, scientific, government funded research >into psychic phenomena has been tremendous and has been going on >for at least a century, but what has it to show for itself, the >issue is STILL not settled by any stretch of the imagination, >even though you can LOOK at the studies and see that there is >some odd effect going on. >So here we have an opportunity to view how a similar phenomena >to UFOs can be treated in the scientific community. It can be >taken seriously and be studied out the wazoo and get mixed, >slightly positive results but make no effect on the world or >society!!! This is astounding in my mind! The ramifications of >REAL psychic phenonena are huge, with a substantial impact on >world events, but positive scientific results make no apparent >impact on our lives or "proving" the phenomena. <snip> You are not catching what I actually said and I don't have time to engage in a deabte on this: I said that a normal scientific discipline has at least dozens or say a minimum of 100 James McDonalds living, breathing and dreaming their subject 24/7, not part-timers, not low-rankers. Examples you gave in an earlier posting just don't wash because one or two scientists devoting a few weeks or even years is still not 100 of them interacting as a worldwide community. There is a syngergistic effect that is greater than the sum of the parts, so you can't just add up a piece of scientific UFO
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:51:47 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:13:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:19:19 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>For the rest of you, if you're interested in my views of why >>it's so hard to get a more precise handle on the questions UFOs >>and other anomalies raise, see the intro to my book >>Unidentified! (2nd ed., 1998) and "From Mermaids to Little Gray >>Men" in The Anomalist 8 (2000), pp. 11-31. >I assume you mean the following from The Unexplained: Actual title, Peter, is Unexplained! No "The," and there is an explanation point, which was not my idea -- one of those goofy notions that book editors conjure up out of the nether regions of the marketing department. I am not big on exclamation points, and most especially in titles. >"Anomalies of the highest strangeness dwell in a twighlight zone >of ambiguity. To say that you have "seen" one is not necessarily >to say that the anomaly lives on in the world when it is not >briefly occupying your vision and scaring the daylights out of >you. We may experience unbelievable things, but our experiences >of them tell us nothing about them except that they can be >experienced. You can "see" a mermaid or a werewolf but how >impressive the experience may be to you, the rest of us cannot >infer from that the mermaids or werewolves are "real". In fact >we can be certain that they are not. And that is all we can be >certain of, becauce all we have done here is tom remove one >explanation (that mermaids and werewolves live in the world) from >consideration while failing to put another in its place" Well stated, I must say. >There is nothing that John Rimmer or I would disagree with in >that paragraph. Oh, dear, then maybe it wasn't so well stated. I can only infer that if you thought I was giving aid and comfort to the flying forces of pelicanism, I must not have been doing my job well. >But when it comes to trying to start thinking >about just how we might see things that aren't actually there, >and suggesting some lines of enquiry you start shouting >pelicanist, ranting on about Orthodoxy, Shouting and ranting? Jeez, I thought I was just typing. I would warn you against capitalizing "orthodoxy," by the way, lest people think you will soon be writing lengthy treatises on the hollow earth with a green-tipped pen. At any rate: The problem, in my opinion, is that we are dealing with phenomena that, while far from rare in human experience, defy useful terminology. Rather than suggesting mere hallucinations or cognitive quirks, which is what you and Rimmer want us all to believe in, they may well point to realms of experience not only unexplained but apparently inexplicable. (I'm sure I am hardly alone even on this List in speaking from personal encounter.) Moreover, what gives them their particularly profoundly anomalous character is (as in my own hardly unique instance) that more than one person can experience them at the same time. In Unexplained! and elsewhere I have tried to get around the stale debate about whether certain classes of claimed experiences are "real/ literal" or "subjective/imagined." I think we ought to be at the point where we no longer have to pretend that something very strange is not occurring, while at the same time not being bound to literal interpretations of the reported phenomena. I also make clear the distinction between what I called "experience anomalies" (as above) and "anomalous events." It's a distinction that many people seem to find useful, judging from my mail and subsequent citations in popular and scholarly material I've seen. Anyway, this is a brief, inadequate summary of a long, more nuanced argument. Those who have any interest in it are urged to seek out writings of mine cited in the opening paragraph. >If you object to my human and prosaic explanations (but >personally I would never ever describe humans or their >imaginations or cultures as prosaic) what is your presumably non >human and and non prosaic one; that we are being beguiled by >demons?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:53:27 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:16:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:23:40 -0500 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:49:32 -0800 <snip> >David: >We've placed online at: >http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com >a piece from NASA about balloon gondolas - experimental >gondolas - used by various government agencies. <snip> Rich, Since you cited a specific source allegedly relevant to Socorro I took the trouble to look at it (the up/download time was only about a minute for me). Then it took me about 30 seconds to ask myself, what the hell do 1986 recommendations for balloon gondolas have to do with an event in 1964? Is this a variation on the Air Force's notorious time-traveling
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:58:52 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:18:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:56:39 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:16:28 EST >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:25:36 -0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>Which brings to mind another question... Is it possible the >>"Green Fireballs" needed to be considered 'unknowns' otherwise >>some agency might be held accountable for answers or >>explanations? <snip> >This is a good point I think. ><snip> >>I doubt they are lost, need to pee or just >>want to ask directions. Why they are sighted in these areas is >>directly related to their intent. Just because we don't know >>their objectives does not mean they don't have any. And just >>because they haven't blown one up doesn't mean they won't >>someday. ><snip>But I suppose you are right on the precautionary >principle to allow the possibility of a threat to nuclear sites >or whatever. The question then arises: What do you do about it? >Obviously the only thing you can do is attempt to convince those >in charge of security that your threat analysis indicates a >clear and present danger that should be prioritized along with >technical failure, terrorist sabotage etc etc. Then, arguing >that the "mere presence" of UFO sightings near this or that >installation at some time or other is self-evidently proof of >alien intent just won't cut it. Hi Martin and Amy, I think this exchange presents a few refreshing tangibles. Martin and Amy agree that a correlation between concentrations of UFO sightings and nuclear facilities might exist. They appear to agree that presuming intent is reasonable, at least on a precautionary basis. They seem to agree that answering the question of whether a correlation truly exists would be valuable. The disagreements are mostly semantic or as Martin says, "operational". I would agree on all the previous points. While I do not ascribe hostile intent to mere observation, (tis where James Smith and I differ, tho I admit that his view is the more precautionary) I assume that if a UFO comes from elsewhere, it is here for a reason, and is where it is for a reason. If they indeed appear at or near nuclear facilities with anomalously higher frequency than other places, knowing it might help us determine intent. I am wary though that determining such a correlation might just be another dead end. I say this because the closer we get to the answers in this particular area (nuclear installations), the fewer answers we will likely get from those who can best address the issue, since they have the most to hide, whether the UFO is ET or secret terrestrial craft. Presumably, if UFOs are natural phenomena, there should be no such correlation. <g> I don't think the science to date is definitive proof of a correlation, so I agree also that a contemporary quantitative analysis, even if flawed, could at least suggest an answer to the question... is there a clear correlation and concentration of UFO sightings in or near nuclear facilities. From that well might spring much of consequence, although ultimately I am sadly doubtful. In fact, I don't really know where the conclusion drawn would logically lead. More accusations of government cover-up? I don't know if that's productive or decidedly unproductive. And we may find no correlation after all. What would we then conclude? At least we have some clear distinctions of thought, and some very clear agreement in the main. If we promote and support the work of Sparks, Vike, Davenport, et.al., who take the time to assemble searchable databases of cases old and new, we will have a rich sampling from which to cull the seeds of such a quantitative analysis. So, even if you don't agree with the premise, our best next step is to further the gathering and quantification of cases, old and new, for analysis.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:02:52 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:20:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - King >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:04:50 -0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:32:29 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> Hi Issac, Much easier to save as a .txt file, and zip it. No trace. Anyone can open the document in Word or Wordpad, or even a Linux app.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:33:09 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:35:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II - >From: Mike Bird <mikebird.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:51:30 -0500 >Subject: Re: Support For Steven Bassett & X-Conference II <snip> >Kelly, considering that I don't post to UFOUD very often, I'm >not sure if my post really qualifies as "incessant raving". Well, I am sure. Your voice is just one of many over the years that have never failed to remind the rest of us about such an improbable event. It's just wishful thinking and very irresponsible, IMO. <snip> >Maybe this is where we fail as a planet, that we do not teach >the truth in our schools? You are giving up on the human condition too easy. We haven't failed, yet. Failure is only in the mindset a person chooses to believe. And for you, and others like you, UFOs have become a distraction from realizing your inner self and the inherent capabilities that God, or the Creator, has given you. As for the truth, it comes not just from the schools, but from what you encounter daily in your life, your church, your sources of information or disinformation, etc. <snip> >Now you're blaming our planetary problems on the UFOs? I thought >you thought that Earthlings are the master and commander of our >own problems? Well, no Mike. But your Space Brothers ought to practice what they preach. Actions speak louder than words. They're just false prophets. Have you, or anybody else on this list for that matter, ever given any thought what this great blue sphere we call earth would be like if there wasn't such a thing as a UFO? It is hard to imagine, but what if? <snip> >As to your first point above, what I meant by "I want the >spaceships to land now", was more that I would like them to show >themselves. This doesn't have to include a "Mass Landing". Don't worry, it won't. >What might be a safer approach from their perspective, is just a >"mass showing". What if 1000 sizeable spaceships hovered at >200,000 feet all along the prime meridan from the north pole to >the south pole, at 12 oclock noon on a given Sunday afternoon in >say October 14 ? What if after 1 hour, they all shifted west to >the next meridian line that was "noon". Then an hour later, >shift again, and again, etc... After 24 hours, the whole world >would know that UFOs exist. Does Will Smith know about this! <snip> >You can call me a fool, a dreamer, or both or neither. It doesn't >matter to me what you think of me. What I don't see is planet >Earth figuring it's way out of it's own stupidity, none too >soon. This has been our history and it is not working. Like 2000 >years later it is still not working and a special person had to >be sacrificed in the process. I would never call you a fool. Dreamer, maybe. As for that special person, I doubt he would want you to feel so helpless. <snip> >Some people lean on God for the answers to Earths problems. I >don't happen to believe in God anymore, but I know that UFO's >exist, because I've seen two. Nobody can take my sightings away >from me. And I've read a lot. The data doesn't lie. Take pilot >and police testimony alone, and the case is closed! I have had at least three UFO sightings, among other things, but I try not to let them interfere with my better judgement. Just because I saw UFOs doesn't necessarily put them in my "trust" file. They may have been awesome to behold, but it's what's inside that counts. Damned if I know what was inside! <snip> >That's why I support and encourage others to support what Steven >Bassett is doing. Maybe see some of you in Washington, D.C. in >April?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Gates From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:04:53 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:38:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Gates Let me be forth right about the so called balloon theories. This load of hot air floats in and out about every 3-5 years. After watching a number of theories advanced, people promoting this or that balloon, the bottom line is, and I suspect always will be is that nobody will be able to find any documentation about a balloon flight that happened on April 24 1964, and flew into Socorro then out again. In essence we have an interesting exercise in balloon history, but no evidence that supports that theory. Much like the Roswell balloon theory that people could, in theory get within 17 miles, of the Foster Ranch, but not actually on the Foster ranch. To a skeptibunker, if you can get a balloon within 17 miles, then the entire case is explained away as a balloon. Likewise to the folks going through the balloon history theory, if you can find a balloon test in New Mexico that happened between 1960 and 1965 you have pretty much explained away Socorro.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:31:25 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:39:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rimmer >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >>>suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >>>is involved. >>In that case, I think Peter and I have very different ideas >>about what is 'prosaic' than you do. I think that some of the >>ideas that Peter has suggested above are quite a challenge to >>the current orthodoxy, particularly issues on how the human >>brain interacts with the envirionment. >I don't believe for a second that either of you is a closet >heretic, nor would any other sensible observer. The psychosocial >function of psychosocial ufology is not to add to perceptual >psychology's or neuroscience's knowledge base - as has been >demonstrated on this List, PSH advocates are effectively >illiterate on those subjects - but to reassure us that all is >well and that our lives and the universe are well in order. In >other words, darkness is just daylight misperceived. That's >something a whole lot of people want - need - to believe. Thank you Jerry for at least one unarguable demonstration of a phenomenon currently unexplainable by orthodox science - the excellent example of mind-reading above.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 26 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 06:42:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:56:12 EST >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly >>just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the >>IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in >>1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. >>But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there >>were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and >>what's not anymore. >I have little time now to respond to these kinds of posts, but >will quickly respond to this. >The Corona sighting was in exactly the same direction as the >moon, and low on the horizon. You are sidetracking my point. And you, mine. Brad, I know you are an intelligent man. An intelligent person never assumes he or she knows it all. If I am wasting your precious time, feel free to move on to the next discussion. Right now - hit the "delete" button! You may know a lot of things but there are a lot of things you _don't_ know and never will if you don't allow others to be almost as smart or right as you consider yourself to be. The thing I saw behind my house in 1997 was also in the same direction as the moon - only the moon had already set minutes earlier. This thing looked almost exactly like the moon but did things the moon cannot. If you (or anyone) had ever interviewed me or the other two witnesses in person, you would know that we were not mistaken in what we saw. And it wasn't the first or last time these kinds of things have been seen. Compile a good database of these and similar high strangeness sightings and you will begin to understand how many legitimate sightings are being ignored or dismissed because they do not fit the stereotypical UFO sighting. While the sighting at Corona may have well been the moon, there are objects that mimic the moon and many other common objects we see every day and night. Someone or something out there knows how to use many disguises and the art of deception to remain hidden, often in plain sight. Continue to ignore or dismiss these kinds of sightings and you will never have anything but half-truths or lies about UFOs. Continue to ignore the implications and you will chase your tales into eternity (pun intended). >>Something else that caught my attention was your reference to >>security agencies discussing only cases that were hard to reject >>as "aircraft, astro, balloons, etc." I'm sorry, but I'm just not >>use to 'security agencies' being too open with information >>(unless it is designed to influence an intended audience). We've >>been lied to so many times it's hard to know when a security >>agency is telling the truth and when they are telling us only >>what they _want_ us to know/believe. Just because a report is >>from an "official" agency doesn't mean it is accurate or true. >>And just because it talks about UFOs doesn't mean we should >>take the information at face value. "Official" reports from >>"official" agencies could just as easily be crock as the truth, >>for all we know. And if they _did_ focus more on 'trivial' and >>IFO cases, would we now be paying any attention to them? >The security agencies were _not_ repeat _not_ telling all this >to the public ("us") as you seem to mistakenly assume. They >were telling this to _each other_ in classified meetings and in >classified documents which they never expected would ever >see the light of day (some 16 years before the passage of the >Freedom of Information Act in 1966). Have you ever asked yourself -- if it was never intended to be made public, then why was it made public at all? How do we know we are getting the actual conversations that took place in those classified meetings? What proof do you have that we are not being shown doctored or perhaps entirely made-up conversations and documents? Do you believe these are genuine because they talk about UFOs and that's what you want to hear? There is no way we can know that what we receive from any government agency is the truth, the whole truth, a partial truth or bold-face lies. Just because they release information through the FOIA does not mean they are giving us the truth or even the real documents. If a judge orders them to hand over documents that are being withheld, who knows if they are legitimate or fake? Just because it looks official doesn't mean it is. >>I've been meaning to ask you...Do you believe the Air Force or >>any government agency is _ever_ going to release files or >>information they don't want us to read or know? Do you believe >>any of the information released to the public through the FOIA >>or any other conduit, past, present or future, contains more >>truth than lies? >Such a narrow-minded and simplistic view. Such a judgmental and egotistical view. >Do you believe the >AF can perfectly control what the CIA releases about the AF, >and vice versa? Do you believe the govt agencies never make >mistakes in releasing documents? Intelligence agencies are >usually more candid with each other behind classified walls >than they are with the public. How do you know? Were you there? How do you know it wasn't all made up? (BTW, you never answered my question, you simply countered with more questions.) My question (in a nut shell)...Do you believe the Air Force or _any_ government agency would give us, J. Q. Public, information they do not want us to know - ever? A simple yes or no will do. >The FBI files have wonderful >pieces of CIA info that the CIA would not release directly. The >FBI does not understand CIA secrets and frankly does not >much care about them. The CIA likewise does not care much >about AF secrets so the CIA did not care about releasing to me >the true "Ghost of the Estimate," which directly quoted from the >SIGN Interim Report of Nov. 30, 1948, saying that UFOs might >be "interplanetary" spaceships. This is something the AF has >never released and cannot be found anymore in the available AF >files. You said, "The CIA likewise does not care much about AF secrets so the CIA did not care about releasing to me the true "Ghost of the Estimate,"... The "true"? Your bias is showing. >I could multiply the examples, FBI not understanding or caring >about NSA secrets, the Navy not caring about AF secrets (it was >a Navy document in CIA files that revealed the AF secret about >the SIGN conclusion), etc. etc. If we adopted your viewpoint we >would have to force ourselves to "ignore" these interagency >revelations and only accept what an agency directly releases to >us about itself. Don't you just hate it when someone tells you to >ignore something?? Never said to ignore anything. I said we need to be _careful_ and never accept anything we are told by any government agency at face value. Review the information, Brad, but don't preach it. Discuss it, but don't swear by it. Read it but don't believe it. Neither believe nor disbelieve, maintain objectivity and _keep_ searching. >>>One out of a dozen. (I would have to go >>>re-read the reports and see if maybe another IFO can be >>>found in them.) Likewise with Lincoln LaPaz's reports on the >>>Green Fireballs, 100% Unknowns, 0% IFO's. Sure, you can >>>find other incidents in the same time frame and location, but >>>then you are spiking the sample yourself with IFO's that the >>>agencies investigating were able to fairly easily decide were to >>>be ignored. >>Don't you just hate it when someone tries to tell you what you >>should study and what you should ignore?! >Don't you just hate it when someone tries to steer you onto >colossal wastes of time, pleading and begging to give "fair" >consideration to "every possibility" no matter how remote, and >to just give up on critical thinking, stop evaluating relative >degrees of merit, probability and where to place priorities of >research effort? This is typical of the funadmental lack of >judgment that is seen so often in this field. Actually, Brad, you are demonstrating a lack of critical thinking and bias by where you place your priorities for research effort. Instead of analyzing these documents according to their origins, content and merit, you simply accept them as valuable data and truthful information about UFOs. Instead of taking them with a grain of salt, you are reveling in all you can quote from the documents with no concern about the potential consequences if you are wrong. I promote critical thinking and objective analysis. I am not trying to steer you into "colossal wastes of time". I'm trying to slap you out of your FOIA-induced euphoria so you won't be wasting yours and everyone else's time. >>How in the heck can you declare something "unknown" yet say it >>wasn't an IFO, at the same time? How can you say what something >>is or is not if you don't know what it is/was to begin with? ><snip> >You are wasting my time and everyone else's with semantic games. >An Unknown is defined by eliminating the IFO's. If that was not >possible, as you erroneously suggest, then you will have >succeeded where the debunkers have failed, by totally >eliminating the whole UFO problem by playing games with >definitions. I suggest you go back and read Hynek's UFO >textbook, The UFO Experience, and brush up on basic definitions >and concepts. I think we got the idea that you think this is a waste of your time, Brad. No one made you read it and no one is making you reply. If you are so bored, simply hit the "Delete" button and go back to your mirror. Hynek wrote a book about UFOs, not a textbook. It may be _your_ textbook but it is not mine. Obviously we did not attend the same schools of thought. This may be why we think so differently about the same subject. Instead of learning from differing points of view, we spar. Instead of discussing the issues, we play games. You're right, nothing can be learned under these
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 05:56:09 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 07:16:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:31:25 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>>What a relief. I was afraid for a second that you were going to >>>>suggest that something other than the purely human and prosaic >>>>is involved. >>>In that case, I think Peter and I have very different ideas >>>about what is 'prosaic' than you do. I think that some of the >>>ideas that Peter has suggested above are quite a challenge to >>>the current orthodoxy, particularly issues on how the human >>>brain interacts with the envirionment. >>I don't believe for a second that either of you is a closet >>heretic, nor would any other sensible observer. The psychosocial >>function of psychosocial ufology is not to add to perceptual >>psychology's or neuroscience's knowledge base - as has been >>demonstrated on this List, PSH advocates are effectively >>illiterate on those subjects - but to reassure us that all is >>well and that our lives and the universe are well in order. In >>other words, darkness is just daylight misperceived. That's >>something a whole lot of people want - need - to believe. >Thank you Jerry for at least one unarguable demonstration of a >phenomenon currently unexplainable by orthodox science - the >excellent example of mind-reading above. >Unfortunately, it's not my mind you read. It's advantage Mr. Clark as Mr. Rimmer trips over his paradigm laces enroute to the ball, and with a flailing backhand, lofts it, stutteringly, to an adjacent court... Perhaps removing his
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 07:05:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 07:33:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:53:27 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:23:40 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:49:32 -0800 >Since you cited a specific source allegedly relevant to Socorro >I took the trouble to look at it (the up/download time was only >about a minute for me). Then it took me about 30 seconds to ask >myself, what the hell do 1986 recommendations for balloon >gondolas have to do with an event in 1964? >Is this a variation on the Air Force's notorious time-traveling >crash-test dummies to explain the Roswell incident(s)? Richard: All I can say in my defense is "obscurum per obscurius" and the Socorro episode is a closed issue for me here at UFO UpDates. But does the debate continue elsewhere, with Larry Robinson and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Filer's Files #5 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 07:18:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Filer's Files #5 - 2005 Filer's Files #5 - 2005, Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern Vice President of Skywatch International January 26, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com Webmaster: C E Warren www.cewarren.com Sightings Pick Up After Holidays The purpose of these files is to report weekly the UFO eyewitness and photo/video evidence that occurs on a daily basis around the world and in space. Many people claim it is impossible for UFOs to visit Earth, I ask you only to keep an open mind and watch the evidence we accumulate each week. These Files make the assumption that extraterrestrial intelligent life not only exists, but my hypothesis is that of the over one hundred UFOs reported each week many represent a factual UFO sighting. Mars Evidence of Tree like vegetation. Scientists See High Likelihood of ET Visitors: UFOs were seen over Alabama, California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin. Sightings were also reported in Canada, China, Finland, Kenya, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Ecuador: Eleven Earthquakes in 4 Days Las Ultimas Noticias reports the Geophysics Institute recorded eleven earthquakes of considerable magnitude along the Ecuadoran coast, keeping local residents in a state of fear. Seismology institutes have called for calm, stating that these are normal events and that any chance of a tsunami has been dismissed. The Geophysics Institute pointed out that "the magnitude of these events is moderate in nature and therefore unable to generate a tsunami." Most of the quakes had their epicenter in the sea and registered around 5.0. Thanks to translation by (c) 2005. Scott Corrales, INEXPLICATA the Journal of Hispanic Ufology. India - Powerful earthquakes sparked panic in India and Indonesia on Monday, January 24, 2005, nearly a month after a deadly tsunami killed more than 160,000 people. The two quakes, both magnitudes of 6.3, jangled the nerves of many. The snow storms and earthquakes as predicted last week are continuing. Solar activity appears to be calming. See Earth Change TV for the latest info on our changing earth. http://www.earthchangestv.com Mars Evidence of Tree like Vegetation Norman Bryden writes, Here is an image of Reull Vallis on Mars from the European Space Agency. The image shows a river valley and areas of dark green that could be possible vegetation. "Reull Vallis is an outflow channel that extends 1500 kilometres across Promethei Terra in the direction of Hellas Basin. This Mars Express image was taken with a ground resolution of about 21 metres per pixel during Mars Express orbit 451 on 29 May 2004. The image shows an area located at about latitude 42 South and longitude 102 East. North is to the left." Mars shows not only signs of vegetation and intelligent structures, but there are corrals, closed off large areas, paths of all different forms like roads and some that look like migratory paths of herds of animals. We can speculate that Mars has a full eco system with a complete range of animals, possibly some like Earth's animals being from the same sources, and from some contact with Earth. Thanks to Norman Bryden Harold Carver writes, "I have found images from the Opportunity Rover that show possible logs, very similar to petrified wood on Earth. Other images show tree like vegetation. Both aerial and ground shots show evidence of life. Black and white photo is from Opportunity Rover completing a year on Mars. Color photo below is a similar petrified log on Earth. Thanks to Harold Carver. ET Visitors: Scientists See High Likelihood By Leonard David Senior Space Writer: Decades ago, it was physicist Enrico Fermi who pondered the issue of extraterrestrial civilizations with fellow theorists over lunch, generating the famous quip: "Where are they?" Now a team of American scientists note that recent astrophysical discoveries suggest that we should find ourselves in the midst of one or more extraterrestrial civilizations. Moreover, they argue it is a mistake to reject all UFO reports since some evidence for the theoretically-predicted extraterrestrial visitors might just be found there. The researchers make their proposal in the January/February 2005 issue of the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS). Pick up any good science magazine and you're sure to see the latest in head-scratching ideas about superstring theory, wormholes, or the stretching of spacetime itself. Meanwhile, extrasolar planetary detection is on the verge of becoming mundane."We are in the curious situation today that our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation, yet any possible evidence of such lurking in the UFO phenomenon is scoffed at within our scientific community," contends astrophysicist Bernard Haisch, along with physicists James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold Puthoff make their case in the JBIS article: "Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation". The scientists point to two key discoveries made by Australian astronomers and reported last year that there is a "galactic habitable zone" in our Milky Way Galaxy. And more importantly that Earth's own star, the Sun, is relatively young in comparison to the average star in this zone -- by as much as a billion years. Therefore, the researchers explain in their JBIS article that an average alien civilization would be far more advanced and have long since discovered Earth. Additionally, other research work on the supposition underlying the Big Bang - - known as the theory of inflation -- shores up the prospect, they advise, that our world is immersed in a much larger extraterrestrial civilization. Point-to-point distances Given billion-year advanced physics, might not buzzing around the galaxy be possible? Even today superstring theory hypothesizes other dimensions... which could be habitable Universes adjacent to our own, the researchers speculate. It might even be possible to get around the speed of light limit by moving in and out of these dimensions."What we have done is somewhat of a breakthrough," Haisch told SPACE.com."We have pulled together various recent discoveries and theoretical issues that collectively point to the strong probability that we should be in the midst of one or more huge extraterrestrial civilizations," he said. Haisch said that superstring dimensions and wormhole and spacetime stretching possibilities address the "can't get here from there" objection often argued in view of the interstellar, point-to-point distances involved. Also, diffusion models predict that even a single civilization could spread across the Galaxy in a tiny fraction of the age of the Galaxy - even at sub-light speeds, he said. ET signature in the data Can the scientific community bring itself to consider any evidence coming from mysterious sightings of strange things by the public? In large measure, the scientific community seemingly has eyed ET visitation as far from being serious stuff to cogitate over. Why so? "The dismissal has several causes, all reinforcing each other," Haisch responded."Most of the observations are probably misinterpretations, delusions and hoaxes. I have seen people get confused by Venus or even Sirius when it is flashing colors low in the sky under the right conditions. Having been turned off by this, most scientists never bother to look any further, and so are simply blissfully ignorant that there may be more to it," he said. Deardorff, the lead author of the JBIS article, points out in a press statement: "It would take some humility for the scientific community to suspend its judgment and take at least some of the high quality reports seriously enough to investigate=85but I hope we can bring ourselves to do that." According to Haisch, there is a motivation not just for scientific tolerance of the UFO issue, but a strong scientific prediction that there ought to be some genuine ET signature in the data."This potentially changes the relationship of the UFO phenomenon to science in a significant way. It takes away the 'not invented here prejudice, pointing out that a 'yes' to ET visitation is exactly what side our current physics and astrophysics theories would come down on as the most likely situation," Haisch concluded. Thanks to Harold Puthoff and Leonard David Senior Space Writer. Alabama - Daytime Stationary Light BAY MINETTE --Back on January 15, 2005, I was on lunch break at my usual time of 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon in -- have a spot that I usually go to and sit in the car. After finishing the usual fast food junk, I started sky watching (something I do way too much) to pass the time until returning to work. After several minutes I spotted a light sitting stationary in the sky to my ENE about 75 degrees up. The object was hard to see with the naked eye. I took a wide angle view of the sky just after the sighting but missed the object. owing picture. This was taken with 10x optical zoom and appeared at least as high as the contrail it was next to. After taking this photo the object vanished. It appeared as a star in the day time to the naked eye. Just a point of light. This crop is from the actual full size photo. Below is yet a closer view. The wind was out of the north 5-10 mph. No sound was heard. Total time of sighting was around 30 seconds. Thanks to Brian Vike. Photos can be viewed at: "http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2322 California - One Light Changing into a Pyramid SAN CARLOS -- From 3:30 AM. to 4:30 AM, the witness was staying at a house during an overnight pet sit for a cute little dog named Bear. The witness states, "The family room where I was sleeping has sliding glass doors onto a deck, overlooking a canyon. It is located in the vicinity of the San Francisco airport. This dog has never barked but at 3:30 AM, I woke up to her yelping in fear and running up the stairs. I got up and looked out onto the deck. Nothing was outside, so I called Bear several times. She wouldn't come downstairs, which was odd, the finally she came down but wouldn't go outside. I went back onto the couch where I had been sleeping. About 10 minutes later I looked out the window to see a white bright star light in the sky. I got up and went up to the sliding glass doors and could see a faint line of fog coming in over the hills behind the canyon. Then I looked over to the right and there was the light! Same brightness, same intensity, in the same altitude of the sky that the other light had been. So I sat down at the sliding door and stared at it, trying to figure out what it was. Then, it changed from one light to three lights, in a pyramid shape. The dog was looking up at that light too, completely transfixed. I gazed at this light for about 10 minutes, and it kept morphing from one light to three lights. Then the fog overtook it and so I went back to bed Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com Florida - Multiple Types of Objects Ocala -- On January 15, 2005, at 7:30 PM, the 33 year old witness drove south on Highway 301 from Jacksonville, and noticed a hovering object with a small red light on each side. In the direct center of them at about 1 second intervals, a white light blinked. Alternately, above each red light (solidly lit at all times) a very small and fast white light would flash after the center white light would flash. Then a second object appeared in the sky to the west of the first one...hovering in the same way. He watched the objects hovering as he drove and stopped at a gas station. As I turned S on I-75 still watching he phoned his girlfriend and described a very large, bright white object that flew over I-75 out over the fields. The red lighted object flying left to right in front of me, flew directly over the highway with a very small white object blinked to the right. Three to six multiple white blinking objects began blinking right over I-75. They weren't bright...small star type brightness and flashing very fast then maybe off for a second or so. It appeared after a couple minutes that I traveled underneath the fast blinkers and I couldn't see them anymore. The constant hovering large white light plus now three of the red lighted objects moved back and forth and flew over I-75. At this point the white object flew parallel the highway and decreased altitude so rapidly and sped so quickly towards me that the diameter of the light easily doubled in size and intensity. He states, "I started yelling into the phone, as it rocketed down and towards me and slammed on the breaks and pulled off the road as the bright object slowed down and dimmed, but I saw three tiny green lights in a slim triangular shape as if it wasn't quite perfectly horizontal." I could see slight illumination of the three green lights at the points of the triangle and could easily make out the edges of the object connecting the green lights as a triangle. Then, it turned on a super bright beaming spot light towards me so that all I could see was a large white ball again. Back on the highway, I saw numerous red objects and about 200 yards down the road the trees ended and everything opened up to a vast farm field. I could still see many objects out there so I pulled over again. And again, the sky went nuts with activity. At one point I could easily count up to six red light objects flying in different directions. I'm convinced they weren't airplanes, blimps or helicopters. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com Illinois - Five Red Lights DOWNERS GROVE -- An amateur astronomer was looking at the Pleiades and Orion, when he saw a formation of five red "lights" pass over a suburb of Chicago about 9:20 PM, on January 13, 2005. The formation consisted of three red lights (one behind the other in the direction of travel) with two red lights behind. The group of lights were in "bowling pin" formation, and uniform in color and size. They moved in exactly a straight line, at constant velocity to the south. It took 8-9 seconds for the group of five lights to travel from directly over head to 30 degrees above the horizon. There was no noise. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com Kansas - Light OLATHE The witness observed an object with red, blue, and white lights in the sky northwest of town that did not move for a period of thirty minutes. He was standing in his driveway on the night of January 17, 2005, talking on his cell phone to his Dad in Missouri. He states, "I observed a stationary object in the northwest sky at 6:39 PM. It was at an altitude that I see many airliners traveling, and appeared to be about five miles away. My wife came outside and witnessed the object too. The object had blue and red lights flashing. At one time it lit up brightly with a white light and did not move for thirty minutes. Then it suddenly disappeared. During this time I described the light to my Dad, who is a retired US Air Force pilot and Intelligence Officer, on my cell phone. He called the Missouri State MUFON Director and reported the matter. The Director tried to contact a MUFON person in the Kansas City area to see if they could observe the object too, but he was unsuccessful in reaching the person. I did not report the object to any law enforcement or other government official. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director www.ufocenter.com Missouri Hovering Light KANSAS CITY,-- Bruce Widaman MUFON state Director writes, "I just heard about a hovering, red and blue blinking light, over Kansas City at 7:00 PM on January 17, 2005." As it was being observed it became very bright -almost white; and it zipped away at 7:09 PM. ; I don't know of any police report, but the FAA had to have seen this thing hovering from about 6:45-7:09 PM. over Northwest K.C.; I will hope we get more information on this soon. Please contact me if you hear of any thing on this case please, Bruce Widaman 636-946-1394 Thanks to Richard D. Seifried and Bruce Widaman Delaware - UFO chased us at 80 mph REHOBOTH BEACH -- A couple is still mystified by a strange experience with a bright light in the sky that followed their car for at least forty minutes on January 23, 2005. The incident happened on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, as Teresa Alexander and her husband, residents of Seaford, headed to the Rehoboth Beach area. They were on Route 20 at 4:30 AM, to get an early start on bargain hunting."We were traveling and I noticed this bright 'star' on the left," Alexander told the Delaware Coast Press this week."My husband commented about how bright it was. I said, 'Yeah, it must be the North Star, but that didn't make sense because we were traveling southeast." Alexander said the light then crossed the road to the right."It would seem to stop and then accelerate to keep up with us. It was very high in the sky, and all we could see was like a round ball of bright light." She suddenly became frightened with the object appeared to make a sharp right hand turn as the couple's vehicle turned right on Route 113. In an online entry Alexander filed with the National UFO Reporting Center, she writes: "When we came to the 113 junction to make a right, the object was going straight and made a sharp right, like a 90-degree turn to stay with us. This scared me a bit. I said to my husband 'Holy ----, it's seriously following us." "I told my husband to speed up and make sure he was close to other cars because I didn't want us to be alone with that thing. After we had stopped at a red light, my husband started speeding down Route 24 doing about 80 mph and the light kept up with us the whole time." She says the light then appeared closer to the ground, and its brightness would change. "It was kind of fluorescent blue," she said."It would dim and then brighten, and it reminded me of a lighthouse light. It would dissipate and then come back as if it had made a full circle." It was too high in the sky to be a helicopter, there was no noise and a normal aircraft would not follow our path to Kmart at about 5:30 AM" She says when the arrived at the store, the light appeared to hover overhead "I know what my husband and I saw." Snip WorldNetDaily.com. Thanks to Skywatch-International. To Become A Member of Skywatch- International,= http://www.skywatch-international.org/skywatch_membership_application.pdf= Missouri - Object Around Stealth Bomber. MILLER COUNTY The observer captured photos of a stealth bomber and orb photos. These two photos were taken at 5:10 PM, on January 18, 2005, in Miller County, Missouri. The photos were taken around 10 to 15 seconds apart. The stealth bomber was flying from the Northeast to the Southwest and the orb appears above it to the west. I did not see the orb while watching the stealth fly over. It only appeared in the two photos I took. I may have missed it visually since I was focused on the stealth. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com New York - Cluster of Semi -transparent Spheres Walker Valley -- "Alexander Zikas MUFON Virginia reports he and www.GreekFuture.com) investigated a December 3, 2003 sighting by multiple eyewitnesses in Walker Valley near Pine Bush. The incident occurred at 10:18 PM and lasted 14 minutes. Sal Cirami who submitted MUFON forms drew the sketch below (with color added) of the object through 20-power binoculars. The object ascended, hovered, revolved, and finally moved away. The cluster of semitransparent spheres had brighter white centers. Such sightings with a seemingly energy based nature widen the choice of explanations for UFOs. If such objects are not misidentified as conventional objects, then what are they? Are they solid objects or interdimensional? Are they objects with intelligent beings, or are the objects themselves the intelligence?" Thanks to Alexander Zikas and Sal Cirami Pennsylvania - Light and Round Disc POTTSVILLE The witness was looking out his window and saw a round clear light appear in the sky over a ridge southeast of the city close to the reservoir on January 18, 2005. I thought at first that it was a low flying plane. The object did not move and heard no sound when it appeared. It stayed stationary and emitted a bright light from 6:44 to 6:47 AM. There was no color and it was round in shape. The object stayed in one spot for two minutes. Then, it got dimmer and dimmer and moved to the west. It disappeared and reappeared for a period of one minute then it was gone. The object was faint gray in color and had a round sort of translucent glass barely visible with a faint light. I looked at it through binoculars. I had two good views of the large round light. I, then, noticed a faint dim round disc. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com Texas - Golden Object Filmed KAUFMAN COUNTY -- I was out today taking pictures of the chemtrails on January 21, 2005, they were blasting us again; and I was aiming my camera at a scrawny little cloud and noticed a flash in the sky through the viewfinder at 11:35 AM. When the picture came on the screen, I noticed a gold-colored object at the top of the cloud that I had captured, also. I looked back where it was and of course it was gone. I downloaded it on my computer and nearly fell out of my chair. It appears to be a craft of some kind with maybe windows or ports on the right side, in the middle. It, also, appears to be emanating a gas or some type of energy field around it, mainly at the top. It looks like it's flat on top and bottom and rounded on the edge. The sun was behind me which is southeast in the morning. The color of the flash was white or silver, like taking a mirror and flashing off the sun at you. A quick flash, but bright and noticeable. This cloud was made by a jet (chemtrail) and judging by that I would guess between 20,000 and 25,000 feet. I've been observing these jets for quite a while now, and they appear to have three levels they lay these lines. First, around 20,000 feet, second around 30,000 feet, third around 40,000 feet, when they get this high, it's very hard to see them. There are no military bases close by, there's a small airport located in Terrel ten miles northeast. Lawwalk 2005 - Please respect the gentleman's copyright. To view the photos: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2319 A white ball/orb object was also filmed at 11:15 a.m. on January 21, 2005. I took a lot of photos and I decided to scan the sky with my camera. Photos can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2323 Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Wisconsin Shooting Up Toward Space GRANTON -- The witness was driving home from work at 5 PM, on January 17, 2005, and noticed a white light blinking and doing the coolest maneuvers in the north...It was going up and down then made the most spectacular U turn within a second and did more maneuvers. There where lights on its body that blinked, at least a couple and the blinking would follow from the first light to the last light. This object was quite a few miles away so I could not tell if it was making noise or could get a clear look at it. It was also 8:15 PM, at night, so it was dark. This object was how-ever large and the lights would still be on and then it would "shoot" into the night sky at an alarming speed. I got the feeling this object was huge. It made some more of those cool maneuvers and then shot into space again and then disappeared out of sight! I have watched the Air Force from Fort McCoye doing dog fights but I have never seen this kind of movement from them either! Thanks to Peter Davenport www.UFOCenter.com Canada Chemtrails I sure wish I had an idea why so many of these UFOs seem to be around chemtrails, etc. I just don't know, but seems a lot of people are seeing this taking place. I have a great new report coming in from a very credible man who called me last night and told me a story about when he was flying home at 35 thousand feet to Vancouver, B.C. from New Brunswick. While with his wife sitting with all the rest of the passengers something caught his eye in the distance. But whatever this thing was, it was kind of strange looking. He asked the flight attendant if he could take some video footage from the aircraft and she said no problem. So the fellow starting shooting and a saucer or hockey puck shaped craft approached the jet and flew up above it and was gone. All of this was caught on video. He is sending me the footage today from Vancouver. SURREY B.C. On January 03, 2005, around 8 PM, the witness noticed a triangular star formation near where I saw those lights flash on and off the other night. One of the stars was really bright so I aimed my camera at the formation and just left it running at 40 X with the night vision on. When I played it back I noticed the bright star seemed to be rotating, so I used the built in zoom to magnify it to about 200 X. or 5 times the optical zoom of the lens. Anyway when I freeze framed the image I saw a white ball of light with 4 greyish oval objects grouped around it. Three were grouped close together and the other was offset. The white light was reflected off the oval objects. Going one frame at a time showed the oval grey objects to be rotating around the light. Around 10 PM, I was just panning around the sky looking for anything unusual and found either the same star or one very similar, but when I zoomed in and froze the frame found it to have only two of those oval grey objects, directly opposed to each other and rotating around the central light. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research CHINA AND INDIA Both countries know about an underground UFO base in the Himalayan border area deep into the tectonic plates according to India Daily Staff Reporter, January 09, 2005 Kongka La is the low ridge pass in the Himalayas. It is in the disputed India-China border area in Ladakh. In the map the red zone is the disputed area still under Chinese control in the Aksai Chin area. The Chinese held northeastern part is known as Aksai Chin and Indian South West is known as Ladakh. This was where Indian and Chinese armies fought a major war in 1962. The area is one of the least accessable in the world and by agreement the two countries do not patrol that part of the border. According to many tourists, Buddhist monks and the local people of Ladakh, Indian Army and Chinese Military maintain the line of control. But there is something much more serious happening in this area. According to the few locals (people on the Indian and Chinese side), this is where the UFOs are seen coming out of the ground. According to many, the UFO underground bases are in this region and both the Indian and Chinese Government know this very well. Recently, some Hindu pilgrims on their way to Mount Kailash from the Western pass, came across strange lights in the sky. Strange lighted triangular silent craft show up from underground and move almost vertically up in Kongka Pass area. Some of the adventurous pilgrims wanted to look into the site and were turned away by the Chinese guards and when they tried to approach the site from the Indian side, the Indian border patrol also turned them down in spite of their permit to travel between the two countries. The recent rush of world leaders to India is remarkable. Starting from Russian President Putin to major Senators from America are planning to visit India. The European Union is in deep discussion with India on cooperation. All sanctions against India's nuclear programs and Indian Space Research Organization are in the process of being lifted. India is cooperating with Europeans and the Americans in space explorations and technology research program. snip See. http://www.indidaily.com/editorial/01-09a-05.asp - Finland - UFO Seen on Field HELSINKI -- My friend and I were walking our dogs at 5 PM, on January 17, 2005, in an open field, and suddenly strange lights appeared and the dogs started to bark. The lights were coming from the sky and all we could see was this bright light upon us. It was like some kind of spotlight and it lasted for about ten seconds and then something happened and the light went off. We could see the whole "craft". The dogs stopped barking and the craft went away with great speed and flames that were blue (maybe gas powered). My friend and I were totally shocked. Thanks to www.UFOCenter.com Kenya - Two Orange Flashes NAIROBI The witness was sitting with his son looking up for the first evening star in a clear sky on January 7, 2005, at 8:40 PM. I, then, observed a seemingly orange colored flash of perhaps two seconds dissolving into a faint tail light moving away. It was moving north and strangely enough, less than 30 seconds later, I saw this repeated at a slightly different position but quite close to the first flash. I thought it might be two rocket stages following each other back into the earth's atmosphere. Thanks to Peter Davenport www.UFOCenter.com New Zealand - Huge Wing Shaped Object AUCKLAND -- I saw a huge wing shaped object (boomerang shaped) at 10:35 PM, on January 15, 2005. I couldn't really tell how high it was traveling as it was white in color but very translucent. This made it difficult to tell how wide it was, but if I had to guess I would say about 2000 ft up & 200-300 ft wide. The object was traveling very fast with no sound. Thanks to Peter Davenport www.UFOCenter.com Editor's Note: During December many UFO reports occurred over Northern New Zealand. UK - UFO Disclosure Shifts Into High Gear Robert Verkaik reports, "Uncovered at last are thousands of classified documents detailing credible observations of unidentified flying objects reported by RAF personnel, British Airways pilots and senior police officers. Now under the Freedom of Information laws, files previously held by the Ministry of Defence's special UFO department, known as SF4, are being released to the public. Among the most credible reports of a possible visit by extraterrestrial life-forms is one made by an RAF pilot and two NCOs at RAF Boulmer in Northumberland. In July 1977, Flt Lt. A. M. Wood reported "bright objects hanging over the sea. The MoD document adds that the RAF officer said the closest object was "luminous, round and four to five times larger than a Whirlwind helicopter." The UFOs were reported to be three miles out to sea at a height of about 5,000 feet. The officer, whose report is supported by Cpl. Torrington and Sgt Graham, said: "The objects separated. Then one went west of the other, as it maneuvered it changed shape to become body-shaped with projections like arms and legs." The men who were positioned at the picket post at the RAF station were able to observe the strange objects for an hour and 40 minutes. At the same time a radar station detected the objects in exactly the same position as the men had observed them. The report describes Flt Lt. Wood as "reliable and sober." It adds: "Two contacts were noted on radar, both T84 and T85, at RAF Boulmer. They were also seen on the Staxton Wold radar picture which is relayed to West Drayton. On seeing the objects on radar, the duty controller checked with the SRO at RAF West Drayton as to whether he could see the objects on radar supplied from RAF Staxton Wold." This account was deemed so sensitive to the national interest that the MoD had delayed its release for an extra three years. But under the Freedom of Information Act, which came into force on 1 January, the file has been declassified. A British Airways Tri-Star on a return flight from Portugal in July 1976 was involved in an incident which led to the scrambling of fighter jets to chase four objects two round brilliant white, two cigar-shaped" 18 miles north of Faro. The captain was so alarmed by what he and the passengers had seen that he reported the sighting to air traffic controllers at Lisbon and Heathrow. The report says that fighters were immediately scrambled from Lisbon. Shortly afterwards another Tri-Star crew on the same flight path reported a similar unexplained sighting. This time they said there was a "bright object with two contrails" between Fatima and Faro. It remained stationary before moving north and then "changing in length." In another incident, in the same month, two Tri-Star co-pilots and five of their cabin crew reported "passing underneath a bright white circular object." The files also contain reports compiled by police officers of their first-hand experiences of observing UFOs. On 8 April 1977, Superintendent Cooper of West Yorkshire Police described a sighting while on duty in a patrol car in Laisterdyke. He said: "I looked to my right and saw a bright silver light just over the rooftops, that moved along the rooftops until the light "suddenly vanished". c. 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=3D603470 =3D3 =3D62 Subscribe Today to Filer's Files So you won't miss a single breaking news story or the building evidence for UFO and life in the universe. Major George A. Filer (USAF ret.) has been bringing you the latest in UFO News since 1995, on radio, television and the internet. Your dollars do make a difference! We appreciate our loyal subscribers and will continue to grow with your help. Annual Membership is only $25 for 52 weekly intelligence reports. Don't miss the latest images of UFOs from Earth and Mars. Click: https://www.paypal.com/cgi- bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. I will send you a CD or DVD copy of the eight years of Filer's Files for a donation of $40 or more. "Life on Mars" UFOs over Mars Your chance to get your (fingers) on the throttle of significant and up to-date UFO info as well as the real deal on the Mars expedition. Get your official and private DVD copy now for $25. Send your contact info to: jlpromo2001.nul or mail your check to Fast Street Productions, 37 Surrey Lane, Willingboro, NJ 08046 or pay: "ttps://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul REAL ESTATE! Get your free report and learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent to help your buy or sell a home. To get a free copy of this report e-mail me at : Majorstar.nul MUFON UFO JOURNAL -- For more detailed monthly investigative reports subscribe to the MUFON JOURNAL. A MUFON membership includes the Journal and costs only $45.00 per year. To join MUFON or to report a UFO go to "ttp://www.mufon.com/. To ask questions contact MUFONHQ.nul or HQ.nul Filer's Files is copyrighted 2004 by George A. Filer, all rights reserved. Readers may post the COMPLETE files on their Web Sites if they credit the newsletter and its editor by name and list the date of issue. These reports and comments are not necessarily the OFFICIAL MUFON viewpoint. Send your letters to Majorstar.nul Sending mail automatically grants permission for us to publish and use your name. Please state if you wish to keep your name or e-mail confidential. CAUTION, MOST OF
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:10:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Clark >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:31:25 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:12:33 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:51:14 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>I don't believe for a second that either of you is a closet >>heretic, nor would any other sensible observer. The psychosocial >>function of psychosocial ufology is not to add to perceptual >>psychology's or neuroscience's knowledge base - as has been >>demonstrated on this List, PSH advocates are effectively >>illiterate on those subjects - but to reassure us that all is >>well and that our lives and the universe are well in order. In >>other words, darkness is just daylight misperceived. That's >>something a whole lot of people want - need - to believe. >Thank you Jerry for at least one unarguable demonstration of a >phenomenon currently unexplainable by orthodox science - the >excellent example of mind-reading above. >Unfortunately, it's not my mind you read. Fortunately, given your and Magonia's long paper trail, one does not have to resort to mind-reading. It seems odd that, in this instance, it is a prominent Magonian who is reduced to an unnecessary paranormal explanation, when a ready prosaic explanation, based on decades of Magonian claims from earnest souls who no longer bother to deny that they are "sceptics," is easily at hand. If, on the other hand, you are signaling that you have now changed your mind and concede that UFO and other anomalous phenomena are indeed radically heterodox in nature, it is up to you to let us know, with details and specifics to match. While I'm at it, let me offer you space in IUR to outline your reasons
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:54:23 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:32:03 +0100 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:06:56 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Martin and All, >One of the reference texts I was relying upon was the article >published in IUR of Summer 2002 (I still have paper refs): >"Do nuclear activities attract UFO's?", by Donald A. Johnson. >And you gave the reference on the web yourself: >http://www.cufon.org in the "contributors" section. This >answers positively to the question ! The statistical analysis, >based on the UFOCAT database, seems clear to me, establishing >higher percentages in the counties with nuclear plants and >facilities. Gildas I realise that I am criticising with 20-20 hindsight and maybe offering a council of perfection, but I believe this is a flawed study. As I tried to explain in previous posts, just showing that you can produce a larger-then-expectation value for some variable or other is never good enough. You have to show all your data and assumptions so that your work can be checked and replicated and proven free of systematic errors caused by selection bias. You have to demonstrate why your expectation value is realistic. And then you have to show that the departure from this value is greater than variation due to chance - for which there are special tests and tables of "significance levels" taking account of the the number of degrees of freedom etc. These protocols and techniques are always followed in reputable statistical work. They aren't there to look cool. They are there as safeguards because there are very real risks in drawing conclusions from raw numbers. In the referenced study, Johnson has taken 164 US counties in which nuclear sites are identified. These include private power reactors, experimental reactors, research and production facilities, military bases hosting nuclear weapons, or Navy nuclear submarine yards. The number of reports in the total UFOCAT database for each of these 164 counties is then added up to give a rate per 100,000 population in each county. These rates are then to be compared county by county with an expectation value based on the null hypothesis that there is no effect on report frequency from the presence of nuclear sites. How is this expectation value arrived at? Johnson selects a "control group" of other counties with a similar spectrum of populations and a similar geographic distribution, in which such nuclear sites are not identified. So far so good. Unfortunately he immediately introduces a selection bias by attempting to "exclude control group counties with military bases that might have held nuclear weapons at one time". The test group is likely to be well supplied with military bases. First it actively selects for such where nuclear weapons or military reactors are in existence. Secondly there is no attempt to investigate or allow for the reasonable suspicion that the distribution of non-nuclear military facilities correlates with that of nuclear facilities - i.e., if an area hosts an ICBM site it probably hosts a number of other military facilities as well. Such a clustering effect due to natural demands of logistics, security and command-and-control is most obvious in the major "strategic areas" but is quite likely general. For example you don't put plutonium production sites an inconvenient distance away from military security, military transport or the military end-user. In general we might expect planning consent for even private nuclear power operations to take account of the emergency security arrangements in place in the area. In other words the overall military presence within the test group of 164 counties has been naturally inflated by association, but in the control group of 164 counties it has been artificially depleted by excluding all those with military bases "that might have held nuclear weapons at one time". The report rate in the control group is therefore possibly not a realistic expectation value against which to compare the report rate in the test group. To argue that it is we would need first to exclude the hypothesis that report frequency is correlated with the overall distribution of air bases, test ranges, Navy ports and other strategic military areas, and would be so whether there were nuclear bombs/reactors there or not. This is not only a reasonable natural suspicion but has been claimed (albeit often informally) in early Air Force studies and elsewhere. None of this is addressed in the paper. Moreover, the paper fails to transparently define its protocol, fails to properly identify sources of information, doesn't tabulate complete data, and doesn't supply any test of statistical significance for the excess in report rates claimed on the basis what seems to be simple averages over all test counties - "Overall, the rate of UFO sighting reports is 13.84 for nuclear site counties and 9.59 for non-nuclear counties, for a relative risk of 1.44". There is also claimed to be tendency for the report rate to correlate inversely with the county population and five population bands are identified. The data summarised in the tables show this trend, and that the next-to-smallest populations have almost double the "risk ratio" of the largest. One might attempt to argue that this is consistent with nuclear facilities being sited away from urban populations - but it might also be the case that militarily and other sensitive activities of all kinds are sited away from population centes, both for security and safety and simply because they often need space. Anyway, Johnson does not offer any interpretation, and again no estimate of statistical significance is given. A previously claimed county-by-county correlation between report frequency and citizen education (Saunders, David R., "Some new lines for UFO research". MUFON 1972 Conference Proceedings. June 17, 1972, pp 139-145) is acknowledged in the paper, but no serious attempt is made to separate its contribution or unpack its meaning. Johnson notes that the adult population in the test group has almost 5% more high school degrees than the population in his control group, which might (as he says) be because the presence of the nuclear sites themselves selects for a higher average educational level of the work force in the test counties. But the presence of technical employment of all kinds, including military test sites and missile bases etc., might be expected to correlate with high school education, and whether this 5% is significant in the first place is not discussed. All he says is "whether this small difference in educational level could explain all of the excess in UFO reports and close encounters seems doubtful." These issues cannot be investigated because of the virtually complete absence of any tabulated results or sources. So, IF the results reported are statistically significant they might easily be consistent with an enhanced report-rate expectation based on the general distribution of military facilities, nuclear or not. Once that was established, the basic question would still arise as to the quality of the UFOCAT database and whether (as Brad Sparks suggested) it admixes IFOs and UFOs. As I said in a previous post, it would be vital to investigate whether any correlation that did emerge was specific to reliably investigated Unknowns or general to reports of all types and qualities. This wasn't considered in the Johnson paper either and no breakdown of report quality is presented that could allow us to investigate the point further. >But the statistical approach is not the main point. I think it should be. >The study of credible documents and testimonies is much more >revealing, and spectacular, as the article shows: 'The UFOCAT >2002 database lists 289 reports at sites coded as "missile" or >"nuclear" facilities. These reports range from March 1944 (an >aerial encounter near Yakima, Washington, not far from the huge >World war II plutonium production plant at Hanford) to another >aerial encounter in October 2001 over a nuclear power plant in >Kent, England.' Johnson's paper does say this, and mentions a number of individual reports. But the statistics remain interesting here. You evidently think it noteworthy that 289 reports include codes for either "missile" or "nuclear", or both. But let's think about this. The current version of UFOCAT 2003 has in excess of 172,000 entries. The "nuclear" or "missile"-coded entries constitute about 0.17% of this total, or: A report is about *600 times* more likely NOT to have any recorded association either with missiles (of any kind) or with nuclear activities (of any kind). It would be difficult to say how remarkable (or not) this is. But as a very rough and intuitive guess, preliminary to a proper study, it is interesting to count up just how many missile- related and nuclear-related sites there are out there. First, considering the US alone: The number of operational sites in the Nike missile programme between 1950 and 1974 reached 240 - just the sites, in addition to which there was a huge network of ARADCOM missile command centres - employing some 45,000 personnel at its peak. A Brookings Institution report "U.S. Nuclear Weapons Research, Development, Testing, and Production, and Naval Nuclear Propulsion Facilities" lists 39 nuclear weapons R&D, production and test facilities active as of 1998 with a further 31 shut down. The DOE/ONEST report "Nuclear Reactors Built, Being Built, or Planned: 2003, In the United States," DOE/NE-0118, December 2003, lists a total of 176 seagoing Navy nuclear reactors, active or shut down, in subs and cruisers etc (obviously sometimes clustered geographically, but not always); half a dozen "remote installations" in the form of mobile army and navy power reactors; active or shutdown experimental reactors at more than a dozen lab locations across the US; operable or shutdown research reactors at 60 different Universities; and operable or shutdown civil power reactors at 92 locations. (Note that the number of *locations* cited here leads to a total of sites somewhat smaller than the total of 627 reactors tabulated in Appendix 2 of the report due to multiple siting of reactors at some sites.) I estimate these sources so far add up to around 440 "missile" and "nuclear" related sites in the continental US alone. Obviously it is very far from a complete list - we have yet to consider ICBM sites, nuclear test sites, possible nuclear- equipped air bases separate from the ARADCOM missile installations listed (which were sited only at SAC bases I believe, and otherwise gave protection to government administrative and strategic centres), and various other highly mobile "locations" of conventional SAM and AAM missile armaments. Let us assume 500 as a conservative round figure for "sites" with a potential for being associated with "missile" and/or "nuclear". How to begin to extend this globally I have no idea, nor can we realistically take account of the geographical/political sampling biases that must affect the UFOCAT report distribution. So we can only arrive a very rough feeling for the possible significance of these figures. But if we merely double the already-conservative US tally we have 1000 potential sites. This means that on average only one in every three or four such sites (about 29%) needs to have submitted ONE single report in almost sixty years in order to generate a total of 289 reports in UFOCAT. This represents about _200_ site-years per report generated. Of course the distribution is not as even as that, and in practice we see concentrations of reports such as those around Oak Ridge, Sandia, Hanford and elsewhere in 1949-51, and the Northern Tier bases in 1975. We can argue that such clustering is significant in these places, but at the same time this depresses the probability of reports at the generality of other non-significant sites far below the already-tiny average of 200 site-years per report. Obviously this is all very sketchy and not at all rigorous, just a flavour of what might be found if a rigorous analysis were ever to be mounted (and very likely has been mounted in places not accessible to the likes of us). I think it's sufficient to cast a reasonable prima facie doubt on the casual impression some people gain from the literature that UFOs show a disproportionate affinity for nuclear and nuclear missile sites - though they obviously are reported at these places from time to time. And as discussed above, the only statistical analysis I know of which could give some quantitative substance to this impression is in my opinion flawed. >One of the first observations, in 1945, has also >been fully reported in the Mufon UFO Journal of December >1996: "UFO sighting over Hanford nuclear reactor in 1945", by >RolanD. Powell, Byron D. Varner, and Walter Andrus. One >of the merits of the article of Donald Johnson is to give exemples >outside ot the United States, thus stressing that it is a world wide >affair. What about Bentwaters, at the end of 1980, with a UFO >hovering over a nuclear storage area? See "You Can't Tell the >People" of Georgina Bruni. I'm not terribly well-informed about the 1980 Bentwaters case. However I did have occasion to check Georgina Bruni's reporting when doing a new literature search for work on the 1956 Bentwaters-Lakenheath case a few years ago. If memory serves, I found her account of those incidents to be thoroughly unreliable, even as a reflection of the popular account, so I would not necessarily choose this book as an authority for the Rendlesham case. Some of the other cases you cite are interesting, and maybe along with others they do constitute evidence of "clear intent" in respect of nuclear sites in certain cases. But I think we should keep things in proportion. After all there are a great many more cases that might seem to indicate "clear intent" in respect of motor vehicles, but I don't see that this generalises necessarily to an animosity towards the auto industry, or a need to suck in petrol vapour for fuel, or that highway intersections must be "portals" or whatever. It is an occasional pattern that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:29:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Smith >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:44:17 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:50:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Dr. Rutledge in his book speculates that the UFOs >>seen in the Piedmont, Missouri area were either due >>to poor aircraft radar coverage of the area and/or >>geological features. However, why there are >>temporal distributions may be too hard a nut >>to crack. >We must also be careful not to engage in too much speculation. >When I mentioned geological features, I was referring to areas >which offer suitable camouflage or features that are more >adaptable to the technological aspects of CC&D. We must not >ignore any geological resources but until we see a UFO mining >for gold or whatever, I'd stay focused on the surface >attributes. Let me make clear that the geological features correlation I think Rutledge is referring to is not due to gold or minerals per se but he means stress points in the plates (sort of along Persinger's ideas) and/or large concentrations of metals that produce magnetic/electrical/gravitational anomalies or at least strong deviations from normal values. UFOs have been reported as sucking up water and asphalt on at least one occasion, but mining seems less reported - if any rulinge out speculation on odd Moon features that imply "mining"..... >We should always be on alert. We have much to fear. It is a good idea to be alert, but regarding UFOs?? I ain't going to keep looking toward the sky in fear of UFOs! If they are intelligent devices then I will not be able to stop them! If
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith I have not commented on this before, but one option that the pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. If the balloon is at a high enough altitude then the prevailing winds could be in a direction different ftom the ground level whihc would permit the vehicle going against the wind. A large enough balloon at altitude would be able to support the massive gondola described. "Landing" would be accomplished by controlling the buoyancy of the at altitude balloon. Holes in this theory are that 1) No cable was seen/reported. Its unlikely that the cable could be invisible regardless of if is was completely transparent. Even transparent objects are visible by reflections of the light off their surface, and at their edges. If the cable was thin and the observer was too far away to make it out then that is possible, but then the cable is damn thin and unlikely to be possible given that era technology to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:04:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:17:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:10:12 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Let me suggest this.... >The slate is clean for me in the Socorro case, here at UFO >UpDates. >No one has read through, as far as I can tell, the NASA- >sponsored PDF at our blog-site, which is enlightening. >And I have today received new material from Larry Robinson, an >Indiana University engineer, about his balloon hypothesis and >Socorro. >But this is not the venue to discuss the matter further. It's an >unexplained sighting, Blue Book was flummoxed by it (uh-huh), >and it's not debatable any longer. I accept that. >It wasn't a balloon that Zamora saw. Okay. Hi Rich, This is the venue to discuss revelations on any UFO issue, and certainly I wouldn't suggest otherwise. It's also a venue for those who are new to the field to learn and ask questions. But these "theories" tend to come up over and over again as new people enter the field re-discover information that really has been discussed and debated to death previously. FYI, I've looked at the NASA document you mention and nothing really jumped out at me. I forwarded the link to a couple of others for their thoughts. Since you're in touch with Larry Robinson, do you know if he ever found the original story that he quoted from memory that involved the landing of an early hot air balloon in the Socorro area? That was the foundation of his theory but he could never really point to the actual text. Of course it seemed to give support to those who are compelled to believe in a mundane explanation for the Socorro case, so it was hailed as a "solution". In 1996 I visited Socorro for several days (unrelated to the Zamorra sighting) and spoke with locals about that case in passing. One of the Professors at the New Mexico School of Mining and Technology in Socorro said he was with one of the first groups to go to the scene, having started at the school earlier that year. He remembered quite a bit, including the smell of burning brush, which was a number of hours after the event. This was a group from the School of Mining brought out to look at the "landing" site. He had no idea what it might have been, but he said the locals believed it was probably a prank by students at the school. Of course, this is some 30 years after the fact and I'm not sure how they would have known unless there was a record somewhere that no one else has found. I'm also not sure how college kids could have pulled it off, but here we have another "theory" based on local knowledge (or perhaps "beliefs). As you're probably aware, Hector Quintanilla (the last Head of Project Blue Book) felt the Socorro case was the most significant investigated by his Group. He believed (but could never prove) that it was an experimental craft, and even visited a number of Air Force bases and airports in the region to see if they were involved in projects that might have been related to it. Nothing was found. Some of his thoughts on the case can be found at: http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/quintanilla.pdf His view can also be found in 'The Anomalist 4', in which the article "Project Blue Books Last Years" by Hector Quintanilla can be found. Is there any good reason to assume that the Air Force was ignorant of hot air balloons at the time? This wasn't a case that the Air Force merely gave lip service to, but made (at least an attempt at) an on-site investigation. I'll admit that I still smile when I think of the Klassian explanation that was promoted for a while. While the Air Force was expressing the lack of a provable explanation, Klass theorized that the whole event had been staged and promoted to develop a tourist trade for Socorro. I guess he felt the town coffers were going to fill with taxes paid by the UFO fanatics who came to see the legendary landing site. I think it's safe to say that didn't occur. All this being said, I'm not set in stone regarding the hot air
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:18:56 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:04:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:00:25 -0600 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 >>Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma] ><snip> >>Neither Jerry nor David think the material is there. But even a >>cursory glance at the Goddard material and document listings >>from the database show that balloon hybrids existed in the early >>1960s which were similar to that which Lonnie Zamora >>described... and they were heavy too! >Rich, The craft noted on the Nott site are indeed heavy...and >they have enormous envelopes to carry them. If you are implying >that Zamora somehow confused a giant gossamer gas-filled >envelope for an overturned car, I think you are trying to shoe- >horn an explanation, and not even that...you want others to find >the shoe-horn. And I would sincerely like to see the hybrid >balloon which is similar to that which Lonnie Zamora described. >Nothing I have found thus far fits. Ho Kyle, Speaking in terms of conventional balloon lift, I agree. Also Rich worries that no-one has read the PDF about balloon gondolas. I have, and like Don Ledger I can see nothing there that improves the fit with the report. The 15 knot impact of several thousand pounds of payload with the desert floor might well make a dent, but the point is that this impact is terminal - the gondals come down on parachutes, they don't take off again. The weight of possible balloon payloads is not at issue - the gas volume is, as you point out. To illustrate some of David Rudiak's calculations with concrete examples from a comparable era to the Socorro event, one can read Vincent Lally's useful 1969 chapter on balloons in the Condon Report. Plainly the payload gondolas discussed in the 1986 bloggroup PDF are equivalent to the payloads of the big polyethylene research ballons flown in the 60's - about 100 a year from the very same National Scientific Balloon Facility in Palestine, Texas. The ascent rate cited in 1986 is the same as that given by Lally for the polyethylene balloons, and the float altitude is the same, with comparable payload weights of several thousand pounds, so the gas volumes will be similar. Lally states that a 20-foot diameter gas bubble lifts 300 lbs - that's 20 feet at ground level, expanding to ten times that at altitude. This might just lift two naked men, hanging on a rope under the envelope, but no gondola - and certainly not one weighing thousands of pounds. The 7000lb (3 1/2 US net ton) Stratoscope II telescope required a ground-level gas bubble 70 feet in diameter. And that package could not hit the earth with sufficient force to create impact marks with a force of 8 tons if there was any buyancy left in the balloon. It would have to have been a burst balloon or a cut down balloon, which would have no chance of "taking off" again even in a strong wind. However there is the issue of auxiliary lift provided by some other means in a hybrid design. There are hybrid lift designs discussed in the Goddard library. I found one discussion of tethering balloons above rotor craft for example, which was mooted as a heavy-lift system for logging operations - though this was not pursued for safety reasons. In this case the balloon is considered to take care of lift for the apparatus, leaving only a surprisingly small helicopter necessary to take care of the operational load. An analogous argument could apply presumably for an experimental "LEM", with rockets in place of rotors needing only thrust sufficient to lift an "operational load" of two crew, and maybe contrariwise an efficient auxilliary lifter could permit use of a small gas volume? But as David Rudiak shows, the scenario is impossible unless the rocket or rotor lift and lateral thrust continue to be supplied during the object's "silent" flight against the wind, and there is still no explanation of the force required to produce landing
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:26:19 +0100 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:07:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:58:52 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:56:39 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >I don't think the science to date is definitive proof of a correlation, so I agree also that a contemporary quantitative analysis, even if flawed, could at least suggest an answer to the question... is there a clear correlation and concentration of UFO sightings in or near nuclear facilities. From that well might spring much of consequence, although ultimately I am sadly doubtful. In fact, I don't really know where the conclusion drawn would logically lead. More accusations of government cover-up? I don't know if that's productive or decidedly unproductive. And we may find no correlation after all. What would we then conclude? Kyle, Perhaps I missed some part of the discussion, but have you read carefully the statistical study of Donald A. Johnson? I repeat the first lines of my last post of yesterday, answering to Martin Shough: "One of the reference texts I was relying upon was the article published in IUR of Summer 2002 (I still have paper references): "Do nuclear activities attract UFO's?", by Donald A. Johnson. And you gave the reference on the web yourself: http://www.cufon.org in the "contributors" section This article answers positively to the question! BTW, I must apologize for two spelling mistakes in my message - read Malmstrom instead of Malstrom, and Stonehill instead of Stonewell.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Brazilian Air Force Admits UFO Investigations From: A. J. Gevaerd <editor.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:29:17 -0200 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:08:49 -0500 Subject: Brazilian Air Force Admits UFO Investigations A Brazilian UFO Magazine Report Brazilian Air Force Admits UFO Investigations 27 years on, the UFO phenomenon is still under wraps with the Brazilian military. A petition asks the Brazilian President, Lula da Silva to disclose the secret files. Article by Carlos Mendes. Translated by Paulo Santos of the Brazilian UFO Magazine team. Submitted to O Liberal newspaper. Distributed by the Brazilian UFO Magazine www.ufo.com.br ----- Introduction In the months of October, November and December, 1977, and during the first half of 1978, the Brazilian state of Para was invaded by UFOs. And it wasn't simply sightings. Nothing to do with mysterious lights wandering at high altitudes. It was about bright objects, in several shapes and sizes, flying over the Marajo Bay region at low altitude, a few meters above the trees and firing strong beams of light at people. The people harmed by the phenomenon - one of the most important cases in the world and still under research nowadays - gave several names to the silent and bright objects: "vampire light", "bug", "the thing" and mainly "chupa-chupa" (the sucker). They said the objects pilots were beings with the height of 1.20 or 1.30 metres. The people called it 'chupa-chupa' because of the weird scars left on the victims bodies. The light beams left tiny holes on the skin. Among women, the scars were on their breasts. They seemed to loose blood during the attack. Men and women complained of giddiness, body numbing and headaches after the attacks. The inhabitants of the cities of Colares, Santo Antonio do Taua, Mosqueiro and Baia do Sol panicked on these days of bitter remembrance. The panic even affected the state's capital, Belem, with a sequence of strange lights reports and chupa-chupa attacks in several quarters of the city, astonishing the authorities. High Mystery At the end of the '70s, scientists from all over the world came to Para, Brazil, but they all failed to explain the phenomenon. Twenty-seven years later, documents from the Brazilian Air Force's secret service reveal that these lights from space were something much more unsettling than we can imagine. The explanation of the phenomenon is: there's no explanation. It is still a big mystery and a huge challenge to science and to the Air Force's experts. Ufologists, scientists and researchers from Brazilian universities are collecting signatures to a petition that will be delivered to the Brazilian President, Lula da Silva. It asks that the Air Force reveal the conclusions of the investigation on the chupa-chupa case. The petition already has thousands of signatures: physicists, biologists, journalists, officers and politicians among them. The campaign is called UFOs: Freedom of Information Now - see: www.ufo.com.br/secrecy.php The military's report, named Operation Saucer, has 2,000 pages, 500 photographs and some 16 hours of film. It was sent to the highest ranking officers in the Air Force. At that time, the country had a dictatorship government and, because of this, those documents have been kept classified for more than 23 years. The report's conclusion wasn't revealed. The military were afraid of some relationship between the object's invasion and the communists, maybe a new weapon to destabilize the military regime. The national information service (note: SNI in Portuguese) and the Air Force's secret service decided to keep the results classified. But through a brave Air Force officer, Captain Uyrange Hollanda, part of the report became public, through an interview he gave to Brazilian UFO Magazine's editor A. J. Gevaerd. Captain Hollanda was the operation'a commander, sent by the government on a secret operation to investigate the facts and interview the chupa-chupa victims. Researchers got a copy of the report along with the victims reports to the officer. The most interesting was from a farmer called Claudomira Paixao. She lived in Baia do Sol and said that, on the night of October 18th, 1977, she woke up when a strong light appeared through her window. "The air got warmer. At first, the light was green and touched my head and crossed my face. I woke up completely and the light became red. I could see a creature, like a man, wearing something like a diver's suit. It had a device like a pistol. It aimed at me and flashed three times, as if shooting at my breast, almost always in the same spot. It was hot and hurt me. I felt like there were needles piercing me. I think they collected my blood. I was terrified. I couldn't even move my legs. I was shocked." What she told the military was very important because, for the first time, someone mentions a being leaving the flying object to extract blood. Almost all stories talk about lights causing giddiness, weakness and "trembling". The only exception was a case, also in Baia do Sol, that involved the appearance of a 'space-couple' that shot at a fisherman with a light-beam pistol, leaving him unconscious for several minutes. Uyrange Hollanda =96 Brazilian UFO Magazine files Carpenter Shoots At Flying Saucer Captain Uyrange Hollanda described, in his Operation Saucer report, an alien aircraft flying over the region caused panic among the locals and which drove some people to despair. They used to use fireworks to warn the neighborhood when chupa-chupa was coming. They often shot, with their hunting rifles, at the UFOs, the Captain told Brazilian UFO Magazine - www.ufo.com.br "We always told them: don't shoot, don't shoot!" Once, a strong light was aimed at a carpenter. The man was 50 or 60 years old. He grabbed his rifle and shot at the flying saucer. A beam of light surrounded him and he fell to the ground, almost paralysed. For 15 days the carpenter could hardly move. In the first day the man didn't move at all. He could see, hear and speak but it was very difficult for him to move." Said the Captain, in an interview with Brazilian UFO Magazine - the only magazine interested in hearing his impressive story. A Colares fishermen also saw UFOs flyng in and out of the waters of the Marajo bay. Sometimes, they could see bluish lights moving under the water. "Once, I was sleeping when the Sergeants - members of the operation - told me they took a photograph of a flying saucer diving into the water close to a boat. I went to the beach and waited for the fisherman. When he came back he told me what happened. He was terrified. Several weeks later I saw a light close to a fishing-boat. It was blue and surrounded the boat once or twice, by 300 meters, then it dived into the water. There wasn't any sound. It was like a blade passing through the water." said the Captain. No Explanation For The Injuries The Captain also heard from Wellaide Cecim Carvalho, the town doctor of Vigia in 1977. She said she took care of more than 40 victims and she saw burns on their bodies. Because of her job, she asked the Captain to keep her interview secrect. She was afraid of being considered ridiculous if people found out she had no explanation for the injuries. The locals - the majority fishermen and farmers - couldn't understand why they were chosen by the lights. They had just one certainty: they were terrified of being guinea-pigs to unknown beings from another planet. And they didn't know whether they would survive the weird experience. The Captain and his team were tired of seeing bright objects flying in front of them. The objects even stopped, waiting for them when they were taking photographs or filming. He couldn't disguise his astonishment. In the report he admits these are weird phenomena. When he developed the photographs of the craft, taken from a distance of 20 m, he had a surprise: the objects didn't appear in some of them. They could only be seen in the negatives. "I think these objects were doing a show for us", the Captain said in the report. In fact, in a very good shot taken on Mosqueiro island, one can clearly see the shape of a UFO that came close to the team at very low altitude. Hollanda said he could see "short humanoid beings" inside the craft. This, if said overtly by him, the operation commander, could seriously affect Operation Saucer's credibility. Although Hollanda's superior, Commander Protasio Lopes de Oliveira, now deceased, believed in the existence of extraterrestrial beings. Captain Hollanda also told Brazilian UFO Magazine that Commander Oliveira would have been "very happy" knowing that chupa-chupa was something so interesting and unexplained to human science. And what the military saw wasn't unknown to the locals. A fisherman from Ponta do Cajueiro said one of the beings was about 1.20m tall. Priest Witnessed Object Appearing A priest, Alfredo de La O responsible for the Colares church at the time, also deceased, was also interviewed by the military. One of his reports: One night when he was driving he saw a bright object, cone- shaped and far away. It was at 100 meters, altitude more or less, and descending. It seemed to be landing. "I stopped and got out of the car to see it better. It's lights were green, red and yellow and turned on and off clockwise. It was swaying but, suddenly, the lights became stronger and it went up. It disappeared and did not land.", said the priest. At two o'clock on the morning of November 27th, 1977, the Air Force agents were paying attention to three, different sized, bright objects, at a place called Ponta do Machadinho. Apparently they'd landed about 3,000 metres from the team. Suddenly, the smaller object got closer to the bigger one. A few seconds later, it flew northeast, towards Belem. The other two stayed for some seconds more and then rose fast, disappearing in different directions. Another five bright objects were seen in November 28th, at 5000 meters, over the city of Colares. After some time, they drew closer to a bigger one. They had yellow, red and green lights. One object left the others and started to emit a strong blue light at a place called Ponta do Bacuri. Later, they came together again and flew toward Baia do Sol, Mosqueiro, at high speed. A fisherman, terrified, reported to the military, the sighting of a dark UFO reflecting a bluish light. He was then interviewed by a crew of the Brazilian UFO Magazine. Object Fires A Ray At Locals And Flies Away One of the reports describes a yellow to red object flying at low altitude and without noise. Suddenly, it emitted a long bluish light beam hitting a victim on the lumbar region - which became numb. The victim also complained of paralysing, muscular pain, and others for several days. Another report, by a Colares local, describes a flying object of about a hundred metres in size. He said the object emitted strong light beams toward the city. When it stopped the local aimed his rifle at the object and shot once. Then, he ran away and hid in some bushes. Several locals spoke of a sighting over the Jejutaua Estuary. A big, bright object at approximately 1,500m and flying faster than a jet plane. The object turned suddenly and disappeared into the dark night over Marajo Bay. On November 1st, 1977, the military, who had set up a UFO observation post on the Colares water-tower, when at midnight, a blue light, already seen in previous sightings, was moving from South to North and stopped above a sand bank called Coroa Vermelha. Another bright object, yellow to red, flew closer and became dark when it touched the light. Half an hour later, another object did the same, disappearing after 'landing' on the blue light. Captain Hollanda said that a huge bright object, which seemed to be the "mothership"', was been a 100 meters from the observation post. "I was terrified. At that moment I didn't know what might happen. They could have taken us. They could have done anything they wanted to us. Another time, the team was at Baia do Sol. It was around 7:00 in the morning, Hollanda says, soon after sunrise. "We hadn't see anything when, suddenly, a huge disc-shaped object, more or less 30 metres in diameter and 50 metres in height, hovered above us". Collecting Materials Operation Saucer came to an end when the Air Force canceled the work without explanation. Hollanda's conclusion - he had been found hanged with his own bathrobe belt by his daughters in 1997, on the second floor of his expensive house, a death officially called "suicide by asphyxia" - "the space beings called chupa-chupa by the locals were not attacking people but "collecting materials". "Over-flying Brazilian air space in bands - in the same way aerial photography does - the objects started overn Maranhao, then Colares, Marajo, Monte Alegre, Santarem, Manaus, covering all the region as if they had a schedule". Why the Air Force canceled the operation? Hollanda's answer: "I don't know why they took it for granted. The Air Force wasn't interested, but I was". Brazilian UFO Magazine - www.ufo.com.br - carries over 500 pages of official secret documents of the Brazilian Air Force, most of them never admitted by the military or the government. About 230 are documents from Operation Saucer, obtained through several sources. All these files are free to download as illustration that the Brazilian government, although still in denial, does have a strong interest in UFO Phenomena and has conducted serious investigations into the matter. ----- A. J. Gevaerd, editor of the Brazilian UFO Magazine, can be contacted at: gevaerd.nul Operation Saucer official secret documents can be downloaded at:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:57 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:25:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:56:12 EST >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >The thing I saw behind my house in 1997 was also in the same >direction as the moon - only the moon had already set minutes >earlier. This thing looked almost exactly like the moon but did >things the moon cannot. If you (or anyone) had ever interviewed >me or the other two witnesses in person, you would know that we >were not mistaken in what we saw. And it wasn't the first or >last time these kinds of things have been seen. Hi Amy, Perhaps this is a naive question, given that I'm sure you must have considered it, but is there a possibility that this "phantom" moon - on the horizon in the same azimuth as the moon - was in fact a superior mirage image of the moon below the horizon? Whenever you see the moon on the horizon it is in fact already below it, but it is shifted upward about half a degree from the geometrical line of sight by standard refraction. I mention this because, as you may know, there are a) many observations of the sun or the moon at the horizon being multiplied, stretched or split into blobs and bands, sometimes (in the case of the sun) with red and green colours separated by refraction; and also b) well-regarded reports, in the academic literature, of _perfect_ images of the sun which are accepted as _some_ sort of mirage phenomenon, but which cannot be explained in terms of current atmospheric physics because they are wildly displaced laterally. As I don't know exactly what you saw this may be off-base but I thought it worth mentioning.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:49:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:27:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Kaeser >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:04:53 EST >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Let me be forth right about the so called balloon theories. This >load of hot air floats in and out about every 3-5 years. After >watching a number of theories advanced, people promoting this or >that balloon, the bottom line is, and I suspect always will be >is that nobody will be able to find any documentation about a >balloon flight that happened on April 24 1964, and flew into >Socorro then out again. If Errol will permit, I was contacted by Don Berliner (Chairman of the Fund for UFO Research) who had been watching this thread on UpDates, and he sent a few comments that he wanted to share: ==begin forwarded comments== Steve, Enough of this imagineering of balloons that look like no known balloons, nor fly like any known types of balloons in order to explain what Lonnie Zamora reported.. Had the Socorro UFO been a hot-air balloon, the blast of flame from the propane burner would have gone up into the bag to keep the air heated. Had it been directed downward (as Zamora described, and which explains the charring, etc., the air inside the bag would quickly have cooled and the bag would have been deflating and distorting. Had it been a helium - or (shudder!) hydrogen-filled balloon, there would have had to be either some hefty mechanical device affixed to the earth, or a crew of big groundcrew men holding guy ropes, to keep it from ascending as soon as the crew got out. Nothing remotely like either of these was reported by Zamora or Sgt. Chavez. In the barren wilds of New Mexico, neither could have been hidden. I have flown in hot-air balloons and in helium-filled blimps, and so have some experience.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:38:53 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:28:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:17:27 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:48:34 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >By Orthodoxy I take it you mean the real, intellectually >exhilarating, often wildly speculative physical and human >sciences, (see the recently posted article by Michio Kaku for >example) with their many disagreements and personality clashes. >Curiously, even though some of these make the most vitrupative >exchanges on updates look positively prim in comparison, no ever >uses words like skeptibunker. Argument, debate and the >challenging of established views are seen as part of the life >blood of the subject not as attacks on one's personal faith. If by this you mean that insults and ad hominem attacks play no part in science, then I'm afraid that is certainly untrue. >Of course there are basic rules, one being scientific naturalism >which means that you don't invoke supernatural forces or unknown >trans human intelligences to get you out of a tight corner. It's >by playing by these rules that real knowledge is gained. It may >be very difficult and take a long time but the paydirts can be >very profound. I'm not at all sure that the phrase "scientific naturalism" really means very much. It tends to be used rather loosely to cover two quite contradictory approaches to scientific research:- Positivism, which specifically disavows metaphysical claims; and materialism, which makes the explicitly metaphysical claim that the phenomena of the universe all derive from the operations of some underlying physical reality. (In fact, materialism is strictly a nineteenth-century doctrine and it is quite difficult to find a coherent modern, post-QM formulation of it.) One would probably find that most scientists - or at any rate most physical scientists - would claim to be both positivists and materialists, but that most probably reflects the fact that philosophy of science is not a primary concern for most working scientists. Likewise, I think it means very little to say that science disavows "supernatural forces", since the word "supernatural" is usually defined tautologically as anything which isn't scientific. If it has any meaning at all, it should probably be regarded as a synonym for "metaphysical", in which case one should note that the definition of what is metaphysical (that is, untestable) and what is amenable to scientific investigation necessarily changes with time. (Subatomic particles would have been metaphysical entities by the standards of medieval knowledge.) In any case, one should always distinguish between what is scientifically testable and what is actually true. We know of no law of nature which requires that truth is necessarily discernible by scientific investigation (or indeed by any other sort of investigation). Also, while it's certainly true that "trans-human intelligences" are not currently invoked to explain any observable phenomena, there is no reason to regard such explanations as inherently
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:40:15 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:30:00 -0500 Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Rudiak >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:05:25 -0500 >Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >http://www.nott.com/Pages/design.php >http://www.nott.com/Pages/Aerostat_AN_1-2.pdf >And go to our blog-site at http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com and click on the >Rudiak title. >The material is a PDF and will load slowly perhaps, and it's pretty dry >stuff, but seems to indicate that Rudiak didn't cover all the bases in >his rebuttal of Larry Robinson's and James Easton's hypotheses that >Zamora may have seen a experimental balloon. More deliberate vagueness from Rich Reynolds. What bases didn't I cover? >The physics outlined in the article should give pause to Dr. Rudiak, >since they counter his views somewhat. What physics? How does it counter my views "somewhat?" Why should anything in that article give me pause? Does Rich have any idea at all what he is talking about? All it shows is a _great_big_balloon_ lifting a heavy payload. That's the physics. Archimede's principle of buoyancy hasn't suddenly changed. You still need huge balloons to lift a heavy load (like two men, the men's compartment, fuel, a burner, landing gears, balloon envelope, etc.). Essential physics: Big balloon needed, but Socorro small. Got it
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Secrecy News -- 01/26/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:00:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:31:04 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/26/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 9 January 26, 2005 ** YET ANOTHER STATE SECRETS CASE ** STRATEGIC SUPPORT TEAMS AND VITAL ARCHER ** US SMALL ARMS SHIPMENTS DATABASE ** DOE CIVIL PENALTIES FOR CLASSIFIED INFO DISCLOSURES ** US ARMY NUCLEAR AND CHEMICAL AGENCY ** EVEN MORE CRS PRODUCTS ** THANKS TO THE OMIDYAR NETWORK YET ANOTHER STATE SECRETS CASE The Bush Administration has invoked the state secrets privilege in at least one other pending lawsuit in addition to the Maher Arar and Sibel Edmonds cases noted in Secrecy News yesterday. In 2003, the Central Intelligence Agency claimed the state secrets privilege in moving for dismissal of a lawsuit brought by Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer who alleged that he was the victim of racial discrimination by the Agency. That case, Sterling v. Tenet, remains on appeal today. In a December 2004 brief by Sterling's attorney, Mark S. Zaid, the appropriate use of the state secrets privilege was one of the questions placed before the court. A copy of the brief (56 pages, 2.1 MB PDF file) is here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling1204.pdf Last week, several public interest groups and 9/11 family organizations filed an amicus brief in support of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. That brief, prepared by Michael Kirkpatrick of Public Citizen and David Vladeck of Georgetown University, is here: http://www.citizen.org/documents/edmondsamicus.pdf STRATEGIC SUPPORT TEAMS AND VITAL ARCHER The Pentagon held a background briefing this week to describe the military intelligence units known as Strategic Support Teams that have been providing intelligence collection support and other intelligence services to the military. The briefing was prompted by, and substantially confirmed, a January 23 Washington Post story by Barton Gellman that first reported the existence of the Strategic Support Branch, a component of the Defense Intelligence Agency. See the January 24 Pentagon briefing transcript here: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/01/dod012405.html Meanwhile, more official documents on defense and intelligence continue to migrate from author William M. Arkin's capacious filing cabinet on to the web in support of his new book Code Names. The latest revelation is a PowerPoint slide that elliptically describes a 2005 U.S. military exercise known as VITAL ARCHER, involving special operations and homeland defense. See "Vital Archer 05" linked from this page: http://www.codenames.org/documents.html US SMALL ARMS SHIPMENTS DATABASE A database of small arms and light weapons transferred by the United States to countries around the world between 1990 and 2000 is now available online. The U.S. Small Arms Shipments Database, based on documentation obtained from the State Department under the Freedom of Information Act and compiled by Matthew Schroeder of the Federation of American Scientists, may be found here: http://fas.org/asmp/profiles/smallarmship_db.htm DOE CIVIL PENALTIES FOR CLASSIFIED INFO DISCLOSURES The Department of Energy will impose stiff new civil penalties on contractors who violate regulations on the safeguarding of classified information, DOE announced today. The new policy "provides that any person who has entered into a contract or agreement with the Department of Energy... and who violates (or whose employee violates) any applicable rule... relating to the security or safeguarding of Restricted Data or other classified information, shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000 for each violation." Up to now, criminal penalties could be imposed on those who knowingly disclosed certain types of classified nuclear weapons information, and civil penalties could be imposed on those who disclosed unclassified controlled nuclear information (UCNI). But civil penalties for failing to safeguard other classified information (whether RD or NSI) have not been available. Now they are. See "Procedural Rules for the Assessment of Civil Penalties for Classified Information Security Violations" from today's Federal Register: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/01/fr012605.html US ARMY NUCLEAR AND CHEMICAL AGENCY The United States Army Nuclear and Chemical Agency is responsible for providing "nuclear and chemical technical expertise" to the Army, other US Government agencies and to NATO. The USANCA, with which we had not previously been acquainted, was described in a newly updated Army regulation this week. See AR 10-16, United States Army Nuclear and Chemical Agency, 25 January 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ar10-16.pdf EVEN MORE CRS PRODUCTS Perhaps it bears repeating that the Congressional Research Service does not permit direct public access to its publications online. CRS staffers are specifically prohibited from responding to requests from the public for softcopy versions of their reports. By light of the untamed fire of freedom, this policy appears fairly ridiculous. Fortunately, if we understood the President's inaugural address correctly, "America will walk at the side" of those who defy such arbitrary restrictions on freedom of access to information. Anyway, here are some new CRS reports, hot off the virtual press. "Security Threat Assessments for Hazmat Drivers," January 25, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32740.pdf "Terrorist Nuclear Attacks on Seaports: Threat and Response," updated January 24, 2005: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21293.pdf "U.S.-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism," January 19, 2005: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RS22030.pdf THANKS TO THE OMIDYAR NETWORK Secrecy News is grateful to acknowledge an extraordinary $15,000 donation from the Omidyar Network. Led by Pierre Omidyar, founder of the online market eBay, the Omidyar Network seeks out and supports innovative efforts "to make good things happen." "We appreciate your work in removing barriers to information access," wrote Omidyar VP Douglas S. Solomon in a cover letter to Secrecy News. See a list of Omidyar Network "partners" including Secrecy News here: http://www.omidyar.net/corp/partners.shtml _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Roswell Book In Clinton's White House - Davids From: Grant Cameron <presidentialufo.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:20:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:41:05 -0500 Subject: Re: Roswell Book In Clinton's White House - Davids ----- From: Paul Davids <Roswellufo.nul> To: presidentialufo.nul Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:50:17 EST Subject: Re: Roswell Book In Clinton's White House >From: John W. Auchettl - PRAM <praufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:39:24 +1100 (EST) >Subject: Roswell Book In Clinton's White House >Phenomena Research Australia Melbourne >Hi Errol & List Members, >I thought it was important to put onto the UFO UpDates record >this interesting Roswell UFO curio. <snip> Hello, John, I thought I should respond to your discovery by letting you know that I'm quite certain that the copy of UFO Crash At Roswell in President Clinton's personal library was the copy of the book I sent him, along with our film, Roswell, (starring Kyle MacLachlan and Martin Sheen and Dwight Yoakam). Our Viacom Showtime film (1994) was based on the Randle/Schmitt book and the film is still available on DVD. The President responded with a thank you note to me for the materials I sent to him but did not reference them. My correspondence with President Clinton about Roswell and other correspondence is published in the 2004 MUFON International UFO Symposium Proceedings from Denver this past summer (there are photos of the actual letters). I gave a talk at that symposium entitled Profiles In UFO Courage that included details about my correspondence with President Clinton, who was one of my father's students in 1968 at Georgetown University. You'll find some information about my father, Dr. Jules Davids, and his connection to John and Jackie Kennedy, and the contribution he made in writing JFK's Profiles In Courage at my website: www.pauldavids.com under EARLY YEARS - PARENTS. There was a time when I believed we might see some breakthroughs on this issue from President Clinton, who was so instrumental in declassifying so many government documents that provided public access to many historic records that had been secret. Instead, of course, we got "Project Mogul" from the Air Force, followed not too long thereafter by the resignation of the Secretary of the Air Force - if my recollection of the timeline is accurate.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: ohn Tosti Case? - Connelly From: Dwight Connelly <publishdc.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:35:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:43:03 -0500 Subject: Re: ohn Tosti Case? - Connelly >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 02:17:49 -0500 >Subject: John Tosti Case? >I came across a website today that has an alien picture that is >said to have been taken by John Tosti. The image looks like a >double exposure. Anyone know if this pic was indeed taken by >John Tosti? If so, this cast major doubt about his case. >Picture: >http://sentinelfiles.tripod.com/bathrmalien.htm >Anyone know of a prop that looks like this? >To refresh your memory about the case in question visit >http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid37 Aaron,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Majority Of British X-Files To Be Released From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:20:40 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:45:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Majority Of British X-Files To Be Released >From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:08:33 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Majority Of British X-Files To Be Released After February 1 >Source: The Journal, Newcastle upon Tyne, >http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/contactus/ >01-24-05 >X-files >By Daniel Thomson >The Journal <snip> >"The MoD does not have any expertise or role in respect of UFOs >and flying saucer matters, or to question the existence or >otherwise of extraterrestrial lifeforms, about which it rem>ains >totally open-minded. >"The MoD examines any UFO reports it receives solely to >establish whether what was seen might have some defence >significance. But to date the MoD knows of no evidence, which >substantiates the existence of these alleged phenomena." I'm late coming to this thread. Hope it is still open for discussion. I have a question which not only applies to the UK's MOD but to other NATO countries as well, specifically the United States'simular line of reason re the subject of UFOs/UAP. How can either the UK or the US take this attitude in light of the present condition that exists in both countries. Never mind what they were doing back then, what are they doing now? Are the UK and the US blowing off UAP reports from their own military facilities, or even civilian facilities, as that "phenomenon" that no longer interests us because they aren't a threat to national security. HOW DO THEY KNOW THIS UNLESS THEY CHECK EACH ONE OUT FIRST? Let's not forget the aura of tension that exists now particularly in the United States and their Homeland Security program, and I'm surethe same applies in the United Kingdom. Are we to believe that the USAF, for example, blows off reports of uncorrelated objects because they "just know" these are UAP. How can they take that chance? I don't think that they do ignore them. To the contrary they check each of their own "targets" carefully, scrammble aircraft to attempt interdictions and examine every technical asset at hand, including satellite surveillance, passive and aggressive radar returns, etc. What happens then if they do interdict a target that is not conventional, because I'm betting they do? Do they just ignore it? How could they? In light of the present day's war of nerves due to terrorism- particularly in the respective countries involved in the War in Iraq - it makes me wonder at statements such as was just issued by the UK's MOD and of course the the same line often spouted by the DoD in the United States.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 27 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:34:27 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:53:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:17:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:10:12 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:59:43 -0500 >>>Subject: Socorro & Balloons [was: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma] >>I think it's important to note that the Socorro case was one >>that Project Blue Book spent some time and effort on, but wasn't >>able to resolve what Lonnie Zamorra had seen. While Hot Air >>Balloons were relatively unknown in the mid 60's, I would >>strongly suspect that the Air Force would have had some idea of >>what they were and wouldn't have been confused by them. >>This is a mystery that will not be resolved without a grand >>revelation of some sort, or the use of a time machine. Larry's >>(and Easton's) theories are as relevent as the reader interprets >>them to be, but they obviously aren't supported by many in this >>genre. Whether there's an advantage to re-debating the issue has >>yet to be seen. >Steve: >Let me suggest this.... >The slate is clean for me in the Socorro case, here at UFO UpDates. >No one has read through, as far as I can tell, the NASA- >sponsored PDF at our blog-site, which is enlightening. >And I have today received new material from Larry Robinson, an >Indiana University engineer, about his balloon hypothesis and Being an engineer, Larry Robinson ought to have know better than to try and make the balloon theory fit. The tip-off should have been the small size of the thing. I see little mention of the wind direction by Larry or others on this list and there should be since that has been said to be at odds with the object's direction of flight and another nail in the balloon theory coffin. As for the information in the "blog" PDF, that is a general description of a much larger hot-air balloon or gas balloon with a heavier gondola than could have been lifted aloft by an auto-sized envelope, whether it be gas or hot-air.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:04:29 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:39:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Sparks >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:56:12 EST >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Brad, you said, "out of which maybe the one at Corona is clearly >>>just the moon low on the horizon, and that's about it for the >>>IFO's!" This caught my attention because the object I saw in >>>1997, looked exactly like that - the moon low on the horizon. >>>But it was not the moon and did not behave like it either (there >>>were two other witnesses). Ya just never know what's what and >>>what's not anymore. >>I have little time now to respond to these kinds of posts, but >>will quickly respond to this. >>The Corona sighting was in exactly the same direction as the >>moon, and low on the horizon. You are sidetracking my point. >And you, mine. This thread started with Nuclear - UFO connections and you have sidetracked it onto your moon-like UFO sighting. My point concerned how the agencies involved with the Holloman-Kirtland- Los Alamos bases had very percentages of Unknowns in their worried discussions, with very few if any IFO's (I cited the Corona moon as one of the few). You come back with some absurd plea for nihilism. Now you try to nuance it with alleged "critical thinking" as if I don't have any and you have to rescue me from this terrible lack. When it is in fact my critical thinking and analysis that realized the high percentage of Unknowns in these documents in the first place, since the documents or authors themselves seem to have no awareness of the UFO vs. IFO statistical issue that we today in 2005 are so concerned with. >Brad, I know you are an intelligent man. An intelligent person >never assumes he or she knows it all. If I am wasting your >precious time, feel free to move on to the next discussion. >Right now - hit the "delete" button! I can't hit the "delete" button Amy because this Martian next to me is holding my finger back preventing me from Deleting! How do you know there isn't a Martian stopping me from hitting Delete? You don't. If we took your extremist form of argument every damned thing would be doubted to the point of absurdity without having to have a shred of supporting evidence for the scenario that is implied by the extreme doubt. Or else we are reduced to incoherence in our understanding of history. Just for your FYI, I have been in the forefront of critical analytical thinking about government UFO documents and history for 30+ years, since just such analysis enabled me to get the CIA to fully declassify the Robertson Panel report (I would fill in their deletions till they got to the point of deciding there was no point in withholding any of it). By the way I didn't use FOIA, I used MDR. I followed that up by analyzing 100,000's of pages of government documents and numerous histories and interviewed 100 CIA, AF, NSA and other intelligence officials to critically assess the documents and to use the documents to critically assess the interviewees. If you bothered to read what I've written you would see I apply critical analysis everywhere, but not a nihilism that leaves behind a wake of incoherence. Read my RB-47 report, 31 pages, in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., which critically analyzes Phil Klass' seemingly very convincing explanation of the case and not just unravels his explanations like some kind of psychosocial exercise in nitpicking but finds dramatic positive support for the case from Klass' work, which he had not seen or expected. Klass discovered that a ground radar site had been detected on the RB-47's ELINT (Electronic Intelligence) detectors and he thought that explained the unidentified radar signals. However I discovered that the UFO radar signal and the Duncanville ADC ground radar signal were _both_ detected at the same time in different (correct) directions, thus actually proving (calibrating) the accuracy of the equipment in real-time. Etc. etc. Again read my 1999 paper on Ruppelt's Coverups and you will see I take apart the tissue of lies that Ruppelt spins in his writings designed to cover up evidences of official coverup. If you do, you will see plain evidence that the AF and CIA and other agencies release info they don't really want to release all the time, for the reasons I already gave (accidents occur all the time, some officials don't understand or care about what
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:40:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' >From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:23:01 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' Observatory <snip> >Two other York U. researchers and myself have also proposed >using the ground based 70 metre radio telescope to emit a strong >radio pulse towards two gravitationally balanced points in space >60 degrees in front and 60 degrees behind the Moon's orbit and >to listen for an echo (more of an active rather than a passive >radar experiment). I have reasons to believe that there is a >debris field in this region of space consisting of meteoroids >and other ET garbage left over since the creation of the Earth- >Moon system. Curious here, Nick - What exactly do you mean by "60 degrees in front [or behind] the Moon's orbit"? The orbit is pretty close to a circle - and I'm not clear whether you mean 60 degree arcs in the plane of the orbit, or some other direction. Also why would a point in space return an echo? Does this have anything to do with "libration points" (which I've never understood.) Being simple minded, I can only conceive of one point between the Moon and Earth where gravity would exactly cancel. When I look at this diagram: http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~megraw/MATH1/lib.html The only one that looks like a gravitational balance to me is point L1. L2 looks like it would be tugged on by both the Sun and the earth in the same direction, for example. Are points L4
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:03:34 +0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:41:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:16:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >The number of academic, scientific, government funded research >into psychic phenomena has been tremendous and has been going on >for at least a century, but what has it to show for itself, the >issue is STILL not settled by any stretch of the imagination, >even though you can LOOK at the studies and see that there is >some odd effect going on. <snip> James, Do you really think that any "settlement" of psi phenomena that was reached in a government (read: intelligence/military) sponsored lab would necessarily be made public? You are right - there is "some odd effect going on". I _know_ through my own experiences that there is something to this phenomenon. However, I don't understand the mechanisms behind it. Imagine the impact it would have on our lives if we did. If you were responsible for the security of your country would you want that type of information released. Imagine a technology that could, at the very least, allow you to access information about other people and places regardless of their position in space or time relative to you. We would have a world with no secrets. Can you imagine the intelligence community coming out and saying, "The secret is - there are no secrets! You all have the potential to know what everyone else is up to/thinking/etc. You all have the potential to see what is in our secret files. Blah blah blah"? Let me put this to you... which of the following scenarios do you think is more likely? The government/intelligence/military sponsors a programme for around 20 years to confirm that "some odd effect is going on" which could, if understood, have immense ramifications on their access to information on just about anything and anyone..... And then they just throw it in the too hard basket and forget the entire thing. Or Driven by the facts presented by the SRI team, a separately compartmentalised black project is established to identify the mechanisms of psi and how it may be enhanced thru the application of technology (in much the same way that sight is enhanced with night vision goggles, binoculars, etc and hearing is enhanced with hearing aids, etc). I think psi is too powerful a weapon/tool for the sponsoring parties to have thrown it into the too hard basket. I tend to think that they would put psi in the Manhattan Project Basket. In which case, Brad, we are yet to find out who those top 10-100 scientists are.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 02:24:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:43:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:56:39 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:41:06 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>Ya just never know what's what and >>what's not anymore. >So maybe _all_ the Holloman reports were Unknowns then? Not necessarily. I prefer to leave doors open and call something no one has yet been able to identify a temporary or possible unknown and anything that appears (on the surface) to be identifiable, a possible IFO. I will explain why. While on the surface an object may seem unidentified or identified, I have found it best to leave the question open in many cases. For example, for about 8 years now I have been collecting UFO reports in which strange objects were observed near the moon. Sometimes they flew around, under or in front of the moon and sometimes they were observed to fly 'into' the moon and disappear. Because the other two people who saw what I saw that night in 1997 also saw two cigar-shaped objects go 'into' the moon which then descended into the field below, I know that things flying into the "moon" is not so unusual (once you get use to the idea). In many of the cases I have collected and even several investigated by representatives of well-known UFO organizations, the objects were called "UFOs" but the moon remained the moon (identified/ IFO). None of the investigators took the time to see if the moon was even visible at the time the UFOs were observed near it. Guess what? The moon was not even visible at the time the objects were sighted or was actually in another part of the sky or in a different phase than the 'moon' described. There are even cases in which the real moon (according to lunar charts) was observed in the sky at the same time a second 'moon' and unidentified objects were sighted. These sightings are often dismissed or ignored simply because they don't fit in the typical UFO sighting paradigm. Our labels and definitions establish the parameters of our awareness. By defining something as an "unknown", we place it in a category that implies it cannot be known and is therefore unsolvable. Labeling something "identified" implies we know what it is. We may use these labels for communication but in our cognitions, we must remain clear. >>How in the heck can you declare something "unknown" yet say it >>wasn't an IFO, at the same time? How can you say what something >>is or is not if you don't know what it is/was to begin with? >Surely we've made our peace with the awkward epistemological >status of "unknown" after six decades, haven't we? Of course >it's an open-ended category, but the idea is that a UFO is not >an IFO by definition, an operational definition: The information >is such as we say _ought_ to be sufficient to identify the cause >of the sighting in normal circumstances. So the conclusion >Unknown labels an abnormal circumstance. The question of what >was seen is not closed off, but remains open. One would hope this is the case but it doesn't always work out that way. >>Which brings to mind another question... Is it possible the >>"Green Fireballs" needed to be considered 'unknowns' otherwise >>some agency might be held accountable for answers or >>explanations? As long as you declare something unidentified, >>unknown or unexplained, no one is responsible for anything. >>Security agencies can't be held accountable for something they >>can't explain or stop. Militaries can't be held responsible for >>doing their jobs in reference to unexplained phenomena (even >>when these things fly over nuclear or other sensitive >>facilities). And scientists can't study something they can't >>catch. What gets me most is that the general public has accepted >>this for so long. >This is a good point I think. The fact that everybody denied >responsibility for the GFs doesn't of itself mean that they >weren't terrestrial technology. We do have evidence that >governments in different parts of the world have "allowed" UFO >beliefs to cover aerospace/intelligence activities from time to >time, and a concerted policy of exploitation is not impossible. >On the other hand, there are all manner of questions raised >here: e.g.What were these things doing streaking about >exclusively over northern NM and startling commercial pilots, >when instrumented secure ranges were available at White Sands in >the south? And where do they fit in the evolutionary chain of >known aerospace developments? This remarkable programme ought to >have left _some_ trace either of its technology or its purpose - >unless you take on board the whole ultra-deep black technology >conspiracy theory, I suppose. Well stated, Martin. Just because we can't yet trace their origins to man-made technologies does not automatically mean they were/are extraterrestrial. And why wouldn't there be black technology? No conspiracy theory, just common sense. Wouldn't make sense to go around telling everyone what you have now would it? As for leaving some trace in the history of technology, I am of the opinion that some of what appears so "otherworldly" may be designed to appear so (CC&D). The GF's remain in my still- scratching-my-head file but I think we are seeing hybrid technologies in many of the UFO cases. If we are not use to seeing these things, they may definitely seem bizarre at first. Do you remember when people were running around talking about "black helicopter" sightings? haha. They have become quite common now. No one is really shocked to see them anymore - unless they are chasing you or something. Maybe we are just seeing new man-made technologies we have never imagined before. >>I, for one, do not think potential correlation studies between >>UFOs and nuclear facilities (of any kind) are a waste of time. >>In fact, I think _where_ these sightings occur is just as >>important as what is seen, by whom, when, and how long >>(intensity, frequency, duration). Instead of just sticking pins >>in maps designating cities or countries where UFOs have been >>observed, correlations may also be found between UFOs, >>landmarks and/or geographical references. For example, ever >>wonder how many UFOs are sighted near highways, rivers, lakes, >>bodies of water, mountains, power lines and railroads? What >>correlations might exist between NOE, H2O, radar, geological >>sources and UFOs? >I'm not familiar with "NOE". Some of the other correlations you >mention have been proposed often over the decades, but usually >only anecdotally. You're right, it would would be good to be >able to test these quantitatively. NOE = Nap Of the Earth, flying close to the ground. Military uses this technique extensively, especially with UAV's and MAV's. Do you know what kind of fuel you get from water? >>As for UFOs demonstrating "specific intent"... I would think >>their mere presence near secure facilities demonstrates intent - >>specific or vague. >The earth is constantly bombarded by countless billions of solar >neutrinos and high energy cosmic ray protons from the more >distant universe. There's a lot of space out there. What are all >these particles doing right here? Intent? On your reasoning it >could look that way. How do you know they don't have intelligence and/or intent? <g> >>I doubt they are lost, need to pee or just >>want to ask directions. Why they are sighted in these areas is >>directly related to their intent. Just because we don't know >>their objectives does not mean they don't have any. And just >>because they haven't blown one up doesn't mean they won't >>someday. >Just because the conclusion Unknown is an operational >defrinition that labels an abnormal circumstance, we don't know >what "they" are or whether "objectives" has any meaning applied >to them. But I suppose you are right on the precautionary >principle to allow the possibility of a threat to nuclear sites >or whatever. The question then arises: What do you do about it? >Obviously the only thing you can do is attempt to convince those >in charge of security that your threat analysis indicates a >clear and present danger that should be prioritized along with >technical failure, terrorist sabotage etc etc. Then, arguing >that the "mere presence" of UFO sightings near this or that >installation at some time or other is self-evidently proof of >alien intent just won't cut it. Actually, Martin, I would hypothesize that if any of them are man-made, they could be here, there or anywhere for a variety of reasons, terrorism being only one. If they are military in origin, they may be conducting exercises over nuclear facilities on their own turf before heading over to more hostile countries to conduct surveillance. The closer you get to the real thing, the better the exercise. Pretend to be what would be recognized and reported as a "UFO" and no one would believe any witnesses anyway. If they actually looked like something man-made, couldn't you just imagine the headlines and the foo-fah? Maybe we can't really stop any presumed UFOs from hovering around nuclear facilities or behind our homes but we should have some say if it is one of ours. If this is our own militaries doing this and letting people assume they are UFOs from outer space, who is going to regulate these covert operations? Even if it is all in our "best interest", where do our rights end and theirs begin? I think we have become almost apathetic when it comes to UFOs. No one seems concerned that flying objects of unknown origins and intent are coming and going as they please over our cities and our homes. You think they'd let some unidentified airplane do that? Hell no. Then why are we seeing these things and why is our military telling us they don't exist and in the same breath, pose no threat? What if some terrorist group builds some UAV's and flies them around dropping deadly toxins or biological agents? How will the military know what's going on if they not paying attention to UFO reports? I'm sure they understand how quickly terrorism is becoming technologically advanced. Why, just the other day I saw a post by some guy on a UAV web site offering to sell his latest UAV to the highest bidder. He was not the only one. Sorry, Martin, I have children and I am not happy that some "thing" hovered behind my house and no one did a damned thing about it or even cared. I expect more of a government and military that is sworn to protect us. I don't know if it had "intent" but I know it should not have been there. I hold my government and military accountable for their actions or lack
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:09:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:47:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:20:03 -0600 >Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:37:04 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:38:12 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs ><snip> >>>The subtitle of the Friedman-Berliner book, Crash At Corona, is >>>certainly not 'The Definitive study of the Roswell Incident'. It >>>is 'The U.S. Military Retrieval and cover-up of a UFO'. >>>At least that is the case in the original 1992 edition. At what >>>point did it get transformed into "The definitive study... ."? >>>And why? >>You do know how the book business works, right? >>Cognoscenti know the marketing that publishers use to sell >>books. ><snip> >>You and I don't even deserve to polish Stan Friedman's shoes. >Chris' problem with the newspaper article cited is that the >book, Crash at Corona, has a subtitle... "The U.S. Military >Retrieval And Cover-up Of A UFO". The subtitle in the article is >an invention or perhaps the opinion of the writer, not the book >publisher. The writer placed the title in quotes as if it is the >correct title of the book... it is not. >This has little to do with Stan's legitimacy, but much to say >about the writer of the article. >This article was not a publisher's blurb, it was an article >written by a supposed journalist in what passes these days for a >"newspaper", the Fort Myers News-Press. >I believe Chris was impugning... rightly... the accuracy of the >most basic statement the author made... the name of the book >itself. Among other things. >Stan Friedman never wrote a book called "Crash at Corona: The >Definitive Study of the Roswell Incident". That was an invention >of the writer of the article. He could easily have said that he >felt the book was the definitive study, but instead he asserted >that it was the title of the book. Shameful, and sadly rather >common these days. Journalists seem all too willing to state >opinion as fact these days, as if the stunning quantity of news >available hides the relatively lackluster quality thereof. Like, >who's gonna know? And more insidious... who's gonna care? >Chris is right to question any information in an article with >such a ridiculous error in the most basic information. Not to >mention, the error indicates a bias on the part of the author >which somewhat disqualifies the remainder from legitimate >consideration. He is no longer a journalist in this piece. He's >an advocate. >In journalism, you are only as credible as the least credible >item you produce. Check out Clifford Irving, Stephen Glass, etc. >for examples of how making up stories gets you a lifelong "no >admittance" card to the journalism field. This item includes >something completely inexcusable. The author obviously did not >even read the book, or if he did, he failed to pause at the >cover, to read the title. >The Fort Myers News-Press deserves a raspberry for the lack of >basic fact-checking, and Mark Krzos deserves a stint at Weekly >World News for his brand of "journalism". >If, as you say, Stan Friedman's shoes are unworthy of our elbow- >grease, I'm sure you feel that he doesn't need Mr. Krzos to >"improve" his work? Isn't it actually an insult that he felt the >need to embellish Stan's book title? As if the real title just >didn't have enough... legitimacy? >Best, My computer has been down for a few days - needed an update and tune up..... The facts are that the original 1992 hard cover title is "Crash At Corona" with a subtitle "The U.S. Military Retrieval and Cover-up of a UFO". This is on the inner cover. The dust jacket has the subtitle on top and "CRASH AT CORONA" in large orange print beneath it. Beneath that in smaller print it says "With Exclusive Testimony on a Second New Mexico Crash Site and new evidence of of the Government's Secret MJ-12 Team." This went through several printings. The Trade paper 1997 edition has the identical inner cover, but the outer cover added, at the strong suggestion of John White, Don Berliner's and my literary agent, The Definitive Study of the ROSWELL INCIDENT above "CRASH AT CORONA" (and replacing The U.S. Military..... There is a gold sticker saying 50th Anniversary Edition. An additional Chapter was provided. Technically that is out of print, but I still have a reasonable supply available (personally autographed) at only $15.00 including Priority mail shipping from me at POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958. List price is 13.95. I am also making a special offer of CAC, my CD-ROM "UFOs: The Real Story" and the controversial hard cover "Braxton County Monster: Cover-up of the Flatwoods Monster Revealed" (List is 29.95) by Frank Feschino Jr. (for which I wrote the Foreword and Epilogue) for only 43.00 Strangely I had raised some questions about the Shulgen quote as well.The reporter did do a phone interview. I gave him the title. The point was that most people had never heard of Corona but Roswell was becoming famous. Of all the books about Roswell, I think, CTA notwithstanding, that it deserved to be called Definitive in 1997. The article noted my job with McDonnell Douglas, which was the shortest (because of an untimely for me program cancellation) job I ever had... and none of the others. I do agree that Karl Pflock's book is probably the best of a number of anti-Roswell books. I certainly agree with Karl, for example, about Frank Kaufmann and some others. I certainly cannot agree with his brushing off Blanchard as a loose cannon or Pappy Henderson as just a practical joker. I talked with Pappy's daugher, son, son-in-law, wife, good friend Dr. John Kromshroeder, and his WW2 bombardier Vere McCarty to whom Pappy had told the story at a group reunion.Karl talked to none of these.He also has a number of false absence-of-evidence arguments . I think there is a picture on my website www.stanfriedman.com of the cover of "Crash at Corona"
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:48:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Reynolds >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:17:10 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >...I'm not set in stone regarding the hot air >balloon theory for Socorro, but I don't see a lot to support it >at this point. Others will, of course, disagree. Steve: An experimental craft seems a possibility for Socorro but I dare not mention that here, because some will get absolutely hysterical that a (supposed) "newbie" would suggest that hypothesis all over again, since it has been discussed ad infinitum, ad nauseum. We have given Larry Robinson a source for his "article" which tells the tale of balloonists being mistaken for aliens after a descent, which caused them to hurriedly ascend; this in the Southwest, 1964. Robinson's error is that he has fostered the idea that it was a hot-air balloon Zamora saw, and that has beclouded his credibility. He's locked into that missing article he saw years ago. Elsewhere I've input a somewhat detailed list of the aspects of the Socorro sighting which make it suspect as an alien craft (or
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:05:37 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:49:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. If the >balloon is at a high enough altitude then the prevailing winds >could be in a direction different ftom the ground level whihc >would permit the vehicle going against the wind. A large enough >balloon at altitude would be able to support the massive gondola >described. "Landing" would be accomplished by controlling the >buoyancy of the at altitude balloon. Hello James What an interesting idea - though I find it hard, like you, to believe in it (even though it could, in principle, repair the flaw in my cable-connected balloon-hybrid model, which was convincingly ruled out by David Rudiak). But you might be interested to check out info on WW1-vintage observation gondolas hung below airships in just this way, as mentioned at http://magonia.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ald02.htm. This is about the 1916 Aldurgh "platform" sighting. Having a previous interest in this sighting I did try to start a discussion with John Harney off-list when he originally posted this link, but he didn't want to know. (Perhaps this is a second opportunity, with chaparones?<g>)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:50:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. <snip> >2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. James Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of it. A large high-altitude powered aerostat would be way above the vicissitudes of local weather and could be quite stable (such have been used as secret radar and radio surveillance platforms since the '50s), and of course it allows the LEM to be as heavy as you want subject only to the volume of available gas envelopes and the cable breaking-strain, as you mention. A rapid paying out of cable could land the LEM hard and create the marks. Also, several fine cables would be better for stability
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:07:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:53:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:54:23 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:32:03 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Martin and All, >>One of the reference texts I was relying upon was the article >>published in IUR of Summer 2002 (I still have paper refs): >>"Do nuclear activities attract UFO's?", by Donald A. Johnson. >>And you gave the reference on the web yourself: >>http://www.cufon.org in the "contributors" section. This >>answers positively to the question! The statistical analysis, >>based on the UFOCAT database, seems clear to me, establishing >>higher percentages in the counties with nuclear plants and >>facilities. >I realise that I am criticising with 20-20 hindsight and maybe >offering a council of perfection, but I believe this is a flawed >study. Martin and List, Thank you very much for your vey detailed critic of the Johnson study. I cannot go myself into such technical details, and I am willing to believe you, but I have a couple of questions which come to my mind. First, did you send your critics to the author? Obviously, there were not enough pages in the IUR issue (32 pages in all!) to give such detailed data that you demand here. Perhaps Johnson could give them to you, at least in part, if you asked him? The fact that they were not published in IUR does not prove that they don't exist. You could also ask him to revise his study and go into more depth. Now, just from plain good sense, I am perplexed by some of your objections. You say that the Ufocat database probably contains a certain percentage of "IFOs". Yes, but it is also probable that this percentage is about the same in all counties. So this argument does not seem very strong to me. Another of your critics does not seem very strong to me. I don't see a major flaw in the idea of eliminating counties with military installations in the the control sample. My impression is that statistics may be a "dangerous game", but maybe the same can be said of their refutation! Anyway, I would like to go back to the basics here, which is the remarkable accumulation of observations of UFOs over nuclear sites. In their famous book "Clear Intent" (1984), Lawrence Fawcett and Barry Greenwood (1984) wrote, in their preface, presenting military documents released on these observations : "In reporting on one incident, a Loring AFB teletype stated that an unidentified object demonstrated a clear intent in the weapons storage area". The Air Force never explained what the clear intent was, though it seems that, in this instance, it was a non-violent intent." Yes, so far, all known UFO appearances over military and civilian nuclear sites seem to have been non- agressive. So far, so good. But it does not mean that we can consider them with "benign neglect"! I am ready to bet, actually, that the military don't. Just one more word, about the book of Georgina Bruni. I have read several books on Rendlesham, and, yes, it is an outstanding
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:32:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:54:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Groff Something that I haven't seen addressed in this thread (or maybe I missed it) is the fact that Zamora saw the flames coming from the bottom of the object and that they burned the sage brush
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Secrecy News -- 01/27/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:50:47 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:56:24 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 01/27/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 10 January 27, 2005 ** PENTAGON WITHHELD INFO FROM CONGRESS ON HUMINT EXPANSION ** NEW FROM CRS PENTAGON WITHHELD INFO FROM CONGRESS ON HUMINT EXPANSION For more than a month, the Pentagon failed to respond to inquiries from the Senate Committee that has lead responsibility for recent intelligence reform legislation regarding the scope of newly expanded military human intelligence operations, two Senators said yesterday. The new Defense Department human intelligence activity in the form of "strategic support teams," formally acknowledged by the Pentagon this week (SN, 01/26/05), may be at odds with the intelligence reform agenda defined in legislation enacted last year, according to Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT). "As authors of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004," they wrote, "we are concerned that this [new Defense HUMINT] capability could undermine Congress's vision for intelligence reform as embodied in this new law." In a January 26 letter, the Senators posed several probing questions seeking to clarify the nature of the Pentagon activity and its relation to existing intelligence organizations. Remarkably, they noted that their prior efforts to obtain such information from the Defense Department had been unsuccessful. "Staff of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs have attempted for more than a month to secure information from the Department on these matters, which have now received widespread media attention." "We write because we know that you understand the importance of Congressional oversight of Executive Branch actions as well as Congress's responsibility to ensure that its laws are faithfully executed," they added. See the text of their letter here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s012605.html NEW FROM CRS The Congressional Research Service does not permit direct public access to the following new CRS publications. So we will. "Lasers Aimed at Aircraft Cockpits: Background and Possible Options to Address the Threat to Aviation Safety and Security," January 26, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS22033.pdf "Pakistan's Nuclear Proliferation Activities and the Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission: U.S. Policy Constraints and Options," January 25, 2005: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/RL32745.pdf "North Korea: A Chronology of Events, October 2002-December 2004," January 24, 2005: http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL32743.pdf _______________________________________________ Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to secrecy_news-request.nul with "subscribe" in the body of the message. OR email your request to saftergood.nul Secrecy News is archived at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html Secrecy News has an RSS feed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss _______________________ Steven Aftergood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:07:28 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:57:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. If the >balloon is at a high enough altitude then the prevailing winds >could be in a direction different ftom the ground level whihc >would permit the vehicle going against the wind. A large enough >balloon at altitude would be able to support the massive gondola >described. "Landing" would be accomplished by controlling the >buoyancy of the at altitude balloon. >Holes in this theory are that 1) No cable was seen/reported. >Its unlikely that the cable could be invisible regardless of if >is was completely transparent. Even transparent objects are >visible by reflections of the light off their surface, and at >their edges. If the cable was thin and the observer was too far >away to make it out then that is possible, but then the cable is >damn thin and unlikely to be possible given that era technology >to support a massive craft. I suppose this could be calced by >interested parties. >2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. This would pretty much be like pulling a hat out of a rabbit,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:46:28 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:58:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:21:32 -0500 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:16:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >The problem, as I see it, after 63 years on the planet, is that the >elite who run the planet publicly ridicule topics they don't want >known to the general public. And they have plenty of power to >paralyze all the underlings. >Stats show lots of people believe UFOs are real and quite a few >see them as ET craft as well. >The problem is not selling the public, the problem is the leaders >who actively discredit, harass, and neutralize any mainstream >officials, government, scientific, or media, who start taking a close >positive look at either PSI or UFOs. They are forbidden topics. Sorry, but this just won't wash. Who exactly are "the elite who run the planet"? And how do they direct mainstream science to ridicule UFOs, PSI or any other paranormal science? The UFO evidence, if of sufficient caliber, will prove itself to mainstream science in due course, whatever this mysterious "elite" say. Think of what happened re meteorites two hundred years ago. Science does correct itself from time to time. (one famous example is Einstein's refinement to Newton's Laws of motion). No "elite" stepped in and harrassed anybody here, did they? Certain fringe medicine such as osteopathy, is gradually getting acceptance into mainstream medicine. Where is the evidence of suppression from the ruling elite? Stats also show lots of people accept astrology as real. Are you suggesting the elite brigade are presurizing them to abandon their beliefs? Nor can the media (over the whole planet) possibly be controlled in the manner you suggest. There are no "forbidden topics". You are propagating the myth of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: John Tosti Case? - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:57:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:05:23 -0500 Subject: Re: John Tosti Case? - LeClair >From: Dwight Connelly <publishdc.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:35:26 -0600 >Subject: Re: John Tosti Case? >Aaron, >I checked into this case (not the photo), which is a continuing >one, and our MUFON investigators say to stay away from it. Stay away from it, as in it's a hoax? Even so, I like studying hoaxes. Gives one an idea as to what to look out for in other cases. Please, if you know of any articles on this case, please point me in the direction. I left MUFON several years ago, and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:43:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:00:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:38:53 -0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >.... one should always distinguish between what is >scientifically testable and what is actually true. We know of no >law of nature which requires that truth is necessarily >discernible by scientific investigation (or indeed by any other >sort of investigation). Cathy: Along the lines of your response, I found an interesting abstract, using my NASA library access, the conclusion of which I've put online at our web-log - blog: http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com If you (or anyone else) would like the whole abstract, let me
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:52:31 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:01:27 -0500 Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights - Hall >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:40:15 -0800 >Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:05:25 -0500 >>Subject: Re: NASA Database Of Balloon Flights >>http://www.nott.com/Pages/design.php >>http://www.nott.com/Pages/Aerostat_AN_1-2.pdf >>And go to our blog-site at http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com and click on the >>Rudiak title. >>The material is a PDF and will load slowly perhaps, and it's pretty dry >>stuff, but seems to indicate that Rudiak didn't cover all the bases in >>his rebuttal of Larry Robinson's and James Easton's hypotheses that >>Zamora may have seen a experimental balloon. >More deliberate vagueness from Rich Reynolds. What bases didn't I cover? >>The physics outlined in the article should give pause to Dr. Rudiak, >>since they counter his views somewhat. >What physics? How does it counter my views "somewhat?" Why >should anything in that article give me pause? Does Rich have >any idea at all what he is talking about? >All it shows is a _great_big_balloon_ lifting a heavy payload. >That's the physics. Archimede's principle of buoyancy hasn't >suddenly changed. You still need huge balloons to lift a heavy >load (like two men, the men's compartment, fuel, a burner, >landing gears, balloon envelope, etc.). >Essential physics: Big balloon needed, but Socorro small. Got it >Rich? I agree with David here, and was beginning to think that Rich was an agent provocateur, but then I looked up the definition and it wasn't quite right. I do think he (Rich) is deliberately being provocative (for good or ill). He should also pay attention to Don Berliner's dead-on comments. Don modestly failed to mention that he is an aviation historian of some repute as well. What Rich fails (or pretends not) to understand is that we foggy-minded, turf-protecting, ancient of days, defenders of the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:19:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - King >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. If the >balloon is at a high enough altitude then the prevailing winds >could be in a direction different ftom the ground level whihc >would permit the vehicle going against the wind. A large enough >balloon at altitude would be able to support the massive gondola >described. "Landing" would be accomplished by controlling the >buoyancy of the at altitude balloon. >Holes in this theory are that 1) No cable was seen/reported. Its >unlikely that the cable could be invisible regardless of if is >was completely transparent. Even transparent objects are visible >by reflections of the light off their surface, and at their >edges. If the cable was thin and the observer was too far away >to make it out then that is possible, but then the cable is damn >thin and unlikely to be possible given that era technology to >support a massive craft. I suppose this could be calced by >interested parties. >2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. Hi James, Here's another difficulty... Zamora saw flame, and the flame burnt the ground. If the envelope was at high altitude, what was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Socorro & Balloons - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:43:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:20:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:18:56 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:00:25 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons <snip> >>Rich, The craft noted on the Nott site are indeed heavy...and >>they have enormous envelopes to carry them. If you are implying >>that Zamora somehow confused a giant gossamer gas-filled >>envelope for an overturned car, I think you are trying to shoe- >>horn an explanation, and not even that...you want others to find >>the shoe-horn. And I would sincerely like to see the hybrid >>balloon which is similar to that which Lonnie Zamora described. >>Nothing I have found thus far fits. >Speaking in terms of conventional balloon lift, I agree. <snip> >The weight of possible balloon payloads is not at issue - the >gas volume is, as you point out. To illustrate some of David >Rudiak's calculations with concrete examples from a comparable >era to the Socorro event, one can read Vincent Lally's useful >1969 chapter on balloons in the Condon Report. >and there is still no explanation of the force required to produce >landing indentations by an object with near-zero buoyancy. Hi Martin, Agreed and agreed. I was hoping that Rich's database would include a hybrid balloon/LEM simulator, where the balloon was simply to provide the 1/6th gravity for a proper moon simulation. This is what I thought was being suggested. I naively assumed that such an approach would work for the case if some experimental hybrid hot air/compressed gas envelope had been tested back then. Reading through the database, there were compelling references to sandwiched Mylar envelopes, which could explain the metallic appearance of the craft. On further searching however, I eventually reached the same conclusion as David Rudiak. A balloon of the era would not provide a suitable explanation, since the balloon would still have to carry two men, the gondola, and whatever fuel it contained to produce the brilliant blue flame. Even an assisted balloon would have to be enormous to lift that weight since... once the "LEM rocket" stopped firing, the whole shebang would simply plummet to the ground with the same dull thud as the balloon explanation itself. Even at 1/6th gravity, a fall from a fair height would not constitute a controlled landing, and a subsequent "quick getaway" would be decidedly unlikely. You might get the dents but you wouldn't get the thing back up in a hurry. And the envelope would still have to be far too large for Zamora's description. I also pondered what James Smith posted here today...that the envelope might have been high above the gondola, out of Zamora's attention. This presented more problems, since at ground level such an envelope...stretched and thin above the craft up to the "bubble" of the buoyant gas...would have been really hard to miss, since Zamora observed the craft from above. At the very least, he should have reported the structure atop the gondola which attached the gondola to the envelope. Balloons don't stay spherical...they are long and thin in the thick air at ground level, and expand to a more typical balloon shape in the thin air aloft. You wouldn't attach such a balloon to a gondola by a single thin cable. Such a single point of failure in an experimental craft with two crew aboard, and planned to be off- base and flying around in public, would necessarily have a substantial connecting means, as the ones in Rich's database. Expensive manned experimental toys don't dangle at the end of a single string. At any rate, the pdf file deals specifically with heavy gondolas, and large volume envelopes, and therefore could only explain the case if Zamora was completely misinterpreting what he saw. I find this highly unlikely, but more importantly it runs counter to the best evidence...his eyewitness report. If we begin to create theories that contradict the eyewitness report, why bother with eyewitnesses at all? And Zamora was an ideal witness, if there's such a thing. A skeptical, high strung cop. I completely buy that this was not an experience Lonnie wanted to have, but he was enough of a duty- bound company man to report faithfully what he saw regardless of the consequences (which were considerable). Almost a perfect witness. <g> Thanks for fleshing out where my education was deficient. I was never a physics guy. I was a drama and debate student. And a computer geek. <insert derisive comment here><LOL>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:57:44 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:22:31 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:26:19 +0100 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:58:52 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Perhaps I missed some part of the discussion, but have you read >carefully the statistical study of Donald A. Johnson? <snip> >I wonder, is this really a serious debate? Hi Gildas, I find the Johnson study flawed by biased sampling on both sides of the question. I am not a statistician and wont pretend to be, but I think Martin makes my point in a much more verbose fashion in his post today on this thread. My "common sense" approach results in the same conclusion he reaches. Too many assumptions and presumptions that skew the results toward a pre-determined goal. I remain open to the possibility that a correlation exists. I just am not convinced by the analyses presented to date. Don Johnson deserves credit for the effort nonetheless. As for your question of whether this is a serious debate, I can only say that I don't take anything too seriously, but I'm not being dismissive or making light of this question, or the debate. I'm just troubled by details of the methodology, and as we all know,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: John Tosti Case? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:14:05 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:23:55 -0500 Subject: Re: John Tosti Case? - King >From: Dwight Connelly <publishdc.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:35:26 -0600 >Subject: Re: John Tosti Case? >>From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 02:17:49 -0500 >>Subject: John Tosti Case? >>I came across a website today that has an alien picture that is >>said to have been taken by John Tosti. The image looks like a >>double exposure. Anyone know if this pic was indeed taken by >>John Tosti? If so, this cast major doubt about his case. >>Picture: >>http://sentinelfiles.tripod.com/bathrmalien.htm >>Anyone know of a prop that looks like this? >>To refresh your memory about the case in question visit >>http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid37 >I checked into this case (not the photo), which is a continuing >one, and our MUFON investigators say to stay away from it. Hi Dwight and Aaron, A nice primer on how to make a cool photographic Rorschach Test image, but evidence of ET visitation? Please. There are classic "disc UFOs" in the page background created in exactly the same manner. Humans are adept enough at deriving patterns from noise on their own. When you split, copy and mirror an image, it would be anomalous if it didn't look like some symmetrical "thing". Multiplying the "noise" doesn't improve the "signal". But it sometimes looks pretty interesting. <g>I hope the image came after the cited report just so I could say that it was "post- Tosti" with a straight face.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Unidentified Falling Object Remains A Mystery From: Brian Vike - HBCC UFO Research <hbccufo.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 00:59:42 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:29:07 -0500 Subject: Unidentified Falling Object Remains A Mystery Source: The Daily Bulletin - Ontario, California http://www.dailybulletin.com/Stories/0,1413,203~21481~2678171,00.html 01-27-05 Unidentified Falling Object Remains A Mystery By Sara A. Carter Staff Writer CHINO - The ashes of a charred shed hold a mystery. What happened the night of Jan. 5, when dozens claimed a fiery object fell from the sky and hit the building, setting it ablaze? Answers -- from fire investigators, astronomers, even professional UFO investigators -- are in short supply about what happened to the structure on Cozzens Street near Roswell. Not Roswell, N.M., but Roswell Street in Chino. "It could have been caused by an electrical malfunction or flammable liquids that were stored in the garage," said Anthony Landin, spokesman for the Chino Fire Department. "At this point, the cause of the fire is undetermined." The department was inundated with calls Jan. 5 and 6, Landin said, as people from all over the Inland Valley, and even farther, called to ask if others had seen the falling object. "One gentleman from Mission Viejo called in," Landin said. "He was really excited. He was laying in bed when he looked out his window and saw the light." However, fire officials believe the shed fire and whatever was in the sky are linked by only one thing: coincidence. Others believe it was something more. "There were numerous reports that came in from all across California from that area," said Brian Vike, founder of the HBCC UFO Research Center in British Columbia, Canada. "From San Francisco to Paramount, I received numerous e-mails and calls. "We've only gotten to the tip of the iceberg on this. The more details we get, the closer we'll get to an answer." Jan. 5 was not the only recent incident of an object spotted in the sky. In late December, residents all across Southern California saw what they described as a light show. David Steuben, an Ontario resident, said he saw an object like the Jan. 5 sighting on Dec. 31. He, his family and friends were mesmerized by a red light high in air that seemed to dance in an S shape across the night sky. "At first I thought it might be some kind of helicopter, but it started moving around all over the sky," Steuben said. "It was a reddish color, not real bright. Everybody was just staring at it. Then it disappeared. Then it reappeared again in a slightly different area of the sky before it disappeared again. My brother described it as a ball of fire in the sky." Patrick So, an astronomer at Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, said the answer could be as simple as a fireball meteor. "If it left a trail, it's usually a meteor," So said. "If it's very bright, it's called a fireball meteor, but they usually burn out 40 miles from earth impact." The observatory spotted meteors Jan. 3, during what is known as a quadrantid meteor shower, when several meteors light up the night sky. Astronomers spotted about 40 that day, So said. Whether a meteor hit the shed or lit up the sky Jan. 5 is still unknown, So said. Astronomers did not log any meteor activity that night or on Dec. 31. "Most meteors that land on the ground don't really cause any fire because they are cold by the time they enter our atmosphere," he said. "We have even seen frost on the outside of some meteors that do make it. But it is very rare that one would hit. Some are only the size of your hand ... others are bigger and they cause more damage." So for now, the "ball(s) of fire in the sky" remain a mystery. Vike, who has spent the past 30 years studying UFO phenomena, said questions about these mysterious sightings can only be answered if people who witness them speak up. "The first thing (people) have to remember is to contact authorities and the media so more people may report on the sightings," Vike said. "All the details are important: color, altitude, a rough idea of how long it (took) to get off across the sky. (Are) there any flashing lights?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:28:04 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:30:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:57 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Perhaps this is a naive question, given that I'm sure you must >have considered it, but is there a possibility that this >"phantom" moon - on the horizon in the same azimuth as the moon >- was in fact a superior mirage image of the moon below the >horizon? Whenever you see the moon on the horizon it is in fact >already below it, but it is shifted upward about half a degree >from the geometrical line of sight by standard refraction. Hi, Martin: Hard to accept, huh? ;> There are always possibilities but I know what I saw. It was about 30 maybe 40 degrees above the horizon, stayed in the same position for 15 - 20 minutes, "eclipsed" _twice_ and disappeared instantly while I was looking at it (after it slowly "eclipsed" or closed). No clouds, visibility unlimited and oddly, no planes where there were usually many planes (circling to land at DFW miles to the west). The other two people saw the same thing, about 10 minutes after it disappeared from behind my house. They saw it over an open field, 106 miles to the south of my location, it "eclipsed" then 'uneclipsed' opened?, they watched two shiny, cigar-shaped objects go into it, it "eclipsed" again then descended to the field below. They jumped in their truck, raced over to the area but found nothing. None of us knew each other, had never met and filed our reports independently (they didn't even have internet, they had a relative file their report on another list). I found their report on the internet three days after the event, contacted them and interviewed them. No MUFON, the FAA laughed, NORAD labeled it a "hot-air balloon" after asking a bunch of odd questions and even Peter Davenport did not file my report in his database. I'm use to it. I would not have believed anyone telling me such a bizarre story either. But it changed my views of UFO's forever. I doubt phantom moons hover in place for 15-20 minutes, long after the real moon has set, 30 - 40 degrees above the horizon or "eclipse" twice (crescent moons do not eclipse but that's what this thing looked like it was doing). In addition, every dog in both neighborhoods were going crazy. I know about phantoms and reflections. This was not that. Just mark it up to misidentification or impossible so it won't bother
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Universal Translator Needed To Understand ET? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:50:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:50:24 -0500 Subject: Universal Translator Needed To Understand ET? Source: Space.Com http://www.seti.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=3DktJ2J9MMIsE&b=3D194993&ct= =3D363416 01-27-05 Universal Translator Might Be Needed To Understand ET by Douglas Vakoch - SETI Institute Will we ever find a primer for decoding messages from extraterrestrials? Last month, anthropologists who gathered for a major conference in Atlanta, Georgia heard some news that will be sobering for SETI enthusiasts: it may be much more difficult to understand extraterrestrials than many scientists have thought before. Among the sessions held during December=92s annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association was one called "Anthropology, Archaeology, and Interstellar Communication: Science and the Knowledge of Distant Worlds." The session included papers by scholars from such diverse fields as astronomy, archaeology, anthropology, and psychology. Is there a Cosmic Rosetta Stone, they asked, drawing parallels to Earth=92s own Rosetta Stone, which provided the key to decoding Egyptian hieroglyphics? Will we ever find a comparable primer for decrypting any messages we might receive some day from extraterrestrials? Universal Translator Thirty years ago, a message was beamed to the stars from the world=92s largest radio telescope in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, written in the language of math and science. But could another civilization understand such a message? In the search for a universal language to overcome cultural differences between humans and extraterrestrials, many have emphasized knowledge that would be shared by extraterrestrial scientists. For example, the metal plaques borne on two Pioneer spacecraft, launched by NASA in the 1970s, indicate our location in the galaxy relative to prominent pulsars that slowly and systematically change frequency over time=97locating the spacecrafts=92 launch in both time and space. And indeed, for an extraterrestrial civilization that values technical intelligence over social intelligence, such a description might be the start of an ideal message. But not everyone is so sanguine about using science and math as universal languages. Anthropologist Ben Finney of the University of Hawai=92i challenged the standard assumptions several years ago, by drawing on lessons learned from decoding Egyptian and Mayan hieroglypics=97a story recounted in Atlanta. "SETI scientists reasoned that advanced ET would de-encrypt their messages through prime numbers, pi, the Planck constant and other presumed cosmic universals so that new members of the Galactic club could immediately begin deciphering them," Finney explained. "I questioned this reasoning on the basis of terrestrial experience in deciphering ancient Egyptian and Mayan inscriptions." On closer examination of the process of decoding these scripts, Finney concluded that when initial assumptions are wrong, the decryption can be delayed for a long time. "These tasks were long held up by Plotinus=92 fallacy of treating each hieroglyph as an idea or concept in itself without reference to language, and were only accomplished with the aid of such keys as the Rosetta Stone and by studying modern forms of Egyptian and Mayan." The lesson for SETI, it seems, is to remain flexible in our initial interpretations of messages from other worlds. "The archaeological search for peoples from another time and place offers some analogy to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence," said Paul Wason, an archaeologist at the John Templeton Foundation. "Without benefit of direct contact with living beings, without the aid of understandable written communications, =85 prehistoric archaeologists rely on inferences drawn mainly from material traces of past activity." We Come in =85 Peace? Astronomer Frank Drake, who conducted the first SETI experiment in 1960, emphasized the ambiguities of communicating with those who encounter reality in very different ways. He cited examples from interstellar messages that have been drafted already, as well as initial planning to communicate with future generations of humans here on Earth =96 through radioactive waste site markers. According to Drake, "probably the most intensive and extensive efforts to communicate with intelligent creatures quite different from contemporary humans have been the program which placed a multi-media record on two of the Voyager spacecraft, and the plan to place fail-safe hazard markers at long-lived radioactive waste repositories." As one of the designers of these two messages, Drake is well aware of the challenges of tapping into concepts that could be interpreted without error. "In both cases, the development of message content in these projects ran into enormous problems of potential misinterpretation," he explained. "The developers recognized that the interpretation of the message contents would surely take place in a context much different from the present, and unknowable to them. Attempting to construct messages which are unambiguous in such circumstances is extremely difficult and inevitably fraught with error." As an example, Drake highlighted the ambiguity of the pictures of a man and woman etched onto the Pioneer plaques. "Is the depiction of a man holding an arm upraised to be taken as a friendly gesture of greeting, or as a threat of aggression?" Even supposing the recipients could discern that we are showing images of our species, how could they infer our intentions? Intelligent Intentions Perhaps SETI scientists can get some guidance in understanding other civilizations from social scientists. As archaeologists try to distinguish between rudimentary stone tools and rocks chipped by natural processes, their methods may provide insights that will help SETI scientists distinguish between naturally occurring cosmic static and signals from intelligent civilizations, whose purpose is to send intentional greetings. "Archaeology regularly engages in the search for intelligence, intentionality, purpose and design broadly," Wason explained, "even as our deeper goal is recovering concrete detail concerning what, specifically, those intentions and purposes were." The resulting insights might inform the ways we structure messages, he suggested. "This is relevant for message construction from our end, reinforcing the view that we should give attention to all aspects of message form and context, not just its content. It is also relevant for identifying signs of purpose and intentionality beyond our planet." Other Worlds The fields of anthropology and archaeology also offer analogies to understanding "the Other," beings radically different from ourselves. In the process, they may provide insights into communicating broader notions of culture, thereby increasing the likelihood that messages will be intelligible. Simulations based on anthropological models of first contact between terrestrial cultures, for example, might help evaluate the adequacy of current protocols that guide responses to detecting a signal from extraterrestrials. And yet, the delay of centuries or millennia between each exchange makes interstellar dialogue impossible, except as a dialogue across generations. In this scenario, initial misunderstandings could go uncorrected for a long time. "Without the Other=92s dialogic input," said archaeologist Kathryn Denning of York University, "their responses to our misunderstandings, and answers to our questions, then the burden of self-correction falls to us. Perhaps then the challenge for both SETI and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Dr. Shostak Answers Questions About SETI From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:55:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:55:23 -0500 Subject: Dr. Shostak Answers Questions About SETI Source: Universe Today http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/seth_shostak_answers_seti.html?2712005 01-27-05 Dr. Seth Shostak Answers Your Questions About SETI Summary - (Jan 27, 2005) You're really interested in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. We put out the call, and received dozens of questions for SETI researcher Seth Shostak. The forum team picked out their favorites, and passed them along to Dr. Shostak. Here are his answers. Thanks to everyone who participated: both the questioners and Dr. Shostak for taking the time to put together his answers. And a special thanks to Ola D. in the forum Community Support team for organizing this. See if your question was answered. Is there any other way a civilization can be detected other than by EM radiation (IR, UV, radiowave, microwave, etc) detection? What's the probability of finding an intelligent lifeform in our lifetime? - Alfchemist Well, sure, there are other possibilities for finding cosmic company. You could look for messages being transmitted by particle beams (even neutrinos), and this has been suggested. But the problem is that these require harder-to-build transmitters and receivers, and are also susceptible to absorption by interstellar gas. So they don't seem to offer much advantage. The other possibility is to find some evidence of "alien engineering" -- maybe sophisticated beings on other worlds have managed to rearrange the stars in their neighborhood, or build huge, starshine-collecting solar panels that we could somehow spot from afar. Some experiments have been done to locate such massive construction projects, but it's hard to know how to look or even what to look for. I think it's likely that the new telescopes being built for SETI will trip across a signal by the year 2025. The SETI Project and SETI.nul have processed a bunch of data. Other than the search for intelligent signals, have you learned anything new about the universe from all this information? - corkft In fact, not too much. This is rather surprising, because the history of astronomy suggests that whenever you build a new instrument, able to look at a previously unobserved bit of either space or the spectrum, you usually trip across some unexpected object or other. SETI projects have receivers with VERY narrow frequency channels. But there really doesn't seem to be any natural phenomena that lend themselves to being discovered with such equipment. In a sense this justifies SETI's assumption that any narrow-band signal would convincingly prove intelligence! What is the maximum distance at which SETI can detect signals which are not deliberately beamed at us, such as normal radio telecommunications traffic? And are there plans to increase this range? - Steve t Our best SETI experiments to date could detect Earth-like "leakage" signals at no more than 1 light-year's distance. So not too far. But keep in mind that (1) our experiments do get more sensitive with time, so this distance will increase, and (2) we've only had radio for a century. Aliens, who may have invented this technology thousands or even millions of years ago, will undoubtedly have some transmitters and antenna systems capable of putting out signals far more powerful than what we manage with our erudite and always entertaining commercial television efforts! To what degree does our SETI search make assumptions about the rate of information transfer? What transfer rates are we currently equipped to detect, and in what modulation modes? - wstevenbrown We don't worry at all about modulation, or schemes for encoding messages. That's something to be considered after you've found that their transmitter is on! At the moment, all SETI experiments simply look for narrow-band (typically 1 Hz or narrower) components to a signal... somewhat akin to the "carrier" signal for earthly transmissions, but not limited to those. We also look for slowly pulsing signals, too. But the point is that at least some fraction of the aliens' transmissions are assumed to put a lot of energy into a narrow bandwidth... making those signal components more easily detectable. Assuming Big Bang origins, how soon would sufficient astronomical metallicity have occurred to produce a 0.8% or better probability of the formation of CHON-based life supporting planets? Is there any way to evaluate how "typical" is the time required for our evolutionary path to technical competence? - GOURDHEAD Well this depends on where you are, as the metallicity varies across the Galaxy. I can't speak to "0.8% or better probability," as I don't know where this number comes from and there's no way to estimate it anyway. But put it this way: even in the oldest globular cluster star systems in our Galaxy -- choked with stars that were born more than 10 billion years ago -- there's enough of the heavy elements ("metals") to make earth-like worlds. I don't think there was much "dead time" between the formation of galaxies and the growth of the heavy element abundance to the point where life was possible. Do the recent conclusions that radio signals from advanced civilizations may be indistinguishable from the thermal radiation of their parent stars give you second thoughts on the likelihood of finding a positive signal? - Greg Nope. It's true that an optimally encoded signal would look like (white) noise, and I'm sure that advanced societies will be very good at encoding. But there are always applications for which you need some narrow-band signals. For example, you might have a solar-system-wide GPS network for interplanetary navigation. Or big radar sets for tracking incoming, long-period comets. Not to mention a deliberate broadcast to galactic brethren...! How will the new Allen Telescope Array (ATA) be incorporated into SETI ? - 6EQUJ5 In the summer of 2005, there will be 32 antennas working at the ATA, and the SETI Institute will initiate a scan of the densest parts of the galactic plane. This is a straightforward SETI experiment that will scrutinize lots of stars, albeit stars that are (on average) thousands of light-years away. As the ATA gets built out to 350 antennas, it will switch over to targeting individual, relatively nearby (less than 1,000 light-years) star systems. By 2025, it should be able to check out as many as a million such systems. Should an alien signal be identified, what would be the protocol for alerting the people of Earth? Would the news be limited to a few,or would be announced for all to listen? - Duane Well, there's no secrecy in SETI, and it's been our experience that whenever we pick up an "interesting" signal, the media are on top of the story right away. So you can be sure you'll be reading about any signal long before the SETI researchers
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Centuries' Old UFO Coin Remains Mystery From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:58:51 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:58:51 -0500 Subject: Centuries' Old UFO Coin Remains Mystery Source: eMediaWire.Com http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/1/emw202359.htm 01-28-05 [Images at site Centuries' Old UFO Coin Remains Mystery An unidentified flying object on a 17th century French coin continues to mystify rare coin experts. Colorado Springs, CO (PRWEB) January 28, 2005 -- After decades of seeking possible answers about a mysterious UFO-like design on a 17th century French copper coin, a prominent numismatic expert says it remains just that: an unidentified flying object. After a half-century of research, the design has defied positive identification by the numismatic community. PRWeb Press Release Newswire v9 "It was made in the 1680s in France and the design on one side certainly looks like it could be a flying saucer in the clouds over the countryside," said Kenneth E. Bressett of Colorado Springs, Colorado, a former President of the 32,000-member American Numismatic Association and owner of the curious coin. "Is it supposed to be a UFO of some sort, or a symbolic representation of the Biblical Ezekiel's wheel? After 50 years of searching, I've heard of only one other example of it, and nothing to explain the unusual design." Bressett said the mysterious piece is not really a coin, but a "jeton," a coin-like educational tool that was commonly used to help people count money, or sometimes used as a money substitute for playing games. It is about the size of a U.S. quarter-dollar and similar to thousands of other jetons with different religious and educational designs that were produced and used in Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries. "The design on this particular piece could be interpreted as showing either a UFO or Ezekiel's wheel, but little else. Some people think the Old Testament reference to Ezekiel's wheel may actually be a description of a long-ago UFO," he explained. "The legend written in Latin around the rim is also mystifying. 'OPPORTUNUS ADEST' translates as 'It is here at an opportune time.' Is the object in the sky symbolic of needed rainfall, or a Biblical reference or visitors from beyond? We probably will never know for certain," said Bressett.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Clear Skies For Area 51 Hacker From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:01:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:01:40 -0500 Subject: Clear Skies For Area 51 Hacker Source: SecurityFocus.Com http://www.securityfocus.com/news/10373 01-27-05 Clear Skies For Area 51 Hacker By Kevin Poulsen SecurityFocus Federal prosecutors formally dropped charges this month against an amateur astronomer who exposed a buried surveillance network surrounding the Air Force's mysterious "Area 51" air base in Nevada. Chuck Clark, 58, was charged in 2003 with a single count of malicious interference with a communications system used for the national defense, after prosecutors held him responsible for the disappearance of one of the wireless motion sensors buried beneath the desert land surrounding the facility. In a deal with the government last January, Clark agreed to enter a one-year term of "pretrial diversion" - a kind of probation - and to either locate and return the lost device, or make financial restitution to the Air Force. "He paid for the missing sensor, and complied with the conditions of his pretrial diversion and the case was dismissed," says Natalie Collins, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Las Vegas. Clark was already known to Area 51 buffs as an expert on the spot the government calls the "operating location near Groom Lake, Nevada," when, in 2003, he discovered an electronic device packed in a rugged case and buried in the desert, given away only by a slender wisp of an antenna poking through the dirt. Along with fellow base-watcher Joerg Arnu, Clark began mapping the sensors, using a handheld frequency counter to sniff out their tell-tale radio transmissions, Arnu said in an interview last year. Together they exhumed as many as 40 of the boxes, noted their unique three-digit codes, then reburied and tested them, said Arnu. The sensors - an estimated 75 to 100 of them in all - were marked "U.S. Government Property." In some cases they were planted miles outside Groom Lake's fence line on public land used by hikers and photographers, as well as the occasional tourist hoping for a Close Encounter. On March 12th, 2003 one of the sensors went missing, according to the government. FBI and Air Force agents descended on Clark's trailer home in tiny Rachel, Nevada - 100 miles north of Las Vegas along the Extraterrestrial Highway - and prosecutors later filed the felony charge against Clark. As part of the deal settling the case, Clark was barred from interfering with any of the sensors or otherwise breaking the law, and was obligated to keep the court apprised of his whereabouts during his year of supervision. Shrouded in official secrecy, the Groom Lake facility has become a cultural touchstone for UFO mythology. But the base is generally believed to be dedicated to the more terrestrial mission of testing classified aircraft. Clark's emancipation from government scrutiny comes well in time for Area 51's unofficial 50th anniversary campout, planned for Memorial Day weekend, and likely to draw tourists, UFOlogists, and exotic aircraft buffs from all over. They'll celebrate with "a campfire with live music" outside the base's main gate, according to the event website. "Be sure to respect the Area 51
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Excerpt: Johnny Carson The Sinatra Of Comedy From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:05:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:05:59 -0500 Subject: Excerpt: Johnny Carson The Sinatra Of Comedy Source: Blairsville Dispatch - Phittsburg, Pennsylvania http://www.securityfocus.com/news/10373 01-28-05 Johnny Carson The Sinatra Of Comedy By John Jennings Managing Editor <snip> Meanwhile, I am back in touch with one of my favorite January correspondents, Stan Gordon. He's just as faithful as the IRS and his compilation of the UFO sightings and unexplained happenings of the past year are a lot more fun. Stan, a Greensburg resident, has been investigating reports of UFOs, Bigfoot, mysterious sounds and other unexplained phenomena for 45 years now, and I first encountered him as a young reporter almost as far back. He has credibility that others in his field lack, mainly because Gordon is quick to point out natural explanations for strange lights in the sky, such as the brilliant orange-red object with a burning trail reported at about 10:50 p.m. last June 26 by observers from Pittsburgh to Greensburg, as well as by people in eastern Pennsylvania. Later it was confirmed that the object was Russian space debris reentering the earth's atmosphere, Gordon said. UFO sightings this year past have not been that exciting, but he did note that a woman in the Punxsutawney area saw a square object about 30 feet off the ground and 50 feet from her window. "The object looked as though it was made up of multitudes of light bubbles," Gordon reported. Suddenly it began to rise slowly higher until it looked like a light in the distance. On April 4 in Washington County, near California, a witness reported observing a large triangular shape over a nearby house. The object had a blue light on each corner and seemed to glow. At about the same time, another large object appeared in the sky, this one shaped like a glass rod. Then a strange fall of sparkling material dropped from the sky just as the triangular object traveled quickly north. In March, in Westmoreland County, passengers on a rural road said their headlights picked up an object in the road. It turned out to be a small metallic cigar-shaped object that rose off the ground, turned right and flew away. As for Bigfoot, Gordon has turned most of that hairy fellow's research over to the Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society, which received 2004 sightings in Carbon, Beaver and Fayette counties. August through October were busy with sightings in Beaver County, including one woman who claimed to have seen three creatures moving across a road. Gordon said he received several Bigfoot reports around Westmoreland County, but a more interesting observation was reported in Tioga County on July 20. There a man on a construction crew said he saw a dark hair- covered creature, seven to eight feet tall, standing near a road. The creature crossed the road in three long strides and continued into a swamp. The ground cover in the area was smashed down where the creature had been seen.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:04:28 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:12:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Lehmberg >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:40:01 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >The underground swell of scientific interest in this problem is >obvious and just below the surface. Michio Kaku testifies to the >public that there is a high level of curiosity by the best and >the brightest in science regarding UFOs... still there is this >cultivated reluctance to... merely investigate. Why? >Fine work gets swallowed up in this culture of easy ridicule. >Ted Phillips, Richard Hall, Carl Findt, and Stanton Friedman (et >sig al) get swallowed up conveniently in this honor-less (but so >rewarding for the few) process. Why? <snip> Folks - This just in from a redacted fellow on my AlienViewGroup List: "Dear AlienView readers: I was fortunate to meet Dr. Peter Sturrock and his wife at an Asian Philosophy seminar held in Palo Alto in the early 1970's (he was Professor of Astrophysics at Stanford Univ.). A short time afterward the Metromedia firm contacted The Academy of Parapsychology and Medicine (Los Altos, Calif.) asking for assistance in lining up a panel of world- experts to give evidence about the existence of UFOs. I was a volunteer at A.P.M. working as their archivist and developing a "World Information Center" using the computer system at Stanford (the ARPA-Net people were in a different building, using the military's secret communications lines to swap student papers and music scores to their friends in other universities all around the country!). A.P.M.'s Director selected me to "round up" a group of persons informed about UFOs, who would present their views for videotaped (motion picture?) interviews by Metromedia. The finished product was to be released to the American public on national television as a sensational newsbreaker. As I began to "round up the talent" Peter Sturrock's name came to mind and I was fortunate to find him amongst the audience of a scientific conference at the University. During a coffee break I greeted Dr. Sturrock and asked whether he might be interested in presenting astronomy's views about the UFO enigma to the Metromedia audience. I was more than surprised at his reply: Prof. Sturrock stated how, as the President of the American Astronomical Society (its members are professional astronomers), he had conducted a postcard survey of the Society's membership asking for reports as to whether his associates were observing unexplainable objects in the skies. He confided to me that he had received a large number of positive replies but that the time (Spring, 1973) was not yet right for the release of this information (He waited until September of 1997 when he convened a meeting of professional astronomers in Tarrytown, New York). Here's the icing on the cake: After I had assembled a powerful namelist of willing UFO advocates, the Director of A.P.M. took me aside and confided (in a very low voice) that Metromedia had dropped their plans for the UFO show because then-President Richard Nixon, facing political criticism as a result of the Watergate Scandal," was himself going to announce to the American people that the UFOs really exist - this in order to build his prestige as the nation's leader."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 28 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:34:08 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:17:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:07:58 +0100 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:54:23 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:32:03 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Martin and All, >>>One of the reference texts I was relying upon was the article >>>published in IUR of Summer 2002 (I still have paper refs): >>>"Do nuclear activities attract UFO's?", by Donald A. Johnson. >>I realise that I am criticising with 20-20 hindsight and maybe >>offering a council of perfection, but I believe this is a flawed >>study. >Thank you very much for your vey detailed critic of the Johnson >study. I cannot go myself into such technical details, and I am >willing to believe you, but I have a couple of questions which >come to my mind. First, did you send your critics to the author? Hello Gildas No, as I just now wrote my review for that List post, in response to you and to the original referencing of it (or the NICAP NCP Project page containing it) by Richard Hall on this List. >Obviously, there were not enough pages in the IUR issue (32 >pages in all!) to give such detailed data that you demand here. >Perhaps Johnson could give them to you, at least in part, if you >asked him? Maybe he could. >The fact that they were not published in IUR does not prove that >they don't exist. You could also ask him to revise his study and >go into more depth. He may have kept complete records of the study - I'd hope so. I'm not saying there _never_were_ detailed records, or citeable sources used to identify the 164 test counties, or sources for data on the various types of nuclear installations broken down by county, or a list of the 164 control counties, or a clear protocol for deselecting those with military sites that "may have had nukes in the past", or a complete tabulation of data county by county rather than just final averages. My argument is not that this information never existed, but that it is not presented. So the paper reads like an abstract for a complete paper that was never written. I understand that the paper has been on at least two web sites, presumably for some time (it was recently removed from the NICAP site). It is a short paper as you say, and only a part of it addresses the statistical study anyway. There has been plenty of opportunity to go into full detail in a web version if desired, either on the NCP page or at CUFON or on a dedicated page linked to UFOCAT, or wherever. There are plenty of gigabytes out there. I suspect that nobody has raised specific criticisms before. >Now, just from plain good sense, I am perplexed by some of your >objections. I'm in favour of good sense, but it is seldom as plain as bad sense would have it appear, as you acknowledge yourself below by saying that statistics is a "dangerous game". >You say that the Ufocat database probably contains a >certain percentage of "IFOs". Yes, but it is also probable that >this percentage is about the same in all counties. So this >argument does not seem very strong to me. To test what you say is "probable" you would have to go back to the data on each of the 164 counties and redo the sums independently for IFOs and UFOs. If it were then found to be the case that IFOs and and UFOs occurred in the same proportions in all counties, then the conclusion you draw from Johnson's study might be that IFOs, like UFOs, correlate with nuclear sites. What would this say about the significance of the claimed correlation? This would be an interesting test, as I said. But nothing in the Johnson paper helps us because we don't even know which counties were used, let alone what the report rates were in them. >Another of your >critics does not seem very strong to me. I don't see a major >flaw in the idea of eliminating counties with military >installations in the the control sample. Well I've explained why I believe it is a flaw. Since you don't offer any salient facts or arguments I can't possibly comment on why you choose to disagree. >My impression is that >statistics may be a "dangerous game", but maybe the same can be >said of their refutation! I'm sure that's fair comment. We need to take great care when interpreting statistical results, correlations especially, and this is exactly why it is incumbent on proponents of such studies to be thorough and follow the sorts of protocols that long practice has established as being prudent. It may be that the headline result that Johnson claims would remain valid and be of great interest if his data and methods were reviewed in detail, but we can't be sure of this at present and there are, as I indicated, some apparent loopholes and shortcomings. >Anyway, I would like to go back to the basics here, which is the >remarkable accumulation of observations of UFOs over nuclear >sites. How can we make the statistical claim that the accumulation of reports is remarkable whilst dismissing statistics as somehow beside the point? The statistics _are_ "basic" to the question of whether or not reports correlate with nuclear sites. You were previously happy with that and cited the Johnson paper as evidence to "rely on". You said: "The statistical analysis, based on the UFOCAT database, seems clear to me, establishing higher percentages in the counties with nuclear plants and facilities." Does statistical analysis start to seem less valuable if it might not after all support the conclusion you favour? You also follow Johnson in citing 289 reports out of a 60-year worldwide UFOCAT database of 172,000. This includes "missile" related incidents as well as "nuclear" related incidents. What proportion of this 289 took place over nuclear sites? I've already questioned whether the whole 289 can be said to constitute a "remarkable accumulation" since it might well correspond to hundreds of years per site per report generated. I think there's reasonable doubt that your subjective impression would survive analysis. Of course there are interesting clusters, but you need to be careful about drawing general conclusions from clusters. Not only is clustering the natural outcome of any stochastic process in the real world (perfect regularity would definitely signal a non-random artefact) but there can be specific local causes due to covariables other than those you are measuring. For example, you might find that there is a correlation between the distribution of rats and the retail business turnover per unit area in different districts. But this is not likely to mean that rats do a lot of shopping, rather that both quantities covary with the amount of street refuse. In the present case, what else might districts with nuclear reactors/weapons and districts that generate more UFO reports have in common? >In their famous book "Clear Intent" (1984), Lawrence >Fawcett and Barry Greenwood (1984) wrote, in their preface, >presenting military documents released on these observations : >"In reporting on one incident, a Loring AFB teletype stated that >an unidentified object demonstrated a clear intent in the >weapons storage area". The Air Force never explained what the >clear intent was, though it seems that, in this instance, it was >a non-violent intent." Yes, so far, all known UFO appearances >over military and civilian nuclear sites seem to have been non- >agressive. So far, so good. But it does not mean that we can >consider them with "benign neglect"! I am ready to bet, >actually, that the military don't. That may well be the case. As I said in my post, I think it likely that the sort of rigorous analysis that could answer questions about the degree of any special association between UFO reports and nuclear sites, and its possible significance if there is one, has been done long ago, many times, in secure places that we don't have access to. But that doesn't help us much, does it? Unfortunately the one public study that we do have access to (Johnson) doesn't help us all that much either, as it stands. Treating the potential risk of UFOs over nuclear sites with "neglect" would be NOT doing that rigorous analysis and instead relying on subjective impressions. If you are very sensitive to risks of aggression, what you need above all is sound intelligence and good analysis, and to remember the adage that a person's most important thoughts tend to be those that contradict his natural expectations. >Just one more word, about the book of Georgina Bruni. I have >read several books on Rendlesham, and, yes, it is an outstanding >one. The best, I think. You should read it. As I said, I read it only so far as was necessary to review literature related directly to the 1956 Lakenheath-Bentwaters case. Her summary account of that, as I also said, was not good.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:08:51 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:30:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. If the >>balloon is at a high enough altitude then the prevailing winds >>could be in a direction different ftom the ground level whihc >>would permit the vehicle going against the wind. A large enough >>balloon at altitude would be able to support the massive gondola >>described. "Landing" would be accomplished by controlling the >>buoyancy of the at altitude balloon. >>Holes in this theory are that 1) No cable was seen/reported. Its >>unlikely that the cable could be invisible regardless of if is >>was completely transparent. Even transparent objects are visible >>by reflections of the light off their surface, and at their >>edges. If the cable was thin and the observer was too far away >>to make it out then that is possible, but then the cable is damn >>thin and unlikely to be possible given that era technology to >>support a massive craft. I suppose this could be calced by >>interested parties. >>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >>least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. >Hi James, >Here's another difficulty... Zamora saw flame, and the flame >burnt the ground. If the envelope was at high altitude, what was >the flame for? Hi Kyle The balloon at altitude (ex hypothesi) would not be a hot air balloon but a gas balloon, and the flame would not be connected with the balloon lift but with the gondala part of this hybrid contraption. One would have to assume that the suspended object or gondola had some sort of thrusters either for its own partial lift or for attitude control. If one wants to pursue this theory, then, as I suggested, a test of a prototype LEM slung under a powered aerostat balloon giving simulated 1/6G is a remote possibility. Presumably the thing would have to have been a runaway from some desert test site to explain its presence - maybe the aerostat's own motor had failed and it had drifted off with a high wind at altitude, hauling the LEM with it. Maybe the crew winched the thing down smartly because they were in a panic to get off, but then panicked again when Zamora drove up and decided to take their chance over the next ridge? A pretty wild-assed idea, I have to agree! And how high would the large balloon have to be to escape detection? The lower the atmosphere pressure the larger the gas bag volume gets, so if we let it be way up high then it's going to be a proportionately large object. Allowing for the fact that the witness's attention would be focused on the LEM, would he and everybody in the area have failed to notice the balloon?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:26:04 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:58:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:57:44 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:26:19 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>Perhaps I missed some part of the discussion, but have you read >>carefully the statistical study of Donald A. Johnson? ><snip> >>I wonder, is this really a serious debate? >I find the Johnson study flawed by biased sampling on both sides >of the question. I am not a statistician and wont pretend to be, >but I think Martin makes my point in a much more verbose fashion >in his post today on this thread. My "common sense" approach >results in the same conclusion he reaches. Too many assumptions >and presumptions that skew the results toward a pre-determined >goal. Hmm, Kyle. Obviously "verbose" must be a synonym for "specific" or "closely-reasoned" in your dictionary! I assume my verbosity at least has the merit that it relieves you of having to expatiate on the same tedious details all over again. <g> Seriously, I'm glad you agree, but it's the failure to transparently dissect "common sense" assumptions that often leads to confusion and uncertainty, as the Johnson study shows. I think we should try to be thorough when we can. Somebody once suggested that no List posts should be allowed that didn't include footnotes. Sounds extreme - but I kind of know what he meant!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:38:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:00:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Here's another difficulty... Zamora saw flame, and the flame >burnt the ground. If the envelope was at high altitude, what was >the flame for? Easy, there was an equipment malfunction! I could also ask why would they be on the ground at all? My guess is that _any_ situation where the crew must land on the ground in an emergency/off nominal condition, they would cut _any_ cables and call for pickup by the ground crew. There is no "taking off again". Now, if there is some sort of test, in a testing range, they might do some off-nominal testing, but not out of the testing range. The only reason they would alight on the ground and then go back up (if balloonists) is if they were not supposed to be in the USA (Communist agents). Maybe this was the poor man's (Soviet's) U-2? I am not familiar with the Soviet ballooncraft at that era. (But this is really thinking out of the box!) I know you also have a problem with my speculation of a high altitude balloon attached via long thin cable to the gondola. Again, I agree that it seems unlikely that the cable was thin
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:43:18 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:02:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:28:04 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:57 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>Perhaps this is a naive question, given that I'm sure you must >>have considered it, but is there a possibility that this >>"phantom" moon - on the horizon in the same azimuth as the moon >>- was in fact a superior mirage image of the moon below the >>horizon? >Hard to accept, huh? ;> What's supposed to be hard to accept, Amy? You gave no details whatsoever about how this phenomenon behaved, and I was not remotely critical or combative, merely curious to know what you thought about the idea of an unusual mirage. But this response indicates to me that you feel challenged even by a reasonable question, and you are making unwarranted assumptions about my interest. <snip> >I know about phantoms and reflections. This was not that. Just >mark it up to misidentification or impossible so it won't bother >your paradigms. Too hard to adjust to this kind of stuff unless >you have to. <smile> Well, not just challenged - stroppy I would say. Well OK since that's your attitude I won't bother you again, and I doubt anyone else will either <bleak grin>.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:59:36 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:03:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:03:34 +0800 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >Do you really think that any "settlement" of psi phenomena that >was reached in a government (read: intelligence/military) >sponsored lab would necessarily be made public? Oh, I didn't say that. I am saying that there has been alot of academic studies of psychic phenomena with published results showing, in the main, an effect happening. Some show more or less effect. This would be the same as an academic study showing that the UFO phenomona is real (with some studies showing more such realness than others). In either case, its like pregnancy, you are or you aren't. All we would have then is that the phenomena is real. This should satisfy some people since they have felt a long time that people should believe that what they think is real, actually IS real. But from the standpoint of academic studies to utilize the phenomena to some practical purpose, I am sure you are right that military/government agencies would keep it secret (although some may not) and are likely still investigating it (unless they have already found some reason that it cannot be used-too hard to duplicate,train). However, the other consideration is that private individuals and corporations may also wish to sponsor such further investigation and this may become public information. My guess is that if the government is continuing to work secretly on psychic phenomena, then it isn't apparenly that successful based on the news. But then again, how many dirty nukes have NOT gone off because of "something". I hate such arguments on non-events. Better, where is OBL, why wasn't Saddam found quicker, where are the WMDs? Items like this should be answerable using psychic phenomena, but aren't.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:09:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:04:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:07:28 -0400 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. >This would pretty much be like pulling a hat out of a rabbit, >wouldn't it-though less painful. Would there have been some >reason for these antics? Heh! As I have said in another posting, I don't see much reason for the "antics" of the "aliens". I speculated on brave or stupid "Soviet spies" floating in a poor man's U-2. Ha! Yes, the comrades experienced some technical difficulties and made an
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:15:13 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:06:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to >simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, >suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give >you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that >you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of >it. Oh, yes, it could be done. But it wasn't ever reported to have been done and it was public info. Also, such tests occur under highly controlled circumstances, lots of ground crew, backups,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:50:05 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:07:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Rogerson >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:38:53 -0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:17:27 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >>By Orthodoxy I take it you mean the real, intellectually >>exhilarating, often wildly speculative physical and human >>sciences, (see the recently posted article by Michio Kaku for >>example) with their many disagreements and personality clashes. >>Curiously, even though some of these make the most vitrupative >>exchanges on updates look positively prim in comparison, no ever >>uses words like skeptibunker. Argument, debate and the >>challenging of established views are seen as part of the life >>blood of the subject not as attacks on one's personal faith. >If by this you mean that insults and ad hominem attacks play no >part in science, then I'm afraid that is certainly untrue. No I didn't, but I probably was thinking more in terms of physics or the Dawkins/Gould conflict, rather than psychology. The memory wars certainly look like the stuff that is on updates, and contain the same conflict between _scientific explanation_ and _personal experience_ >>Of course there are basic rules, one being scientific naturalism >>which means that you don't invoke supernatural forces or unknown >>trans human intelligences to get you out of a tight corner. It's >>by playing by these rules that real knowledge is gained. It may >>be very difficult and take a long time but the paydirts can be >>very profound. >I'm not at all sure that the phrase "scientific naturalism" >really means very much. It tends to be used rather loosely to >cover two quite contradictory approaches to scientific >research:- Positivism, which specifically disavows metaphysical >claims; and materialism, which makes the explicitly metaphysical >claim that the phenomena of the universe all derive from the >operations of some underlying physical reality. (In fact, >materialism is strictly a nineteenth-century doctrine and it is >quite difficult to find a coherent modern, post-QM formulation >of it.) >One would probably find that most scientists - or at any rate >most physical scientists - would claim to be both positivists >and materialists, but that most probably reflects the fact that >philosophy of science is not a primary concern for most working >scientists. Materialism sounds very old fashioned, harking back to billiard ball atoms, and no one outside aging psychical researchers seems to use the word these days. By scientific naturalism I mean that we don't ascribe the workings of the world to occult personal agencies or arbitary wills. It also implies that the world is in some sense orderly, that say the speed of light is either constant, or will alter in some regular sense, and won't very arbitarily from day to day. That if we ask the question, why do the planets stay in their orbits, we arn't satisfied with the answer that the angels push them along. >Likewise, I think it means very little to say that science >disavows "supernatural forces", since the word "supernatural" is >usually defined tautologically as anything which isn't >scientific. If it has any meaning at all, it should probably be >regarded as a synonym for "metaphysical", in which case one >should note that the definition of what is metaphysical (that >is, untestable) and what is amenable to scientific investigation >necessarily changes with time. (Subatomic particles would have >been metaphysical entities by the standards of medieval >knowledge.) For supernatural forces read magic. Science proceeds on the assumption that the results of experiments are due to the operations carried out, and the properties of the things being studied rather that to the experimentor's psychokinesis, or to the wishes of the local boggart. >In any case, one should always distinguish between what is >scientifically testable and what is actually true. We know of no >law of nature which requires that truth is necessarily >discernible by scientific investigation (or indeed by any other >sort of investigation). >Also, while it's certainly true that "trans-human intelligences" >are not currently invoked to explain any observable phenomena, >there is no reason to regard such explanations as inherently >unscientific. The Michio Kaku article you refer to, for >example, refers explicitly to Kardashev Type III civilizations. I've certainly argued along these lines myself in the past. Of course we can only deal with models of the world constructed directly or indirectly through our senses and brains, and that these will be very partial and perhaps very distorted models of the world as such. Nevertheless these models in some represent a world out there. Now you must believe something of the sort yourself in order to argue that James Gibson's theory of perception is superior to Richard Gregory's. That only makes sense if there are or were indeed entities called James Gibson and Richard Gregory out there, that there a real world for us to somehow perceive, and that there are experiments and observations which can somehow interrogate this real world in order to judge between the rival theories. Though I must admit to sometimes having the heretical thought
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:10:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:12:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - King >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:32:01 -0600 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Something that I haven't seen addressed in this thread (or maybe >I missed it) is the fact that Zamora saw the flames coming from >the bottom of the object and that they burned the sage brush >around the landing site. >Is there any kind of balloon configuration, then or now, that >would do this? Hi Terry, What seemed intriguing about Rich's original post on this thread was the possibility that the object was a LEM simulator being assisted by a balloon. This would account for the flame, but also for the apparent motion of the craft. This was very intriguing to me, but the fault lies with the balloon required. Since that post, we have had theories that there could have been a balloon out of Zamora's sight which could have been at high altitude, and attached to the "LEM" by a thin all but invisible cable. I assume this to be theorizing that we had back then a suitable cable that could hold such weight from several hundreds or thousands of feet. I think this is again shoe-horning an explanation to fit the balloon model. The question is why would NASA need the supporting balloon to be so high up? So people would think the LEM was a UFO? Seems much more likely that the craft was similar to the LEM, and did not need a balloon which was not seen anyway. Of course, this means that the craft was not one of ours... at least not of 1964. Or it was a secret craft we don't know about. Much simpler to put a balloon on the thing, and then try to explain away a reason why Zamora didn't see it. Every time the balloon is refuted, the balloon theory gets more exotic. At this point, a UFO from outer space is less exotic, in my view.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:14:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:46:28 -0000 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:21:32 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >>The problem, as I see it, after 63 years on the planet, is that the >>elite who run the planet publicly ridicule topics they don't want >>known to the general public. And they have plenty of power to >>paralyze all the underlings. <snip> >>The problem is not selling the public, the problem is the leaders >>who actively discredit, harass, and neutralize any mainstream >>officials, government, scientific, or media, who start taking a close >>positive look at either PSI or UFOs. They are forbidden topics. >Sorry, but this just won't wash. <snip> >There are no "forbidden topics". You are propagating the myth of >unseen powers-that-be interfering with science, the media and >the public. Bravo Chris. Eleanor, The elite who run the planet? I guess these are a bunch of guys who have some kind of game board before them, and they take turns moving levers and pushing buttons to make people lose their jobs, and make them hear voices, and make the military ignore UFO reports, and plant thoughts in their heads, and have minions who follow harass, and even torture regular folks for the sheer fun of it all. Meanwhile, this elite is unable to forecast weather, cure sickness, end hunger, solve problems. Some elite. Who are these elite, Eleanor? Where do they live? What's their address? Where do they meet? Why do they have to meet? Who decides who they are? Was Adam one of them? When did they start running the planet? Do you know any of this, or are you just regurgitating what you've read in the tabloids and books in the "conspiracy" section? If so, how did these get printed in light of the elite who run the planet? And, if so, how do you hope to ever know anything they don't
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:12:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:17:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. ><snip> >>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >>least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. >James >Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to >simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, >suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give >you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that >you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of >it. A large high-altitude powered aerostat would be way above >the vicissitudes of local weather and could be quite stable >(such have been used as secret radar and radio surveillance >platforms since the '50s), and of course it allows the LEM to be >as heavy as you want subject only to the volume of available gas >envelopes and the cable breaking-strain, as you mention. A rapid >paying out of cable could land the LEM hard and create the >marks. Also, several fine cables would be better for stability >and control than one fat one - would that be easier or harder to >see from a few tens of feet? Just grist to the mill . . . I doubt this is an option Martin, Where's the NASA documentation to back it up? I've seen film of a test pilot [I believe incorrectly attributed to Neil Armstrong] nearly killing himself in a LM flight at Edwards AFB. See URL below. He ejected shortly before the LM went unstable and crashed. If we have this film why wouldn't we have seen this other balloon contraption as well?. What was it doing in Socorro, NM, incidentally. The ":Flying Beadstead" the name attached by the test pilots to the LLRV- the Lunar Module test vehicle had it's first test flight at Dryden Research at Edwards AFB on Oct. 30 1964 to a peak altitude of 10 feet. Edwards AFB, incidentally, is over 700 miles away from Socorro. In the history of the test program there is no mention of a balloon being used to teather the LLRV to a balloon and risk a $2.5 million dollar vehicle that incidentally carried ONE pilot. And no one would mistake this vehicle as being ovoid or egg-shaped. See here for further details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LLRV
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:19:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Rudiak >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >An experimental craft seems a possibility for Socorro but I dare >not mention that here, because some will get absolutely >hysterical that a (supposed) "newbie" would suggest that >hypothesis all over again, since it has been discussed ad >infinitum, ad nauseum. You might as well write that a flying pig seems a possibility for Socorro. The point is, where is any evidence for such an "experimental craft?" In 40 years, nobody has ever turned up any evidence that such a craft existed. That's not too surprising when you look at the _facts_ of the case. Consider the following characteristics of the Socorro craft: 1. It had no apparent conventional propulsion system such as propellers, rockets, or jets, and left no trail. 2. It was oval shaped and lacked a conventional airfoil (i.e. wings or lifting body shape) to support it in flight. 3. It descended and ascended vertically with a roar, but once it reached 20 feet altitude, it became completely silent. 4. In silent mode it zipped away and disappeared in the distance near Six-mile Canyon in 20 seconds or less (also executed a sharp upward turn). That works out to approximately 1000 mph for its _average_ speed. (It's peak speed was probably substantially greater.) So we have an nonconventionally shaped craft with no wings to support it, with a nonconventional propulsion system capable of vertical takeoff and landing, but which is also capable of silently accelerating to supersonic speeds in a matter of seconds and perhaps capable of hypersonic speed. This is one jim-dandy experimental flying machine we had 40 years ago. With characteristics like that, you would think we'd have a fleet of these things by now instead of jet aircraft So where are they? >We have given Larry Robinson a source for his "article" which >tells the tale of balloonists being mistaken for aliens after a >descent, which caused them to hurriedly ascend; this in the >Southwest, 1964. I've being hearing about this alleged article for years. Even if it turns up, so what? How can a balloon possibly explain the facts of the case? >Robinson's error is that he has fostered the idea that it was a >hot-air balloon Zamora saw, and that has beclouded his >credibility. He's locked into that missing article he saw years >ago. Again so what? How can a balloon, or even a conventional experimental craft explain the facts of the case? >Elsewhere I've input a somewhat detailed list of the aspects of >the Socorro sighting which make it suspect as an alien craft (or >balloon even), and I've listed elements of the investigation >which were awry. Again Rich, you seem deliberately vague with your details. Where's your detailed list and what exactly makes Socorro
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:40:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:23:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - King >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:04:28 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:40:01 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >This just in from a redacted fellow on my AlienViewGroup List: <snip> >Here's the icing on the cake: After I had assembled a powerful >namelist of willing UFO advocates, the Director of A.P.M. took >me aside and confided (in a very low voice) that Metromedia had >dropped their plans for the UFO show because then-President >Richard Nixon, facing political criticism as a result of the >Watergate Scandal," was himself going to announce to the >American people that the UFOs really exist - this in order to >build his prestige as the nation's leader." >[Redacted] Hi Alfred, Did your friend mention why, after Nixon obviously had a change of mind, Metromedia didn't go forward with the show? I would have at least gone back to the source of the rumor, (presumably William Tiller PhD, the groups founding director) and asked. As Nixon resigned in Aug. 1974, just over a year later than the "Spring 1973" time-frame, one would think that the show's producers would have picked the story up again, especially after having been told not to "steal the President's thunder", as it were. Tacit admission of the reality of the UFO enigma, and they'd have the scoop from the horse's mouth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:41:15 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:27:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:04:28 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:40:01 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >This just in from a redacted fellow on my AlienViewGroup List: <snip> >Here's the icing on the cake: After I had assembled a powerful >namelist of willing UFO advocates, the Director of A.P.M. took >me aside and confided (in a very low voice) that Metromedia had >dropped their plans for the UFO show because then-President >Richard Nixon, facing political criticism as a result of the >Watergate Scandal," was himself going to announce to the >American people that the UFOs really exist - this in order to >build his prestige as the nation's leader." >[Redacted] Well, I guess that shows to go you how wild rumors can fly around without ever amounting to anything in reality. We would have to know more about how much clout Metromedia had at that time, who was involved in the program, etc., in order to understand the significance of this. If, for example, it was the then-equivalent of Fox Network, I might make up excuses not to appear on it too. In any event, it will be very interesring to see what impact the Peter Jennings ABC-TV 2-hour, prime-timer special on ET life and UFOs (now scheduled for Feb. 25) has. Depends of course of what treatment he gives it, but all signs are very positive so far.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Hynek Interview? From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:15:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:35:14 -0500 Subject: Hynek Interview? List: I have been asked by the people making a 2 hour documentary to be broadcast by ABC at 8PM Eastern on Thursday, February 24, with a title that includes Peter Jennings Reports... UFOs.. and Life in the Universe, the following question: --- "We've been talking with James Fox, whom I think you've spoken with, and he said you may be able to answer this question: There is an interview with J. Allen Hynek on "UFOS: 50 Years of Denial?" from 1985 where Hynek says that the goal of Project Bluebook was to coverup any questionable UFO sightings. He's wearing a white suit and sitting on a couch. By any chance, do you know who shot this footage?" --- Anybody have any ideas here? Please let me know. I should add that the Jennings people interviewed a host of people in Roswell, Denver, and other places. UFO skeptics were
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Case Reopened In Couple's 1957 Disappearance From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:42:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:42:10 -0500 Subject: Case Reopened In Couple's 1957 Disappearance Source: The El Paso Times - El Paso, Texas http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20050129-17040.shtml 01-29-05 Case Reopened In Couple's 1957 Disappearance Diana Washington Valdez El Paso Times The disappearance of William and Margaret Patterson has been a mystery to the police and El Paso for nearly 50 years. It has inspired urban legends, wild stories of espionage and even tales of UFO abductions. Their old house in the 3000 block of Piedmont was known by generations of El Pasoans as the "haunted house." Over the years, several theories emerged to explain what happened to them: They were kidnapped, they met with foul play, they left everything behind to start a new life elsewhere, they were spies or they were abducted by space aliens. Now the mystery has taken another turn: The El Paso sheriff's and police departments are taking a new look at the case, which began in March 1957. "We're assembling all the information in our files and archives," said Sgt. Jim Belknap of the sheriff's Crimes Against Persons unit. "At some point, we will get together with the Police Department people again, lay out everything we have, see what we have and figure out where we can go from there." Representatives of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and the El Paso Police Department met during the past week to discuss the possibility of working together to solve the case, which has baffled law enforcement for nearly half a century. "We're willing to follow any leads that might help to solve this case," said Carlos Carrillo, a missing persons detective for the Police Department. He said Detective Darrel Petry and police spokesman Javier Sambrano are helping him. Theories of espionage "I think they were spies," El Paso County Sheriff Leo Samaniego said. "The way they got up and just walked away and left everything behind. The Russians, or whoever sent them, probably told them to drop everything and go back. Some people said they had seen Patterson take photographs of Fort Bliss and of military shipments on the trains that came here." The Pattersons owned Patterson Photo Supply near Downtown. "It was a high-profile case, very unusual," Samaniego said. "The original theory was that they were kidnapped. There was no sign of a struggle. It's like they went out for a walk and never came back." The Pattersons' disappearance received widespread publicity and became one of El Paso's best known cases. In their quest to find the couple, El Paso officials sought help from the FBI, Los Angeles Police Department and Mexican authorities, among others. El Paso FBI Special Agent Art Werge said he couldn't find any information in the agency's files that go back that far to could indicate whether the Pattersons ever came under surveillance for suspected espionage. Associates of the Pattersons told authorities in the 1950s that the couple left to go on an extended vacation to Florida, and later, that they sent word that they weren't coming back. Cecil Ward, a friend of the Pattersons, reported the couple missing Aug. 15, 1957, five months after they were last seen in El Paso. Ward filed the report with then-Sheriff Jimmy Hicks. Court of inquiry El Paso authorities convened a rare court of inquiry, also known as an inquest, to look into the couple's whereabouts, but the inquiry failed to find them. According to news archives, Patterson's 75-year-old father, Luther Patterson, traveled from Chicago to El Paso to testify at the court of inquiry. He said then, "I always knew Pat and Margaret would take off like this some day, but I figured it to be four or five years away. ... They're not dead. ... My boy has done things like this before. ... He made his living doing sleight-of-hand tricks." However, several years later, after failing to hear from his son, Patterson's father said he suspected the couple was dead. Adding to the mystery was the fact that Patterson associates told police that William Patterson had sent written instructions on how he wanted to dispose of his business and private properties. A letter signed "W.D. Patterson" stated that Patterson wanted his properties to be distributed among Doyle D.G. Kirkland, a friend and manager of Duffy's Photo Supply store; Herb Roth, his business auditor; and Art Moreno, an employee of Patterson who was 24 at the time. Police lost track of Kirkland after he left El Paso, and Ward and Roth have died. Moreno, who is on vacation out of the country, was unavailable for comment. At some point, sheriff's Sgt. Belknap said, a signature on one of the letters Patterson allegedly sent was challenged. Belknap said it was unusual for Patterson to leave his property to those people, considering that he had at least two living relatives at the time, his father and a sister. Besides the Patterson Photo Supply store in Downtown, Patterson also owned an interest in a high-end boat company, property in Guaymas, Mexico, the house, a boat and a Cadillac. A girlfriend During the initial investigation, police interviewed Patterson's alleged 20-year-old girlfriend, Estefana Arroyo Marfin, who lived in Ju=E1rez. She said she last saw William Patterson early March 6, 1957, and said that he told her he had important things to tell her, and that "when they come for me, I'll have to go in a hurry." Belknap said she recanted her statement later. Ward was the last person to talk to Margaret Patterson, who reportedly had a drinking problem. And Kirkland, they said, was the last person who was at the Patterson house before the couple vanished. "Kirkland was helping Patterson work on (Patterson's) boat in the garage at the house," said Freddie Bonilla, a former homicide detective who now works as a private investigator. "I can't believe they just took off. They left their house, business, money and their cat. I heard they fed their cat caviar." The feline turned up when new tenants leased the house. Several sightings Several sightings of the couple were reported in Mexico and the United States, but sheriff's officials said they were never able to confirm any of them. Bonilla suspects that the Pattersons were killed. In 1984, when he was a sheriff's captain, a new witness emerged who gave credence to that theory. His name was Reynaldo Nangaray. Bonilla, who also was a homicide detective for the El Paso Police Department, said the case was reopened quietly. "I wanted to take the case to a grand jury and get an indictment," he said. "Nangaray told us he found blood in (the Pattersons') garage and a piece of human scalp on the propeller of Patterson's boat. He found a pair of jeans with a Rolex watch that belonged to Patterson, and said he also saw one of Patterson's (associates) remove bloody sheets from the home and put them inside the trunk of a car," Bonilla said. "He did not talk to police sooner because he was an illegal immigrant at the time, but when he came to see us, he was a U.S. citizen." Two weeks ago, current residents of the Piedmont house allowed Bonilla to look over the property and photograph the exterior and garage. He has never lost the desire to solve the case. Nangaray died in a car accident two years after giving his statement to the Sheriff's Department. Belknap confirmed that Nangaray's statement is on file. Bonilla said his employment contract with the Sheriff's Department was not renewed in 1985, and he thinks the investigation lost steam after that. Ghost stories The mystery also fueled rumors that ghosts of the Pattersons haunted their former home. Another detective in the early investigation suspected that their bodies might be there, according to news archives. "When I was a city patrolman, the house on Piedmont was in my district," Samaniego said. "I would get a hundred calls ... all these kids would stop by the house because they thought the house was haunted, and they would scare this poor old lady who (once) lived there." Frank Manning, a former chief sheriff's deputy, was in charge of the earlier investigation in the 1950s. Former El Paso County Sheriff R.L. "Bob" Bailey told the El Paso Herald-Post that "at one time Frank thought maybe the bodies were buried right there in or under the house, but he could never find any evidence of it."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Universal Translator Needed To Understand ET? From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 03:58:08 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:15:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Universal Translator Needed To Understand ET? >Source: Space.Com >http://www.seti.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=194993&ct=363416 >01-27-05 >Universal Translator Might Be Needed To Understand ET >by Douglas Vakoch - SETI Institute >Will we ever find a primer for decoding messages from extraterrestrials? Last month, anthropologists who gathered for a major conference in Atlanta, Georgia heard some news that will be sobering for SETI enthusiasts: it may be much more difficult to understand extraterrestrials than many scientists have thought before. <snip> Hello all: An interesting article. I can't add much to it, except to hope that any alien language vaguely resembles English, French, Spanish or Italian in general syntax and usage. If its more like German, Basque or Japanese we're pi** out of luck, at least I am.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Freeman From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:21:04 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:19:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Freeman >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >There are always possibilities but I know what I saw. It was >about 30 maybe 40 degrees above the horizon, stayed in the same >position for 15 - 20 minutes, "eclipsed" _twice_and disappeared >instantly while I was looking at it (after it slowly "eclipsed" >or closed). No clouds, visibility unlimited and oddly, no planes >where there were usually many planes (circling to land at DFW >miles to the west). Hi Amy, Martin and LIst, Thought maybe you would be interested in this account reported to me back in the fall of 1994 here in the Big Bend area of Florida. It seems to be quite similar to your sighting. The witness, also female, relates the following: "...I saw two shapes, one round, one crescent positioned at the lower right side of the round shape. They were solidly glowing white light but the sky around them was dark. Their edges were sharp (very defined) and the shapes were perfectly formed and still. I looked at them about 30 seconds and realizing they were coming from the sky and not the ground, like someone with a flashlight, I was relieved and went back to sleep, rolling over and seeing how brightly lit the wall was and the shadows so defined. Even though I recall having the thought that this was a UFO, I was unconcerned and didn't keep watching it or wake anyone up to see it. The morning after, I felt very differently about it." She further states: "A couple of days later one of my sons, playing with a friend who lives behind us, found out his mother saw it, too. I phoned her and she saw 1 shape which was round. She described everything like me, it was still and light shining through her window woke her. She was frightened by it and got up to check her locks and never went back to see it so she didn't see it
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:15:53 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:24:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:08:51 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. <burp!> >>>Holes in this theory are that 1) No cable was seen/reported <snip> 1.1 - its nuts <snip> >>>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, 2.2 Agreed. >Hi Kyle >The balloon at altitude (ex hypothesi) would not be a hot air >balloon but a gas balloon, and the flame would not be connected >with the balloon lift but with the gondala part of this hybrid >contraption. One would have to assume that the suspended object >or gondola had some sort of thrusters either for its own partial >lift or for attitude control. OK. Lets pull out the stops, and give every benefit of the doubt to thoughtful skeptics. Lets say it was a gas balloon. Not Helium, that's heavier than hydrogen. Not even Hydrogen, that has weight too. Hows about a _total_ vacuum! All you need is something to contain it. I work on vacuum systems that weigh as much as a car. Their weight is from the strong metals needed to hold back the atmosphere, some 14.7 pounds for each and every square inch of surface area. Lets assume, for the sake of argument (chuckle!) that somebody had a totally weightless vacuum chamber in the 1960! Lets further assume that 2 or 3 'occupants', their gondola, tools, instruments, radios, gear and what have you, weighs something like 300 kilograms. Double that would make more sense of course, triple that, most of a ton, would be even more realistic. How much air would the 'balloon' (here a best-case weightless vacuum chamber) have to displace, before it could lift off, even gently? It would have to displace at least as much air-weight, somewhat more really. It would have to take the space of hundreds of kilograms or air mass. What does air weigh? Did you think air is weightless? If so, go back and read something more easily digested. Air weighs roughly 1 kilogram (1 kg weight that is, about 2.2 pounds) per square meter at sea level. The situation is even worse for the balloon theory in Socorro, NM where air is thinner due to altitude, but we forgive that for now. To lift off, my imaginary vacuum-balloon would have to occupy a space of hundreds of cubic meters of space. Lets try 300 meters-cubed (m3) for 300 kilograms of payload. The Socorro object is described as very roughly ovoid in shape. That math for that escapes me for now, (burp!) lets say it was shape of a tall skinny can of soup, twice as tall as it is wide. The volume of this can would be its diameter times pi (3.1415926..) times its height. This works out to pi * d * h/2, which equals 1/2 pi * d squared. Get out your calculators. I see a soup can something like 13.81 meters in diameter, that's over 45 feet[!] ...multiplied by 27.6 meters in height (around 90 1/2 feet) .. and all of this is with a weightless soup can capable of withstanding 14.7 PSI of atmospheric pressure without imploding. Need I go on? I have invented an ideal 'balloon' and the numbers are still insane. This is not what Zamora described. Not even a ghost of it. Unless Zamora saw something much further away (hence larger) the balloon hypothesis is absolute nonsense. I don't know what to make of the Socorro case. It is atypical in many ways. With reservations, I suggest you can leave balloons completely out of it. They inevitably weigh more than my imaginary weightless vacuum chamber. I invented that as an ideal 'Socorro Balloon' for your kind consideration. You won't be finding one at NASA. - - - A modest proposal: Maybe the "gondola" that Zamora saw, and at first mistook for an overturned car, was some mundane device suspended by an invisible cable, the upper end firmly attached to a UFO that went unnoticed.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:19:32 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:47:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:41:15 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:04:28 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:40:01 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma ><snip> >This just in from a redacted fellow on my AlienViewGroup List: ><snip> >>Here's the icing on the cake: After I had assembled a powerful >>namelist of willing UFO advocates, the Director of A.P.M. took >>me aside and confided (in a very low voice) that Metromedia had >>dropped their plans for the UFO show because then-President >>Richard Nixon, facing political criticism as a result of the >>Watergate Scandal," was himself going to announce to the >>American people that the UFOs really exist - this in order to >>build his prestige as the nation's leader." >>[Redacted] >Well, I guess that shows to go you how wild rumors can fly >around without ever amounting to anything in reality. We would >have to know more about how much clout Metromedia had at that >time, who was involved in the program, etc., in order to >understand the significance of this. If, for example, it was the >then-equivalent of Fox Network, I might make up excuses not to >appear on it too. >In any event, it will be very interesring to see what impact the >Peter Jennings ABC-TV 2-hour, prime-timer special on ET life and >UFOs (now scheduled for Feb. 25) has. Depends of course of what >treatment he gives it, but all signs are very positive so far. >I'm not holding my breath, but I am cautiously optimistic. I called ABC yesterday and was told that the Jennings special would be on Feb. 24. I was also given this date by a connected person the day before. Too early for a TV Guide listing I suspect.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:32:55 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:53:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hatch >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:26:04 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Somebody once suggested that no List posts should be >allowed that didn't include footnotes. Sounds extreme >- but I kind of know what he meant! Hello Martin: Part of me wants to agree with the footnotes requirement, but more realistic thoughts somehow peek thru my California fog. 1) Footnotes will only enlarge the archive files for these discussions _and_ 2) The well known airheads would simply scrape unrelated but officious looking footnotes from botanical texts, creationist screeds etc. 3) Virtually nobody uses them; just eggheads who read too much anyhow.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:12:18 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:36:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hatch >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:40:31 -0600 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:04:28 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>This just in from a redacted fellow on my AlienViewGroup List: ><snip> >>Here's the icing on the cake: After I had assembled a powerful >>namelist of willing UFO advocates, the Director of A.P.M. took >>me aside and confided (in a very low voice) that Metromedia had >>dropped their plans for the UFO show because then-President >>Richard Nixon, facing political criticism as a result of the >>Watergate Scandal," was himself going to announce to the >>American people that the UFOs really exist - this in order to >>build his prestige as the nation's leader." >>[Redacted] >Did your friend mention why, after Nixon obviously had a change >of mind, Metromedia didn't go forward with the show? >I would have at least gone back to the source of the rumor, >(presumably William Tiller PhD, the groups founding director) >and asked. As Nixon resigned in Aug. 1974, just over a year >later than the "Spring 1973" time-frame, one would think that >the show's producers would have picked the story up again, >especially after having been told not to "steal the President's >thunder", as it were. >Tacit admission of the reality of the UFO enigma, and they'd >have the scoop from the horse's mouth. Hello Kyle, Alfred In 1973, an era which I watched closely, my impression was that Nixon would have invented space aliens, if necessary, just to save his presidency. I do not see this as any special knowledge reserved by global 'elites', forever wiring up the mattresses of innocent tinfoil- hat types, but rather as the desperate thoughts of a man up against a hopeless political wall.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:29:14 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:38:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hatch >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:19:32 -0400 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:41:15 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> Hi Stan: >I called ABC yesterday and was told that the Jennings special >would be on Feb. 24. I was also given this date by a connected >person the day before. Too early for a TV Guide listing I >suspect. This may sound odd. If somebody today asked me if I had a working TV set, I couldn't give an honest answer. Heck if I know. I used to have some fun 45rpm records too. I suppose they went out with my Scrooge McDuck comics. A darned shame really. I miss the Scroogey Money Bin. The impression I get is that today's TV audience would like to get on that AOL-internet thingy, but aren't quite sure how to do so.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:05:51 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:17:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:46:28 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:21:32 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies ><snip> >>>The problem, as I see it, after 63 years on the planet, is that the >>>elite who run the planet publicly ridicule topics they don't want >>>known to the general public. And they have plenty of power to >>>paralyze all the underlings. ><snip> >>>The problem is not selling the public, the problem is the leaders >>>who actively discredit, harass, and neutralize any mainstream >>>officials, government, scientific, or media, who start taking a close >>>positive look at either PSI or UFOs. They are forbidden topics. >>Sorry, but this just won't wash. ><snip> >>There are no "forbidden topics". You are propagating the myth of >>unseen powers-that-be interfering with science, the media and >>the public. >Bravo Chris. >Eleanor, >The elite who run the planet? I guess these are a bunch of guys >who have some kind of game board before them, and they take >turns moving levers and pushing buttons to make people lose >their jobs, and make them hear voices, and make the military >ignore UFO reports, and plant thoughts in their heads, and have >minions who follow harass, and even torture regular folks for >the sheer fun of it all. You may have even nailed it right there, Sir. Wouldn't that be appallingly ironic? >Meanwhile, this elite is unable to forecast weather, cure >sickness, end hunger, solve problems. Some elite. False argument, they don't have to be omnipotent to be an 'elite', Mr. King. There's been elitism since the chimney was invented, Sir. Check James Burke and Eugene Weber for clues to who an elite might be and then I've written a modest paper on the justifications for stealthyness on 'their' part. http://www.alienview.net/conspire.html For the kinds of behavior that an elite, without penalty, can involve themselves with please review: http://tinyurl.com/66syx (and notice the bizarre tinyurl that was randomly generated for the site address). >Who are these elite, Eleanor? Where do they live? What's their >address? Where do they meet? Why do they have to meet? Who >decides who they are? Who are _you_, Mr. King? What state are _you_ in? What's _your_ address? Where do _you_ meet and why? Who's _your_ daddy, Mr. King? >Was Adam one of them? When did they start running the planet? Ms. White can hardly be faulted for her lack of belief or trust in a dodgy, contrived, and manipulated 'mainstream', Mr. King >Do you know any of this, or are you just regurgitating what >you've read in the tabloids and books in the "conspiracy" >section? If so, how did these get printed in light of the elite >who run the planet? Again, Ms.White can hardly be faulted for her lack of belief in a hijacked mainstream, Mr. King. Moreover, your condescending tone would seem to belie that you might be getting a little of your news right here from UFO UpDates _or_ that you have a willing abundance of faith in a duplicitous mainstream largely indicating that you're going to get glasnost and perestroika from the Bush Junta... I don't think you think so... >And, if so, how do you hope to ever know anything they don't >want you to know? Isn't your theory the theory of hopelessness >and powerlessness in the face of insurmountable technology? A few days ago you rather pompously and judgmentally wrote: "Hi Paul and Stan, "Here we have an effective, salient rebuttal... devoid of ridicule, free of hyperbole and emotional histrionics, reasoned and fair. Quite refreshing." Well... I trust my response to you was a reflection of the preceding... even if yours to Ms. White seemed to fall a little short. You don't have the deadlock nut on the reality of situations, Mr. King. You probably shouldn't lecture Ms. White like you do. 'They' exist Mr. King. You are less the captain of your intellectual ship that you would suppose, I suspect. As to who they are... well I just wrote about that, too... 'They' are... the privileged arbitrary, the unelected, and far too many of the elected. 'They' are those who _have_, and having 'had', would keep on 'having' despite an aggregate detriment to the common good of those who 'have not.' 'They' are in possession of information that would credit, or be to the advantage of, anyone who 'knew', _specifically_ outlining why most 'know' not. 'They' are the secret keepers. 'They' are the jealous manipulators of the mainstream. 'They' are the ardent covetous who encourage bland employees while they discourage critical thinkers. 'They' are the ones with hidden agendas, duplicitous plans, and secret programs. 'They' are the _few_ willing to profit at the expense of the many. 'They' are above the law, outside reasonable ethics, practice a sociopathic amorality, and, Mr. King, they hold the many enthralled... but beneath their privileged contempt... Think 'these' don't exist, Mr. King? And existing, hiding? If so, it may not be Ms. White with the crippling naivete... Finally, as to your almost sneering explication with regard to 'them'... it may be "you doth protest too much," Sir.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 16:28:32 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:21:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:19:32 -0400 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:41:15 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >>In any event, it will be very interesring to see what impact the >>Peter Jennings ABC-TV 2-hour, prime-timer special on ET life and >>UFOs (now scheduled for Feb. 25) has. Depends of course of what >>treatment he gives it, but all signs are very positive so far. >>I'm not holding my breath, but I am cautiously optimistic. >I called ABC yesterday and was told that the Jennings special >would be on Feb. 24. I was also given this date by a connected >person the day before. Too early for a TV Guide listing I >suspect. Well, that's what they told me too. But then a friend saw an announcement on the ABC evening news that said Feb. 25 (a Friday, which would seem to make more sense). Watch your local
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 29 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:47:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:23:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Maccabee >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:38:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>Here's another difficulty... Zamora saw flame, and the flame >>burnt the ground. If the envelope was at high altitude, what was >>the flame for? >Easy, there was an equipment malfunction! I could also ask why >would they be on the ground at all? My guess is that _any_ >situation where the crew must land on the ground in an >emergency/off nominal condition, they would cut _any_ cables and >call for pickup by the ground crew. There is no "taking off >again". <snip> >I know you also have a problem with my speculation of a high >altitude balloon attached via long thin cable to the gondola. >Again, I agree that it seems unlikely that the cable was thin >enough to be "invisible", but I disagree that he may have >necessarily seen the balloon since the length of line could have >been ~a kilometer. However, I am basing this on today's >echnology, so I can't see how it could be done that far in the >past. If there was a very long tether, to a balloon, far up, there would be no need for a fire near the ground. The fire is to heat the air in the balloon. Only by having a large diameter pipe
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hale From: Roy Hale <roy.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:48:00 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:18:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hale >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:15:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >I don't know what to make of the Socorro case. It is atypical in >many ways. With reservations, I suggest you can leave balloons >completely out of it. They inevitably weigh more than my >imaginary weightless vacuum chamber. I invented that as an ideal >'Socorro Balloon' for your kind consideration. You won't be >finding one at NASA. But he could have simply met humanoids outside a craft?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:58:32 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:20:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Shough >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:50:05 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:38:53 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>>Of course there are basic rules, one being scientific naturalism >>>which means that you don't invoke supernatural forces or unknown >>>trans human intelligences to get you out of a tight corner. It's >>>by playing by these rules that real knowledge is gained. It may >>>be very difficult and take a long time but the paydirts can be >>>very profound. >>I'm not at all sure that the phrase "scientific naturalism" >>really means very much. It tends to be used rather loosely to >>cover two quite contradictory approaches to scientific >>research:- Positivism, which specifically disavows metaphysical >>claims; and materialism, which makes the explicitly metaphysical >>claim that the phenomena of the universe all derive from the >>operations of some underlying physical reality. (In fact, >>materialism is strictly a nineteenth-century doctrine and it is >>quite difficult to find a coherent modern, post-QM formulation >>of it.) >>One would probably find that most scientists - or at any rate >>most physical scientists - would claim to be both positivists >>and materialists, but that most probably reflects the fact that >>philosophy of science is not a primary concern for most working >>scientists. >Materialism sounds very old fashioned, harking back to billiard >ball atoms, and no one outside aging psychical researchers seems >to use the word these days. By scientific naturalism I mean that >we don't ascribe the workings of the world to occult personal >agencies or arbitary wills. It also implies that the world is in >some sense orderly, that say the speed of light is either >constant, or will alter in some regular sense, and won't very >arbitarily from day to day. That if we ask the question, why do >the planets stay in their orbits, we arn't satisfied with the >answer that the angels push them along. Hi Peter As applied to the subject of this List I think the exclusion of _agency_ from the repertoire of scientific hypotheses merely begs the essential question which is at the heart of the debate. Granted that physical science has enjoyed huge success by moving away from animistic to mechanistic models, and that the various purposeful gods and spirits that once filled the world have dwindled and fallen through the gaps, this is not to say that agency - human or nonhuman - can never again be a useful hypothesis. A great many scientists and philosophers today would regard the embargo on agency as being as bankrupt as the old "medical materialism" that was the obverse of the crude psychism peddled by those ageing psychical researchers you mention. The question of human agency is seen as subtler, I would say, physically and philosophically, than a "naturalistic" or mechanistic Victorian account would have sanctioned. The very difficult area of the role of "observation" in the interpretation of QM has had a lot to do with that (often misconceived my opinion), but also the development of genetics, the dynamics of complex systems, critical-point phenomena, far-from-equilibrium systems, self- organisation and so on, have altered forever the old notion of purposeful agency as being something exhibited, if at all, only by the very special brains of humans on earth, alone in a universe of deterministic particles and forces. Specifically, quite well-founded theories of exobiology now mean that non-human agency is (arguably) already a conventional item in the scientific tool-kit, which affects how we are supposed to apply Occam's Razor to exclude "new entities". The ET tool is not a new entity, even if science has yet to agree on a problem that demands that it be taken out and used. If the scientific picture has any merit then it is only a matter of time before such a problem is encountered. It could be encountered now. I don't think it's valid to extend an argument derived from the old failures of mediaeval occultism to the UFO problem today.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:22:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:22:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reynolds >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 16:28:32 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:19:32 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>I called ABC yesterday and was told that the Jennings special >>would be on Feb. 24. I was also given this date by a connected >>person the day before. Too early for a TV Guide listing I >>suspect. >Well, that's what they told me too. But then a friend saw an >announcement on the ABC evening news that said Feb. 25 (a >Friday, which would seem to make more sense). Watch your local >listings, as they say. It should be one of the two days. Gentlemen: As consultants to our local ABC affiliate, we should get a preview of the Jennings UFO broadcast two weeks before its airing on the network.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Socorro & Don Berliner From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:01:57 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:27:17 -0500 Subject: Socorro & Don Berliner Greetings, I've pasted below an extract from an email I received from Don Berliner about a phone conversation Don had with Lonnie Zamora on Monday 27 April 1964 following Lonnie's sighting on the Friday 24 April 1964. Although I don't think that Don's account of that conversation will have a dramatic impact on perception of the Socorro sighting, I thought it was worth putting it into the public domain by forwarding it to the List (with Don's permission). By the way, one or two messages I've received off-List imply that I may have been unclear in my reference, last week, to the UFO Chronology I've been working on. The draft Chronology is _not_ a chronology of the Socorro incident. The references I provided were Socorro was noted at the same time as I noted references for several hundred other frequently discussed events relating to ufology and SETI from 1877 to 2004, plus various reports, committees, documents, books, dissertations, people, AFRs, AFLs etc. Anyway, all should become clearer in the near future now that I can start circulating extracts of a preliminary draft thanks to the generous assistance of Joe McGonagle, Gary Anthony and Kyle King in resolving the technical concern I had regarding metadata. Kind Regards, Isaac Koi ----- On 26th January 2005, Don Berliner wrote: Isaac, I got in on the Socorro case quite early. On the afternoon of Sunday, April 26, 1964, I was at the apartment of Richard Hall, under whom I worked at NICAP as a staff writer, researcher, etc. We were watching a baseball game on TV, when the phone rang. As I was (and am) less of a baseball fan than Hall, I answered his phone and spoke with Frank Rawlinson, a NASA engineer and good friend of NICAP. Frank had picked up a news story about Socorro on his car radio and was relaying this to us. I immediately called the radio station and was read the full text of the story. The baseball game game faded into the background as Hall and I pondered the potential importance of what we had just learned. Would it be the big break we had been hoping for, or would it turn out to be just another exagerated version of something pretty ordinary? As a live-witness is the closest an investigator can get to being there when something happened, I called Zamora on Monday, April 27, in mid-morning Eastern time and two hours earlier in New Mexico. I talked to the operator in Socorro and asked for Zamora's phone number. As Socorro was and still is a small town, she knew Lonnie, and knew that he didn't have a telephone. She also knew that his brother, who lived next door, had a phone and she connected me with him. As the story was just starting to have an impact, Lonnie had not yet been subjected to the spotlight, and so his brother offered to go next door and roust Lonnie out of bed! He didn't mind, and it didn't seem to bother Lonnie, either. Lonnie described his experience in much the same terms that appear in the report he wrote with U.S. Army Capt. Holder and FBI agent Byrnes. He did add a couple of things: 1. He said that after the craft took off with a roar and rush of flame "it got so quiet you could have heard a pin drop". I've spent enough time in the wilds of New Mexico to be familiar with just how quiet it can be. 2. When he described the two small suits of white coveralls next to the craft, I asked him if there had been anybody inside the coveralls. Anyone else would have assumed there were, but Lonnie said he didn't know, because he couldn't see inside the coveralls! In all my years as a reporter, I've never interviewed anyone who so adamantly refused to jump to conclusions. It was this, as
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Hynek Interview? - LeClair From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:05:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:33:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Hynek Interview? - LeClair >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:15:10 -0400 >Subject: Hynek Interview? >"We've been talking with James Fox, whom I think you've >spoken with, and he said you may be able to answer this >question: >There is an interview with J. Allen Hynek on "UFOS: 50 Years of >Denial?" from 1985 where Hynek says that the goal of Project >Bluebook was to coverup any questionable UFO sightings. He's >wearing a white suit and sitting on a couch. >By any chance, do you know who shot this footage?" The clip I have is of Hynek with a white coat and blue shirt sitting on a couch. He is talking about Blue Book and the UFO coverup. This video set was made well after Hynek died I think so they got the footage from somewhere else. I looked in the credits, and his clips aren't singled out. The 2 tapes I have are titled, UFOs: Miracle Of The Unknown. The one Hynek is on, Above Top Secret, which is part 2. They were distributed by a company called Questar Video. P.O. Box 11345 Chicago, Illinois 60611. Maybe contact them and ask them where the footage originated. The customer service phone number is 1- 800-544-8422. Doubt that will do any good though. Don Ecker was one of the consultants of these videos. Maybe ask him.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:08:36 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:02:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:15:53 -0800 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:08:51 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >To lift off, my imaginary vacuum-balloon would have to occupy a >space of hundreds of cubic meters of space. >Lets try 300 meters-cubed (m3) for 300 kilograms of payload. >The Socorro object is described as very roughly ovoid in shape. >That math for that escapes me for now, (burp!) lets say it was >shape of a tall skinny can of soup, twice as tall as it is wide. >The volume of this can would be its diameter times pi >(3.1415926..) times its height. This works out to pi * d * h/2, >which equals 1/2 pi * d squared. >Get out your calculators. >I see a soup can something like 13.81 meters in diameter, that's >over 45 feet[!] ...multiplied by 27.6 meters in height (around 90 >1/2 feet) >.. and all of this is with a weightless soup can capable of >withstanding 14.7 PSI of atmospheric pressure without imploding. >Need I go on? Larry No, you needn't. I'm afraid you've maybe missed a few posts, but nobody has been discussing the theory that you criticise. What we're talking about is not the idea that the object Zamora saw was a balloon but James Smith's suggestion that an object supported by cable from an unseen large high-altitude balloon could be quite massive. >I have invented an ideal 'balloon' and the numbers are still >insane. >This is not what Zamora described. Not even a ghost of it. >Unless Zamora saw something much further away (hence larger) >the balloon hypothesis is absolute nonsense. <snip> >A modest proposal: >Maybe the "gondola" that Zamora saw, and at first mistook for an >overturned car, was some mundane device suspended by an >invisible cable, the upper end firmly attached to a UFO that >went unnoticed. Wonderful! Have you finally sourced that Theakston's Old
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:26:33 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:04:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:47:00 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:38:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >><snip> >>I know you also have a problem with my [JS] speculation of a >>high altitude balloon attached via long thin cable to the gondola. >>Again, I agree that it seems unlikely that the cable was thin >>enough to be "invisible", but I disagree that he may have >>necessarily seen the balloon since the length of line could have >>been ~a kilometer. However, I am basing this on today's >>echnology, so I can't see how it could be done that far in the >>past. >If there was a very long tether, to a balloon, far up, there >would be no need for a fire near the ground. The fire is to heat >the air in the balloon. Only by having a large diameter pipe >leading up to the baoon could one "guarantee" that the heat from >the fire would warm the air in the balloon. I think the idea of >a considerable distance between the gondola, where the torch or >whatever you call it, is kept and the balloon itself is a >non-starter. Bruce, I'm increasingly amazed and amused! Does anybody actually read the posts on this List? The idea of the cable-supported "gondola" has nothing whatsoever to do with hot air balloons and never did! James just pointed out that David Rudiak's calculations of lift do not rule out a large gas balloon at _high altitude_, subtending quite a small angle and out of the line of sight of someone understandably fixated on the landed UFO. If you carry such a theory through you have to suppose that the "gondola" thingy itself had jets or rockets to generate the "blue flame" of course, but that can be justified. Since one is so readily misunderstood here I suppose I'll have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:29:39 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:07:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:50:05 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma >>If by this you mean that insults and ad hominem attacks play no >>part in science, then I'm afraid that is certainly untrue. >No I didn't, but I probably was thinking more in terms of >physics or the Dawkins/Gould conflict, rather than psychology. Heavens, you mean you never heard the story about E O Wilson and the bucket of water? ;-) >The memory wars certainly look like the stuff that is on >updates, Not just the memory wars, but the science wars, the Darwin wars, and probably numerous other controversies one could name. >and contain the same conflict between _scientific >explanation_ and _personal experience_ I very much doubt this, because I think the role of scientific explanation in psychology - and probably in Ufology too - is really quite insignificant. I think what psychology and Ufology have in common is a preoccupation with authority and status, and that both disciplines are more concerned with representing themselves as sciences rather than doing much actual science. >Materialism sounds very old fashioned, harking back to billiard >ball atoms, and no one outside aging psychical researchers seems >to use the word these days. No, I think this is a misconception. The word itself may not be in common usage these days, but the concept itself does persist. It tends to manifest in those areas where science shades into metaphysics, such as foundations of physics or philosophy of mind. Forced to choose between materialism and dualism, I don't doubt for a moment that most scientists would unhesitatingly choose materialism. >By scientific naturalism I mean that >we don't ascribe the workings of the world to occult personal >agencies or arbitary wills. It also implies that the world is in >some sense orderly, that say the speed of light is either >constant, or will alter in some regular sense, and won't very >arbitarily from day to day. That if we ask the question, why do >the planets stay in their orbits, we arn't satisfied with the >answer that the angels push them along. Ok, although that approach is liable to look rather shaky when applied to human beings, whose behavior is often far from orderly and whose workings are very much dependent on occult personal agencies and arbitrary wills ;-) But strictly speaking, the problem with angelic planeteers is not that they involve occult agencies or arbitrary wills, but that their existence is unveriable. One might assume that the universe is orderly and deterministic, but outside of the physics lab or the engineering workshop, it's arguable how much it really is. >For supernatural forces read magic. Science proceeds on the >assumption that the results of experiments are due to the >operations carried out, and the properties of the things being >studied rather that to the experimentor's psychokinesis, or to >the wishes of the local boggart. Ok, but what does this amount to other than a requirement that the theoretical entities invoked must be testable? I'm sorry, but I think the notion of scientific naturalism as you've outlined it here is redundant. I also think it shows a bias towards assuming that everything in the universe will behave like the inanimate objects in a physics lab. Well human beings definitely do not behave like inanimate objects in a phsyics lab! For one thing, human beings will react to the experimental context itself, and so right from the outset you have a complicated dynamical system involving subject and experimenter. >I've certainly argued along these lines myself in the past. Of >course we can only deal with models of the world constructed >directly or indirectly through our senses and brains, and that >these will be very partial and perhaps very distorted models of >the world as such. Nevertheless these models in some represent a >world out there. Assuming, once again, that they are testable. Since we're on the subject of Michio Kaku, how do you classify superstring theory, which is notorious for being completely untestable, in all of this? Is it supernatural and unscientific, and if not, why not? >Now you must believe something of the sort yourself in order to >argue that James Gibson's theory of perception is superior to >Richard Gregory's. Actually I have never argued this, partly because I don't think Richard Gregory is representative of Constructivists (he doesn't try to argue that perception is not determined by stimulus, for one thing) but also because Gibson's theory has a lot of theoretical baggage of its own which I don't think is entirely reasonable. The arguments over affordances versus concepts, for example, sometimes reach levels of almost theological futility. The advantage of Gibson's approach as far as I'm concerned is that exposes many of the assumptions on which Constructivism is based, and thereby reveals just how much of what passes for scientific work in psychology is built on foundations of sand. But I also believe that concepts such as information-processing and computation are too important to discard, as strict Gibsonians would like to do. >That only makes sense if there are or were >indeed entities called James Gibson and Richard Gregory out >there, that there a real world for us to somehow perceive, and >that there are experiments and observations which can somehow >interrogate this real world in order to judge between the rival >theories. Yes, but as positivists all we can say for sure is that the external world exists in the form of some agency which orchestrates our conscious perceptions. All else is metaphysics. Not that I'm averse to metaphysics - but metaphysics is one thing, and science is another. >Though I must admit to sometimes having the heretical thought >that the paintings produced by chimpanzees and elephants which >tend to be dismissed as meaningless daubs are indeed pictures of >what the world unmediated by culture actually looks like.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:54:48 +0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:08:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Rimmer >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>An experimental craft seems a possibility for Socorro but I dare >>not mention that here, because some will get absolutely >>hysterical that a (supposed) "newbie" would suggest that >>hypothesis all over again, since it has been discussed ad >>infinitum, ad nauseum. >You might as well write that a flying pig seems a possibility >for Socorro. The point is, where is any evidence for such an >"experimental craft?" In 40 years, nobody has ever turned up any >evidence that such a craft existed. Ah, but David, you miss the point here. According to Jeromian principles (as set out in the discussion of the Trindade case) it's not enough just for you to point out that in forty years no-one has ever turned up with evidence to *prove* the claim. It's actually your responsibility to find "negative witnesses", i.e. people who can show you documentary evidence that it *didn't* happen. I don't know exactly how you'd do this, but I'm sure Jerry Clark could tell you.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:48:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:09:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >Who are these elite, Eleanor? Where do they live? What's their >address? Where do they meet? Why do they have to meet? Who >decides who they are? I guess I can reply to this, as the statements from researchers into secret societies do claim that one of the bodies of knowledge the elite are keeping secret is the full UFO story. I'm not making the claims, Kyle. I am relaying what I've heard and read from people claiming inside knowledge for roughly the past decade. So I can't give you the detailed answer you want. If you look into "Bilderbergers" you will, according to the researchers, have a list of the world's wealthiest and most powerful. That's who "they" are. International bankers, corporate heads, kings, queens, popes, heads of some major religious orders, and a few well-connected individuals. All I am saying is, when I watch the UFO story unfolding as told on Strange Days... Indeed and this List, as well as a few other articles and books, it is _eminently_ sensible that someone with power over the visible governments is keeping the full UFO story secret. In fact, I can personally find no other satisfying
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Sanchez-Ocejo From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:17:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:13:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Sanchez-Ocejo >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:51:13 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>An experimental craft seems a possibility for Socorro but I dare >>not mention that here, because some will get absolutely >>hysterical that a (supposed) "newbie" would suggest that >>hypothesis all over again, since it has been discussed ad >>infinitum, ad nauseum. >You might as well write that a flying pig seems a possibility >for Socorro. The point is, where is any evidence for such an >"experimental craft?" In 40 years, nobody has ever turned up any >evidence that such a craft existed. >That's not too surprising when you look at the _facts_ of the >case. Consider the following characteristics of the Socorro >craft: >1. It had no apparent conventional propulsion system such as >propellers, rockets, or jets, and left no trail. >2. It was oval shaped and lacked a conventional airfoil (i.e. >wings or lifting body shape) to support it in flight. >3. It descended and ascended vertically with a roar, but once it >reached 20 feet altitude, it became completely silent. >4. In silent mode it zipped away and disappeared in the distance >near Six-mile Canyon in 20 seconds or less (also executed a >sharp upward turn). That works out to approximately 1000 mph for >its _average_ speed. (It's peak speed was probably substantially >greater.)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:23:43 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - King >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:26:04 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:57:44 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >Obviously "verbose" must be a synonym for "specific" or >"closely-reasoned" in your dictionary! I assume my verbosity at >least has the merit that it relieves you of having to expatiate >on the same tedious details all over again. <g> >Seriously, I'm glad you agree, but it's the failure to >transparently dissect "common sense" assumptions that often >leads to confusion and uncertainty, as the Johnson study shows. >I think we should try to be thorough when we can. Somebody once >suggested that no List posts should be allowed that didn't >include footnotes. Sounds extreme - but I kind of know what he >meant! Hi Martin, Please excuse the vernacular of the computer geek. Verbose is the equivalent of clicking the "Details" button on a Windows help screen. More information for those who want more. From an authoritative source. Were I as adept at statistics as with computers, I'd have been more verbose. Fortunately, I read your post prior, so only noted as much. I found your post compelling, and my common sense was able to see the logic of your assertions without having the academic "chops" to support it as you did. We should be thorough. I was just not wanting to duplicate in my words what you so effectively posited with your own. My post was simply in support of your assertions.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 19:02:07 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:33:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:05:51 -0600 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >>Eleanor, >>The elite who run the planet? I guess these are a bunch of guys >>who have some kind of game board before them, and they take >>turns moving levers and pushing buttons to make people lose >>their jobs, and make them hear voices, and make the military >>ignore UFO reports, and plant thoughts in their heads, and have >>minions who follow harass, and even torture regular folks for >>the sheer fun of it all. >You may have even nailed it right there, Sir. Wouldn't that be >appallingly ironic? >>Meanwhile, this elite is unable to forecast weather, cure >>sickness, end hunger, solve problems. Some elite. >False argument, they don't have to be omnipotent to be an >'elite', Mr. King. There's been elitism since the chimney was >invented, Sir. Check James Burke and Eugene Weber for clues to >who an elite might be and then I've written a modest paper on >the justifications for stealthyness on 'their' part. >http://www.alienview.net/conspire.html >For the kinds of behavior that an elite, without penalty, can >involve themselves with please review: >http://tinyurl.com/66syx >(and notice the bizarre tinyurl that was randomly generated for >the site address). >>Who are these elite, Eleanor? Where do they live? What's their >>address? Where do they meet? Why do they have to meet? Who >>decides who they are? >Who are _you_, Mr. King? What state are _you_ in? >What's _your_ address? Where do _you_ meet and why? >Who's _your_ daddy, Mr. King? >>Was Adam one of them? When did they start running the planet? >Ms. White can hardly be faulted for her lack of belief or trust >in a dodgy, contrived, and manipulated 'mainstream', Mr. King >>Do you know any of this, or are you just regurgitating what >>you've read in the tabloids and books in the "conspiracy" >>section? If so, how did these get printed in light of the elite >>who run the planet? >Again, Ms.White can hardly be faulted for her lack of belief in >a hijacked mainstream, Mr. King. Moreover, your condescending >tone would seem to belie that you might be getting a little of >your news right here from UFO UpDates _or_ that you have a >willing abundance of faith in a duplicitous mainstream largely >indicating that you're going to get glasnost and perestroika >from the Bush Junta... I don't think you think so... >>And, if so, how do you hope to ever know anything they don't >>want you to know? Isn't your theory the theory of hopelessness >>and powerlessness in the face of insurmountable technology? >A few days ago you rather pompously and judgmentally wrote: >"Hi Paul and Stan, >"Here we have an effective, salient rebuttal... devoid of >ridicule, free of hyperbole and emotional histrionics, reasoned >and fair. Quite refreshing." >Well... >I trust my response to you was a reflection of the preceding... >even if yours to Ms. White seemed to fall a little short. You >don't have the deadlock nut on the reality of situations, Mr. >King. You probably shouldn't lecture Ms. White like you do. >'They' exist Mr. King. You are less the captain of your >intellectual ship that you would suppose, I suspect. As to who >they are... well I just wrote about that, too... >'They' are... the privileged arbitrary, the unelected, and far >too many of the elected. 'They' are those who _have_, and having >'had', would keep on 'having' despite an aggregate detriment to >the common good of those who 'have not.' 'They' are in >possession of information that would credit, or be to the >advantage of, anyone who 'knew', _specifically_ outlining why >most 'know' not. >'They' are the secret keepers. 'They' are the jealous >manipulators of the mainstream. 'They' are the ardent covetous >who encourage bland employees while they discourage critical >thinkers. 'They' are the ones with hidden agendas, duplicitous >plans, and secret programs. 'They' are the _few_ willing to >profit at the expense of the many. 'They' are above the law, >outside reasonable ethics, practice a sociopathic amorality, >and, Mr. King, they hold the many enthralled... but beneath >their privileged contempt... >Think 'these' don't exist, Mr. King? And existing, hiding? If >so, it may not be Ms. White with the crippling naivete... >Finally, as to your almost sneering explication with regard to >'them'... it may be "you doth protest too much," Sir. Hi Alfred, and Eleanor, Many words, and very little asserted. Lots of things are run by an elite. I am a member of an elite... several in fact. The tone of my post was based on correspondence you are likely unaware of. Eleanor knows why it was as it was. Had you received the rather impolite message I received, methinks you might be a little less comfy in your high-altitude barstool. Like you, I give as good as I get. Your examples are of elites we all know about. No secrets there. Or is your knowledge of this elite due to your advanced wisdom? If so, why are you allowed to continue? Neither individually nor collectively do we run the planet. Do you have reasonable information to the contrary? If you do, aren't you a target? What keeps you safe against the elite that runs the planet? If my post elicited such a reaction from the Lehmberg, I must be doing something right. <LOL> (that was a joke... honest) I did enjoy your impassioned retort though, Alfred, devoid of pertinence as it was. Your friend offended me, and I offended your friend in kind. I applaud your sense of loyalty or kinsmanship.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 RAF Boulmer Reports Of UFO Sightings Were Hushed Up From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:00:08 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:36:49 -0500 Subject: RAF Boulmer Reports Of UFO Sightings Were Hushed Up Source: Northumberland Gazette, January 28, 2005, http://www.northumberlandtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1117&ArticleID= 930633 01-28-05 Boulmer Reports Of UFO Sightings Were Hushed Up THE X-Files came to RAF Boulmer as strange flying objects were spotted hovering over the North Sea by a fighter pilot at the base In a case that would intrigue TV's Mulder and Scully, bright objects were spotted by RAF staff in 1977. They changed shape as they watched. So sensitive was the sighting that all records of it were hidden from public gaze and have only just been released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). It was stored in the Ministry of Defence's "possible extra- terrestrial contact" department, known only by the code name SF4. It is one of many sightings listed by the Government where credible witnesses, such as military staff, policemen and airline pilots, have reported UFOs. The drama started in July 1977, when Flight Lieutenant AM Wood reported seeing the objects, saying the nearest was luminous, round and four to five times the size of a Whirlwind helicopter. The two possible UFOs were seen hovering at a height of around 5,000 feet and were three miles out to sea. His report is backed by those of Corporal Torrington and Sergeant Graham, who say the objects parted, with one going west and changing shape as it went. The objects, with one then looking body shaped, were watched by the three men for one hour and 40 minutes. A radar station at the base also picked up the objects in the same position before they vanished. Checks were made to RAF West Drayton to see if it had spotted them. Flt Lt Wood is described as "reliable and sober" in the report, which adds that radar staff at RAF Staxton Wold also picked up the strange objects. The RAF Boulmer report was deemed so sensitive that instead of being released to the public 25 years later as normal a further three-year ban was imposed. It is only because of the FOI Act, which came into force on January 1, that the case was reviewed and the details declassified. Other released reports show that fighters were scrambled in July 1976 when a British Airways pilot reported strange, white cigar- shaped objects over Portugal. Nearer to home Chief Supt Hobson, of Manchester Police, watched a bright light for two minutes and followed it along the A62 on
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 The Unusual Kentucky Compendium From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:34:05 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:38:09 -0500 Subject: The Unusual Kentucky Compendium Source: The Cincinnati Enquirer - Cincinnati, Ohio http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050129/NEWS0103/501290449/ 1059/news01 Saturday, January 29, 2005 Weird Kentucky develops a following By Amy Barnes Special to The Courier-Journal Where's the small Kentucky town no one will claim? Is there really a goat man of Pope Lick, and why is there a giant fish looming over Dixie Highway? If you're interested in such strange phenomena, look no further than two local experts whose travels take them off the so-called beaten path, looking for the little oddities and coincidences that, as they say, can "only happen in Kentucky." Mr. Holland's Kentucky Louisville artist Jeffrey Scott Holland achieved his local fame sort of by accident. Long interested in odd people and places, he began snapping digital photos and posting them on a Web site called the "Unusual Kentucky Compendium" in 2001. Holland said, "Unusual Kentucky covers it all: interesting people from the past and present, cemeteries and odd tombstones, abandoned places, hauntings, roads, buildings, attractions, culture, towns, mysteries and assorted weird stuff. "It also covers good ancient diners and retro restaurants from time to time," he added. So what makes for good Web-site fodder? "It's not all Charles Manson and UFOs," Holland said. "It can be something as simple as Richmond's downtown fountain with a cranky-looking fish, or the fact that a penny has been wedged into the corner of the rear handrail of Berea's Boone Tavern for as long as I can remember." The compendium was mentioned in USA Today and listed as the Yahoo "site of the week." It got so many hits that Holland could no longer afford the bandwidth to support it. It's now a continually rotating log of unusual material (www.geocities.com/unusualkentucky) , with a few new entries added each week. Holland plans to release the "volumes and volumes" of material he had to remove from the site on CD or in book form by the end of the year. Many entries on the Unusual Kentucky Compendium also will be represented in an upcoming "Invisible Topography" show, a maze- like fun house filled with paintings covering such subjects as the Pope Lick Monster, UFO abductions in Stanford and Lexington's Grillo the Clown. Holland said it will open this summer. In the meantime, here is a sampling on the Unusual Kentucky Compendium: Tombstone Junction: This Wild West theme park outside Corbin, built in the 1950s, burned down in 1989 when a mysterious fire erupted; now, all that's left is a few roasted railroad cars and the Tombstone Junction sign. Holland is looking for photographs from anyone who vacationed there. Bondurant's Pharmacy: A drive-through pharmacy in Lexington shaped like a mortar and pestle. The Mother Goose House: A man named George Stacy built a giant green goose atop his house in Hazard. The Blue Grass Army Depot: This Madison County storage facility houses nerve gas and is a popular site for UFO sightings. Rumor has it an alien spacecraft was once stored here. The Nameless Grocery Store in Wildie, which doesn't sell much of anything, and is very "Children of the Corn," the site says - only "without the children. Or, the corn." An Ancient Civilization under Kentucky: The story goes that in 1783, a 300-foot-long, 100-foot-wide burial ground was found beneath the city of Lexington that contained exotic artifacts, a stone altar (for sacrifices?), human skulls and bones and mummified remains. The mummies were "very strange-looking and had red hair." The strange orange fungus in a Lexington cemetery: See the pictures. Ewwwww. One curious Kentuckian Most people know author Vince Staten as the person who has the answers to life's most important questions, such as "Do Bald Men Get Half Price Haircuts?" or "Did Monkeys Invent the Monkey Wrench?" Quite a character himself, Staten, 57, has been covering Kentucky's underbelly for years, in addition to penning colorful commentary on topics of natural interest such as barbecue and baseball (and writing a weekly video column). Staten wrote a book in 1990 called "Unauthorized America: A Travel Guide to the Places the Chamber of Commerce Won't Tell You About." His propensity to seek out the curious and the bizarre, Staten said, is his answer to "all the road trips we took as a child. You'd drive down the highway, and you'd see a historic marker on the road, and you'd get out and look, and say, 'Oh!' Then you'd get back in the car and drive on to the next one." Staten's most recent writings can be found in the eccentric travel guide, "Kentucky Curiosities: Quirky Characters, Roadside Oddities & Other Offbeat Stuff" (2003). The collection of stories ranges from unmarked roadside oddities to unusual outdoor festivals and other useless information. Absent from the book are Charles Manson's boyhood home address (a private residence in Ashland, Ky.) and the fact that Muhammad Ali chucked his Olympic gold medal into the Ohio River, two stories that were edited out as a sort of PR move for the state. Here are some of the entries you will find, though: Harrison Mayes: This Middlesboro man had a vision of God while pinned against the wall of a Kentucky coal mine by a runaway coal car. Following his near-death experience, Mayes erected a large cross of light bulbs on a mountain overlooking East Middlesboro. The Charles Heigold House: This facade was constructed as a monument to President James Buchanan by a German immigrant. Now located on River Road, it has achieved national acclaim and has appeared in Liberty Bank commercials. Vent Haven: This ventriloquism museum in Fort Mitchell is home to nearly 600 dummies. Fort Mitchell is also home to the world's smallest church, the Monte Casino Chapel, which measures 6 feet by 9 feet. The only replica of the tomb of Jesus: It took TV evangelist Morris H. Coers 10 years to see this project to fruition in Covington; unfortunately, he died two months before its
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Love And Rockets From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:13:03 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:41:23 -0500 Subject: Love And Rockets Source: Salon.Com http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2005/01/26/lord/print.html 01-26-05 Love and rockets In her new book, Astro Turf, author M.G. Lord explains how a search for her father's secrets led her to unearth the hidden history of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. By Kenneth Miller M.G. Lord had just turned 14 when her mother died after a six- year battle with breast cancer. During that long, doomed struggle, "what [my mother and I] needed was a full-time husband and father," Lord recalls in her new book, "Astro Turf: The Private Life of Rocket Science." "What we had was a cold-war-era rocket engineer, who embraced the values of his profession: work over family, masculine over feminine, repression over emotion." After his wife's death in 1970, Charles Lord grew even more remote, relying on his only child to cook his meals, wash his clothes, and grapple with her loss alone. "Whatever grief he may have carried," she writes, "he remained a silent, archetypal, mid-century male." Nonetheless, Lord was fascinated by her father's occupation - designing components for Convair and Northrop and ultimately working as a contractor for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. JPL, of course, was NASA's principal supplier of robotic probes, and to a brainy girl who chafed at her grim circumstances, its products represented "hope, expansion, the future." Lord slept each night cradling a pressure helmet that her father had retrieved from a trash bin at work. For a time she aimed to follow in his professional footsteps, though she eventually found that her real talents lay elsewhere. She went off to Yale and became a syndicated political cartoonist, then a cultural columnist for New York Newsday. After her father died in 1994,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:44:56 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:43:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:12:10 -0600 >Subject: Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >At least the author separated UFO Fanatics from >Space Cadets :-) >-------- >Source: The News-Press - Fort Myers, Florida >http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=3D2005501210329 >01-21-05 >Museum To Exhibit Unsolved Mysteries & UFOs >By Mark S. Krzos >One of the greatest unsolved mysteries of the 20th >century will land at the Southwest Florida Museum of >History on Saturday. >For the first time since the July 2, 1947, crash of >an alleged unidentified flying object, artifacts, >sworn affidavits and government documents will be >seen somewhere other than Roswell, N.M. >Get ready history buffs, conspiracy theorists, UFO >fanatics and space cadets, because "The Roswell >Exhibit" promises to be a unique close encounter of >the otherworldly kind. <snip> The article doesn't supply the details of time and place, so here they are: Source: Naples Daily News, Florida, http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/sh_local_events/article/0,2071,NPDN_14975_349= 9624,00.html 01-28-05 Fact Or Fiction? 'roswell Exhibit' Comes To Fort Myers Museum By Daily News Do you believe in aliens? A new exhibit at the Southwest Florida Museum of History could solidify your beliefs. If you don't think that life exists on other planets, the artifacts and documents in the exhibit may change your mind =97 or reaffirm your skepticism. Either way, "The Roswell Exhibit" leaves the question for you to decide. The exhibit focuses on a series of events that took place near Roswell, N.M. in the summer of 1947, involving an alleged UFO crash and an alleged military and goverment cover- up. Highlights include sworn affidavits from eyewitnesses, photographs, replicas of an autopsy of an Extraterrestrial Biological Entity, as well as other documents and video. The exhibit, produced by The International Museum Institute of Texas, is open Tuesdays through Saturdays 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. and can be seen through Aug. 12. The Southwest Florida Museum of History is located at 2300 Peck St. in Fort Myers. Tickets are $9.50 for adults, $8.50 for seniors age 62 and older, $4 for children age 4-12, $3 for school groups, and free for children 3 and younger. Group rates are available. For
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 FBI Set To Move From Historic 'UFO' Site From: Stig Agermose <trippyplanet.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:10:56 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:46:27 -0500 Subject: FBI Set To Move From Historic 'UFO' Site Source: San Antonio Express-News - San Antonio, Texas http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA013005.4B.fbi_move.589cb3= f6.html 01-30-05 FBI Set To Move From Historic Site Downtown Guillermo Contreras San Antonio Express-News The white, plastered concrete walls, lined with marble baseboards, give way to glass and solid walnut doors with equally magnificent walnut trim rarely seen today. In some areas of this building in the historic heart of downtown, vaults with massive steel doors reading "Mosler Safe Co., 1935" still protect sensitive files and tactical weapons and other gear. =46rom inside the building, a then top-secret memo was dispatched in January 1949 to J. Edgar Hoover, the legendary FBI director: "At recent weekly intelligence conferences... officers (of the) Army have discussed the matter of 'unidentified aircraft' or 'unidentified aerial phenomena,' otherwise known as 'flying discs,' 'flying saucers' and 'balls of fire.' THIS MATTER IS CONSIDERED TOP SECRET BY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS OF BOTH THE ARMY AND THE AIR FORCES," states the now-declassified memo. That FBI memo, describing for-your-eyes-only information about UFOs, is but a piece of the rich history that has shaped the American conscience and passed through the U.S. Courthouse and Post Office building at 615 E. Houston St., which counts the FBI as one of its tenants. Soon, the country's second-oldest FBI office will leave much of that history behind. The FBI plans to move its 85 San Antonio-based agents to a building to be constructed on a 10-acre tract at UTSA Boulevard and Interstate 10. Groundbreaking is tentatively scheduled for the latter part of this year. The move-in date is targeted for April 2007. "We've simply outgrown the space here," said Patrick Patterson, the bureau's special agent in charge. It was 1910 when the San Antonio office of the Bureau of Investigation =97 one of the FBI's predecessors =97 was opened in the San Antonio Post Office Building, according to the FBI. It was the second field office in the country, and it covered all the territory west of the Mississippi River. In 1934, the BOI became the Division of Investigation. That same year, the San Antonio Post Office Building was demolished and replaced with the current structure. In 1935, the DOI became the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and its San Antonio field office again was placed inside that building. The FBI has been there ever since, even before artist Howard Cook was paid $12,000 to paint the murals that adorn the building's first floor. Today, the local FBI office is responsible for 60 counties, from Waco south to Brownsville and west to Del Rio. It has more than 200 agents based in the San Antonio field office and "resident agent offices," or hubs, in Waco, Austin, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo and Del Rio. Agents who have been based in the San Antonio division have seen their share of intelligence on UFOs, murderers, bank robbers, gamblers and shysters. "Today, the cases are in the thousands," special agent Rene Salinas said. Salinas, who first applied in 1980, recalled how changing times have forced the bureau to adapt. "Back then, it was open with just a couple of secretaries at (their) desks," Salinas said. "The only thing separating them from us was a wooden door." In today's security-conscious world, the office has video monitors, security scanners, guards and bulletproof glass between the FBI reception desk and visitors. Many of the modifications were made over the years, but much of the original building material remains. "We're probably the only FBI office in the country still in a U.S. post office," Salinas said. "There's going to be a certain sense of nostalgia for this historic building when we move to the new one."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:41:53 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:48:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:43:18 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:28:04 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:57 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>Perhaps this is a naive question, given that I'm sure you must >>>have considered it, but is there a possibility that this >>>"phantom" moon - on the horizon in the same azimuth as the moon >>>- was in fact a superior mirage image of the moon below the >>>horizon? >>Hard to accept, huh? ;) >What's supposed to be hard to accept, Amy? You gave no details >whatsoever about how this phenomenon behaved, and I was not >remotely critical or combative, merely curious to know what you >thought about the idea of an unusual mirage. But this response >indicates to me that you feel challenged even by a reasonable >question, and you are making unwarranted assumptions about my >interest. I'm sorry, Martin. I didn't mean to offend you. Since you never asked for the details or more information, I thought you were more interested in providing an explanation than learning more. ><snip> >>I know about phantoms and reflections. This was not that. Just >>mark it up to misidentification or impossible so it won't bother >>your paradigms. Too hard to adjust to this kind of stuff unless >>you have to. <smile> >Well, not just challenged - stroppy I would say. Well OK since >that's your attitude I won't bother you again, and I doubt >anyone else will either <bleak grin>. I am quite open to informed discussions. It's just the knee-jerk explanations I'm tired of. ;) If I had described seeing a classic, saucer-shaped object, more details would be requested. Instead, I find it a common occurrence for people to offer explanations based on little information. Most I have talked to simply ignore it as if it never happened - including other events that later occurred in those fields. At least NORAD asked questions before pronouncing it a "hot air balloon"... landing in a nest of high power lines at 10 pm at night. (Yeah, right.) They offered no explanations for what the other two people saw. I've explored many possible explanations and gone over these events in my mind hundreds of times. It has changed my perceptions forever. It is so hard to allow high strangeness to exist without classifying it as either something explained or as phenomena. Above all it has taught me to be very careful in my analyses of UFO sightings, especially the more bizarre ones. Because of what I saw, I began researching high strangeness reports and collecting them. I found that I learned more from what most people naturally ignore or dismiss than the regular sightings that got everyone all excited. There is definitely much more going on than what is seen or reported in the papers, on the internet, in magazines, etc. I'm just trying to convey a 'head's up' because things are not as they seem (I will explain more in the book I'm writing - may take two books). Pardon my ignorance but what is "stroppy"? Never heard that word before.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 03:51:03 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:49:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Hebert >From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:21:04 EST >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:37:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >Hi Amy, Martin and LIst, >Thought maybe you would be interested in this account reported >to me back in the fall of 1994 here in the Big Bend area of >Florida. It seems to be quite similar to your sighting. >The witness, also female, relates the following: >"...I saw two shapes, one round, one crescent positioned at the >lower right side of the round shape. They were solidly glowing >white light but the sky around them was dark. Their edges were >sharp (very defined) and the shapes were perfectly formed and >still. <snip> Thank you, Kelly, that is interesting. I've come across other reports of multiple objects like this being sighted together and apart. Do you know the exact date, time and location of this sighting? Did the witness indicate how big the crescent shape was in comparison to the round shape? If you or anyone has or comes across sightings of this nature,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:04:02 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:51:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Bourdais >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:34:08 -0000 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:07:58 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? <snip> >>You say that the Ufocat database probably contains a >>certain percentage of "IFOs". Yes, but it is also probable that >>this percentage is about the same in all counties. So this >>argument does not seem very strong to me. >To test what you say is "probable" you would have to go back >to the data on each of the 164 counties and redo the sums >independently for IFOs and UFOs. If it were then found to be the >case that IFOs and and UFOs occurred in the same proportions in >all counties, then the conclusion you draw from Johnson's study >might be that IFOs, like UFOs, correlate with nuclear sites. Martin, I don't agree with your answer on this point. First, nobody knows exactly how many IFOs there are in the Ufocat data base. It's just a reasonable supposition that there is a certain number of Ifos, but there is no way to know exactly how many. Experts of the Blue Book files admit that there is a number of cases labelled Ifos, which were probably not. So, what were the real percentages of Ufos against Ifos, whe don't know. Secondly, it is just as reasonable to assume that the percentage is about the same in all the 164 counties chosen for the statistical test. Now, if there are more Ufo observations over and near nuclear installations, it is possible that there are also more Ifos, just like a "noise" in a transmission. If this is correct, it certainly does not mean that "IFOs, like UFOs, correlate with nuclear sites. " It would just mean - a reasonable assumption - that there are as many misperceptions as usual, human nature being what it is. Or maybe there are less, but there is again no way to determine that. So, yor argument seems pointless to me. Just one more word on Rendlesahm-Bentwaters. Your negative judgement on the book by Georgina Bruni - unfair in my opinion -
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:30:52 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:53:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Bourdais >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. ><snip> >>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >>least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. >Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to >simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, >suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give >you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that >you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of >it. A large high-altitude powered aerostat would be way above >the vicissitudes of local weather and could be quite stable >(such have been used as secret radar and radio surveillance >platforms since the '50s), and of course it allows the LEM to be >as heavy as you want subject only to the volume of available gas >envelopes and the cable breaking-strain, as you mention. A rapid >paying out of cable could land the LEM hard and create the >marks. Also, several fine cables would be better for stability >and control than one fat one - would that be easier or harder to >see from a few tens of feet? Just grist to the mill..... Martin,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:13:05 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:55:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:12:12 -0400 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. >><snip> >>>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time, at >>>least not public. And it is hard to see why is would be needed. >>James >>Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to >>simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, >>suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give >>you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that >>you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of >>it. A large high-altitude powered aerostat would be way above >>the vicissitudes of local weather and could be quite stable >>(such have been used as secret radar and radio surveillance >>platforms since the '50s), and of course it allows the LEM to be >>as heavy as you want subject only to the volume of available gas >>envelopes and the cable breaking-strain, as you mention. A rapid >>paying out of cable could land the LEM hard and create the >>marks. Also, several fine cables would be better for stability >>and control than one fat one - would that be easier or harder to >>see from a few tens of feet? Just grist to the mill..... >I doubt this is an option Martin, >Where's the NASA documentation to back it up? Hi Don I don't believe there is any, but what this discussion of James Smith's post is showing is that not every possible angle related to this sighting has necessarily been thought through before. Maybe the idea won't wash but you have to try it out. Reports should be subjected to the Nietzsche test: "What does not kill it makes it stronger." >I've seen film of >a test pilot [I believe incorrectly attributed to Neil >Armstrong] nearly killing himself in a LM flight at Edwards AFB. >See URL below. He ejected shortly before the LM went unstable >and crashed. If we have this film why wouldn't we have seen this >other balloon contraption as well? I don't know. For all I know the agency responsible was not NASA, and although the term "LEM" has been used to illustrate possible purpose this doesn't mean it has to have been directly connected to the mainstream of the Apollo moon programme. But given the proven danger of flying the LEM test rig at Edwards it wouldn't necessarily be surprising if other engineers elsewhere, faced with a similar sort of test programme, had decided to hedge their bets by trying a balloon suspension system. >What was it doing in Socorro, NM, incidentally. As I suggested (_suggested_ for discussion, remember, not espoused!) maybe the aerostat was no longer so "stat" and was a runaway from some up-wind test area, hauling the LEM-like gondola thingy with it. Can that be discounted on the grounds of evidence? If so let's do it. >The ":Flying Beadstead" the name >attached by the test pilots to the LLRV- the Lunar Module test >vehicle had it's first test flight at Dryden Research at Edwards >AFB on Oct. 30 1964 to a peak altitude of 10 feet. Edwards AFB, >incidentally, is over 700 miles away from Socorro. In the >history of the test program there is no mention of a balloon >being used to teather the LLRV to a balloon and risk a $2.5 >million dollar vehicle that incidentally carried ONE pilot. And >no one would mistake this vehicle as being ovoid or egg-shaped. Dissimilarities to the Apollo module are very relevant if anyone is arguing that the Socorro object was actually an Apollo module. I'm not. I'm not sure anyone else is either. >I think the balloon theory in all of it's aspects is a non- >starter. It may be a non-finisher, but what we need to do is to do a _better_ job of trying to make it work than Robinson, Reynolds & co., and still fail. Get rid of the strongest and strangest versions of it, not just the weakest and most obvious. Until then it will remain a runner.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:17:55 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:56:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Clark >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:54:48 +0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>You might as well write that a flying pig seems a possibility >>for Socorro. The point is, where is any evidence for such an >>"experimental craft?" In 40 years, nobody has ever turned up any >>evidence that such a craft existed. >Ah, but David, you miss the point here. According to Jeromian >principles (as set out in the discussion of the Trindade case) >it's not enough just for you to point out that in forty years >no-one has ever turned up with evidence to *prove* the claim. >It's actually your responsibility to find "negative witnesses", >i.e. people who can show you documentary evidence that it >_didn't_ happen. I don't know exactly how you'd do this, but I'm >sure Jerry Clark could tell you. Thank you for reminding me of that excellent point. It shows, once more, that since UFOs don't exist, the absence of evidence for negative hypotheses about specific cases is moot. Call it
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hale From: Roy Hale <roy.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:44:16 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:57:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hale >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:54:48 +0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Ah, but David, you miss the point here. According to Jeromian >principles (as set out in the discussion of the Trindade case) >it's not enough just for you to point out that in forty years >no-one has ever turned up with evidence to *prove* the claim. >It's actually your responsibility to find "negative witnesses", >i.e. people who can show you documentary evidence that it >*didn't* happen. I don't know exactly how you'd do this, but I'm >sure Jerry Clark could tell you. I am quite sure that the magonia readers of this world, especially its contributors, would have come up with a quite
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Faded Discs Catalog Addition From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:58:25 -0700 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:22:26 -0500 Subject: Faded Discs Catalog Addition Greetings to the Listarians, Volume 10 in the on-going MP3 compilation series is now available to researchers. Contactees Vol. 2: Saucerology - Tales of Giant Rock contains the following: Daniel W. Fry, Howard Menger, John Otto, Truman Bethurum, Richard Miller, Buck Nelson, Major Wayne S. Aho, William Ferguson, Woodrow Derenberger and Rhinehold O. Schmidt...plus the complete Galaxy broadcasts of Richard Miller. This volume comprises 23 .mp3 recordings and runs approximately 14.5 hours. Please find information for ordering at my website: www.fadeddiscs.com On February 19th I will be doing my regular appearance on Strange Days... Indeed - CFRB 1010 in Toronto and CJAD 800 in Montreal... visit: www.virtuallystrange.net for program information. During that program I will present a special surprise as we revisit the beginning of the modern flying disc phenomena of the early 1940s. This, along with some new audio clips of the 1957 Holloman AFB incident concerning MSgt. James Stokes - among others. Please join us for this Very Special Audio Presentation. You won't be disappointed! I am pleased to announce the addition of Rick Hilberg's recordings to the archive. His collection included several "Program P.M" shows of "Ufology Roundtable," which was instituted by Earl J. Neff of the Flying Saucer Investigations Committee and the Cleveland Ufology Project, along with Harv Morgan of KYW radio in the early 1960s. Thank you Rick!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:59:25 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:25:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough Dear List Pursuing - however unpopularly - notions of suspended LEM-type objects, does anyone have a recent update on the story below? It originates from Charles Moore I think via James Mosely a few years ago and is posted at: http://www.nmsr.org/socorro.htm Obviously the theory as it stands can't hold up on the grounds of helicopter rotor noise alone. Also the 3-legged Surveyor doesn't match the 4 imprints left at Socorro. But does it perhaps illustrate the possibility that similar kinds of flights with other suspended test vehicles or dummies could have happened around this time, maybe using balloons a la James Smith's long cable(s)? Martin Shough --------- EXTRACT BELOW [Begin Quote] "... on April 24, 1964, there were special tests being conducted at the north end of the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) involving a helicopter used to carry a Lunar Surveyor around for some tests. A portion of the WSMR Range Log obtained by McAndrew appears below. Surveyor was a three-legged, unmanned probe, which was used to learn about the moon before the Apollo program got there..... The timing isn't right for the UFO sighting - the range log calls for morning tests, and the sightings occurred in late afternoon - but then things don't always go "according to plan," and many tests which have defied completion by morning have been known to somehow get finished up in the afternoon. In fact, bombing runs scheduled for that part of the range might have delayed the tests. There are many other tantalizing bits that might support the Surveyor explanation for Socorro. o The Surveyor tests were done with a small Bell helicopter that supported the craft from its side. The helicopter and spacecraft would have presented a bizarre profile. The Surveyor's slanted legs fit Zamora's description well, and are also a match for the shape of the "landing pod imprints" found later. In Stanford's 1976 book, he mentions Phil Klass's comment that landing pads like Surveyor's were among the only practical shapes for that function. o The spacecraft used vernier engines and attitude jets to probe and sample soil, which could explain the flames the policeman saw, and the burn marks many saw. The flames weren't being used for lift; that was supplied by the helicopter. The burn marks at the site did not indicate sufficient thrust to lift a large vehicle, according to Hynek. o The Surveyor used a mechanical scoop with a shape that matches a rectangular trough photographed at the Socorro site. o Zamora described the craft as "aluminum-white," which certainly matched the bulk of the Bell helicopter. o The tests missions were manned by a helicopter pilot and a
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:45:57 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:26:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Amy Hebert <ahebert.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:41:53 -0600 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:43:18 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >I'm sorry, Martin. I didn't mean to offend you. Since you never >asked for the details or more information, I thought you were >more interested in providing an explanation than learning more. Hi Amy The possibility of a mirage was suggested by the coincidence of lunar azimuth, lunar-like appearance, and the fact that you said the real moon had set only "minutes earlier" so should have been not far below the geometrical horizon. But, as I indicated, I thought it likely you would have considered it already, which is why I didn't ask for raw details but for your opinion in the first instance. (Bad interviewing technique I admit!) An elevation of 30 degrees is certainly far too high by an order of magnitude for any conventionally understood mirage mechanism, and a near identical sighting by people a hundred miles away over a very different optical path at a different time is very difficult to account for. Maybe you saw one of those very rare phenomena, discounted as impossible today, which atmospheric physicists in 2050 will look back on as having redefined the science of optical mirage. Maybe you saw the effects of an advanced technology. Or maybe you saw something even weirder for which science simply has no category at all. >Because of what I saw, I began researching high strangeness >reports and collecting them. I found that I learned more from >what most people naturally ignore or dismiss than the regular >sightings that got everyone all excited. There is definitely >much more going on than what is seen or reported in the papers, >on the internet, in magazines, etc. I'm just trying to convey a >'head's up' because things are not as they seem... Amen to that :-) >Pardon my ignorance but what is "stroppy"? Never heard that word >before. Ah, sorry, that bit of slang must be an anglicism. I think it comes from the word "obstreperous" (but I could be wrong) and the original meaning - literally, putting up a fight against
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 16:04:56 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:27:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Shough >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:30:52 +0100 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:54:03 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:44:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>I have not commented on this before, but one option that the >>>pro-balloonists should consider is the possibility of the >>>gondola alighting but that a thin support line attached to a >>>balloon at a high altitude is carrying the gondola. >><snip> >>>2) Such advanced ballooncraft was not available at the time,at >>>least not public. And it is hard to see why is would beneeded. >>Quick afterthought: One possibility is that if you want to >>simulate a touch-down in 1/6 gravity for a prototype LEM, >>suspending the vehicle by winch from an _aerostat_ could give >>you delicate control over the effective weight and motion that >>you maybe wouldn't get by just strapping a gas bag on the top of >>it. A large high-altitude powered aerostat would be way above >>the vicissitudes of local weather and could be quite stable >>(such have been used as secret radar and radio surveillance >>platforms since the '50s), and of course it allows the LEM to be >>as heavy as you want subject only to the volume of available gas >>envelopes and the cable breaking-strain, as you mention. A rapid >>paying out of cable could land the LEM hard and create the >>marks. Also, several fine cables would be better for stability >>and control than one fat one - would that be easier or harder to >>see from a few tens of feet? Just grist to the mill..... >Martin, >Just grist to the debunking mill? Oh dear, oh dear. I hadn't thought of James Smith as a "debunker", Gildas, or myself for that matter. I'm disappointed to see that you resort to such lazy and distasteful nonsense. Refutation by labelling is the equivalent of a declaration of intellectual bankruptcy. It tells me that rather than having the spine to take on an argument when it is at its fittest and to defeat it with honour, you would rather confront it when it is half asleep and sickly and pretend that the "victory" you have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 30 Bad-Think? From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:22:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:29:10 -0500 Subject: Bad-Think? A view (or two) of the problem with UFO study, and those who have made it their avocation, or vocation:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 16:25:28 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:47:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma - Reason >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:50:05 +0000 >Subject: Re: Experts Divided On The UFO Dilemma <snip> >The memory wars certainly look like the stuff that is on >updates, and contain the same conflict between _scientific >explanation_ and _personal experience_ Actually I should have commented on this use of the term "scientific explanation" in my last post. What do you mean by a scientific explanation? Are you talking about a coherent theoretical account, rigorously defined and well-supported by testable predictions, or do you mean a compelling narrative? Because the one does not necessarily imply the other. Rigorous theoretical accounts do not always supply compelling naratives (QM is an excellent example of one that doesn't) and compelling narratives are frequently ill-defined and little supported by scientific evidence. One of the problems with those Humanities subjects which are now trying to pass themselves off as sciences, is that academics trained only in these subjects often fail to appreciate the difference. Much of what passes for scientific explanation among psychologists, anthropologists, folklorists and other social scientists is really narrative, not science. Experiments may be cited, but there is usually a chasm between the experiment and the narrative which has to be bridged entirely by subjective interpetation. Take for example, the Susan Clancy false memory study which was cited by John Harney a couple of weeks ago. Clancy argued that UFO abductees were more likely to develop false memories because they made more mistakes on a word-list remembering task. But what is the scientific basis for making inferences about an individual's proneness to develop false memories of a UFO abduction from an arbitrary task in an information-poor, isolated environment which produces an effect of such small magnitude that it requires detailed statistical analysis even to detect it? It's rather like saying that, because I saw a sparrow in my garden today, I can reasonably infer that a flock of vultures will appear there tomorrow. >Now you must believe something of the sort yourself in order to >argue that James Gibson's theory of perception is superior to >Richard Gregory's. That only makes sense if there are or were >indeed entities called James Gibson and Richard Gregory out >there, that there a real world for us to somehow perceive, and >that there are experiments and observations which can somehow >interrogate this real world in order to judge between the rival >theories. I let this go originally but I really shouldn't have, because in the context of what we're talking about above, this is potentially a serious error. Neither the Gibsonian nor the Constructivist approach is a theory of perception - they are paradigms, not theories. That is, they are sets of assumptions. Constructivists assume that what goes on in highly artificial, information-poor lab environments is representative of how perception works in vivo, Gibsonians argue (conclusively, in my view) that this assumption is nonsensical. Which set of assumptions you prefer will determine how you interpret the evidence available. I prefer the Gibsonian paradigm because its assumptions are explicit and testable - and the proposition that real-world environments contain far more information than lab studies allow, has been largely born out by detailed studies in neuroscience and psychophysics. The Constructivist paradigm, by contrast, rests on assumptions that were largely implicit and unacknowledged until J J Gibson were exposed them and made them explicit - and are still largely implicit and unacknowledged
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:30:08 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:51:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 19:02:07 -0600 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:05:51 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies <snip> >Hi Alfred, and Eleanor, >Many words, and very little asserted. I really could have leveled the same charge at you, Mr. King. Your piqued explication only charged; it didn't prove. >Lots of things are run by >an elite. I am a member of an elite... several in fact. We both know who we're talking about, Mr. King. Your safe and likely self-facilitated ignorance of them won't make them go away, nor will your ridicule of persons interested in them disway those persons. >The tone of my post was based on correspondence you are likely >unaware of. Eleanor knows why it was as it was. Apparently, Ms. White had the good sense to keep her correspondence between the two of you... between the two of you. >Had you received >the rather impolite message I received, methinks you might be a >little less comfy in your high-altitude barstool. However high my stool might appear to be to you, Sir, it has a wide enough base to more or less unaffected by persons who fail to make their case as much or more than they indicate cases were un-made by others. >Like you, I >give as good as I get. That could be one interpretation, Mr. King. >Your examples are of elites we all know about. No secrets there. >Or is your knowledge of this elite due to your advanced wisdom? "Advanced wisdom"? Well forget for a moment the snarky backhand of that, Sir, and remind you that your argument is not with me. It is with many notables contributing to this forum indicating that there's a 'man' behind the curtain moving control levers and pushing buttons deftly removed from those put in office to do 'his' bidding. >If so, why are you allowed to continue? > I'm gratified you might think I'm significant enough to be stopped, Mr. King. >Neither individually nor collectively do we run the planet. Suggesting what? That this 'control' comes out of chaos? I suggest you don't have a clue how this planet is run, Sir. Like the rest of us, all you know is what's read in the 'newspapers' and what you prefer to believe is real to keep your 'warm and fuzzy index' in bounds. >Do >you have reasonable information to the contrary? Neither of us has _any_ real authoritative information, Mr. King. That's the problem. N'est ce pas? I do 'know' (because I'm reading credible reports, cited works, and seeing them myself) that there is a very real ufological phenomenon that is discounted by the authority you seem to intimate is more transparent than it is, and a huge (albeit needless) information void that is born as a result. This seems to argue for something undreamt of in _your_ philosophy it would seem. >If you do, >aren't you a target? In a word, yes. This is going to be a problem for anyone, like myself, afflicted not by the credulity of belief, as has been accused, but the incredulity born of an imposed _inability_ to believe. I don't believe the government, can't believe the church, and won't believe its agencies or the attendant institutions. >What keeps you safe against the elite that >runs the planet? Bumping my gums is my best guess. Supporting others who do a similar gum bumping? Voting (however useless that appears in the last two major elections)? We're really kind of powerless in the aggregate, to do anything else. But we have to do something. >If my post elicited such a reaction from the Lehmberg, I must be >doing something right. <LOL>(that was a joke... honest) It's likely no surprise to you that I don't get it. >I did enjoy your impassioned retort though, Alfred, devoid of >pertinence as it was. Every line was packed with example, citation, and meaning, Mr. King. If that was impertinence, so be it. >Your friend offended me, and I offended >your friend in kind. I applaud your sense of loyalty or >kinsmanship. Ms. White and I have never corresponded, never met, nor has she so much as commented on posts I've written... to my memory. The bone picked was with you alone, Sir. >But, properly chastened, I recede into the background from >whence I came on this non-issue. That would be best, forgetting that the 'information void' alluded to earlier makes it a _huge_ issue. >How about a good UFO story? Sure, Mr. King: Alfred's Odd Observation #15 (Saturday -- April 20, 2002) Sparse sightings, indeed, have been made through partly cloudy skies... when there was any visibility at all. A few of the mornings were very good, cool and clear, but remained auspiciously empty. Empty is equally satisfying, anymore... Where do they go? All my sightings during the period were magnitude zero or less, save one. Most, eight total (spread out over the days since the last report), were so dim that they could only be seen using off center viewing. All colors were reddish, speed was between three degrees a second and one degree a second, and they were in no evidence, at all, for -many- of the days I was able to observe. All of the sightings would have been prosaic examples of the non-prosaic... but for a couple of 'odd' wrinkles. Friday, the twelfth of April at 04:15 Pacific time, soundless fastwalkers clipped by, one after the other, at a -hot- three degrees a second and arrow straight! The sky was crystal clear and the -first- silent yellow-red light, a little dimmer than Sirius, did not diminish in intensity as it flew from the time it was noticed overhead to a point where it disappeared behind some trees at about 20 degrees elevation. It was immediately followed by an identical fastwalker on the same track and heading, which also dove to disappear behind the same cut in the darker trees. Here's the wrinkle: the course of both objects was the duest of due Wests... That was _due_ west, ladies and gentelbunkies, an artful track that your garden variety satellite of human manufacture is not supposed to be able to describe. This is according to an albeit inconstant and less than reliable (?) Jim Oberg... intrepid space historian, and arguably the noisier of our noisome noisy negativists. The other wrinkle concerns a good sighting on the 15th at 04:50 that I was able to call the attention of a -witness- to! It was one of the more typical wandering stars, appearing as I watched the Northern sky, at about 350 degrees azimuth and 50 degrees elevation. It traveled about 20 degrees in arc west-southwest, before it dimmed, abruptly, and went out. My recently widowed brother was relaxing prior to a 10 hour shift of work (involving activity driving -tunnel- through ruined rock a quarter mile inside a small mountain northwest of Redding, California) and he was close by. When I called him over to see the object from beneath a covered porch where he was sitting, quietly consuming a cup of "morning ambition", he was something less than thrilled. He lumbered over to where I was, out in the open, mumbling bothered protests. Looking up to where I pointed with what I knew to be an under-whelmed expression on his sharply planed miner's face, he acknowledged that it -was- weird, but after grudgingly watching for just a few seconds, he turned and went back to his coffee even -before- the damned thing blinked out! He was something less than impressed, like I said, but my irritation was minimal. I understood why. It's not complacency, insentience, or having "bigger" fish to fry that explains his lack of interest. It was the simple lack of a strong enough -stimulus- provided by the object we observed together that morning. Tiny quiet lights moving in the night sky don't -begin- to approach his interest threshold, much less cross it. Why is that? My brother and (his now deceased) wife saw an uncontestable UFO, for a period of -many- minutes, on a deserted California Coast Highway, so up-close and personal that it was the only thing they could see in the sky at all! I wanted my brother to witness anomalous minnows flitting in a small pond when he had already seen Moby Dick leap clear of the Pacific ocean! That's _small_ hyperbole. In 1977, and after the end of the _last_ incarnation of the "endless war" in Viet Nam, my brother and his bride of a few years were traveling at night down the Pacific Coast Highway, in California (from French Gulch to Oxnard) to spend time with our folks for Christmas - about a twelve hour trip. I was ufologically _oblivious_ in what was then West Germany at the time, but I digress. Both were well rested, not intoxicated, and looking forward to a quiet drive on a beautiful night down an uncluttered California highway listening to R&B on the '64 VW Window Van's cheesy little AM radio... One can almost hear tense music swelling on the soundtrack... Kill the music. As they drove, they would crest an occasional bluff and be able to see many miles out into the ocean where offshore oil rigs glittered deceptively like diamonds in the darkness of an untroubled sea. It was a beautiful night and their spirits were high. There were no children as yet, and their lives stretched out before them in a manner that seemed as optimistic and completely open ended as the ocean on their right. They would _stay_ married - forgive the digression. Every time that they would get a shot of ocean they would fully appreciate the quiet beauty of the sea and sky. The starry reaches would look like a glittering backdrop weighted at the bottom by the brighter lights of the sparkling offshore rigs. Highway One is a curling, winding snake of a road that takes the traveler in and away from periodic views of the ocean to points inland, and they became puzzled, as they drove along, that an "oil rig" (one of them) seemed to be getting closer to shore every time they had an opportunity to see it. They were still unsuspecting. Driving through a stretch away from the ocean and down a valley between some hills, my brother's wife noticed what she took for a lighted billboard further down the road... that they didn't _seem_ to be gaining on! Abruptly, they did gain on it, in the darkness, until it was adjacent to the car outside her passenger door about a hundred feet away! It became obvious to them at last that the "sign" was moving, so they upgraded their estimation of the object to a plane in trouble... or a helicopter. They pulled over to the side of the road to see what was what. My brother got out of the car and jogged around the front to see. Before his slack-jawed eyes loomed a silent upside down Christmas tree as big as an office building, it seemed! One racing heartbeat later all he could observe from horizon to horizon were billions of different sized bright lights hovering right down over the top of them like a swarm of quiet multicolored bees! My brother ran a few meters from the car in a heedless attempt to see more, immediately enchanted. His wife screamed from the car, and he looked back. She was begging him to return to her. "They'll get us"! she shrieked. "They'll get us"! A cold fear took him then, and he scrambled back to the van and piled inside with her, slamming the door! He looked up at the UFO through the top of the windscreen. His wife was beside herself with fear! Just as abruptly, it was gone. They quickly fired up the VW window van and left the area while the leaving was apparently good. Both were _highly_ freaked out! Now, my brother's a merry trickster. His totem animal would be the crow (he can reproduce, by the way, into _living_ steel sculpture) ...if he was into native religions. But like the crow, he's not wired for enduring obfuscation, he's a dyed in the wool sociophile, and he won't be a party to the short- sheeting egregious. Still -- it's not _him_ that convinces me. It's her. His wife was ever only a solid indication that it is only the good who die young. A serious (albeit canted) student of ardent Christianity, she was a grammar school teacher who inspired a permanent monument, festooned with rose bushes, to be raised in her memory at her school. On the monument is a metal plaque that reads her name and "Always gentle, always kind..." An intelligent women, she was under the inculcated mainstream opinion that only feebs and losers saw UFOs! She was not _remotely_ comfortable or eager providing testimony to _this_ kind of event. She would never have brought it up on her own, but that my brother was eager to talk about it, and she was there with him... She was a most _reluctant_ witness, forgetting she's never told a self-serving lie in her life. She feared hell's demons descending upon them in the form of a sky full of different colored silent lights _that_ night, though. She trembled as she related the story and looked haunted. I knew her for almost 30 years; she's the real deal. Later, I'd ask my brother about missing time, and whether he seemed to get down to Oxnard about when he thought he should have been down there. He said he thought he did. I don't -think- there were abduction complications... The reader can now, perhaps, understand my lack of irritation with this under-whelmed witness a little better! He was party to lightning -bolts-; I was getting excited about lightning-bugs! I can dig the scale. Still, he had to admit my "lightning bug" was weird, though he was _still_ able to fake a yawn in a manner that would break a normal man's jaw. What a guy. That's enough. I remain, for now, watching the western skies. Read on!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:38:22 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:53:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Bourdais >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:26:33 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:47:00 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>If there was a very long tether, to a balloon, far up, there >>would be no need for a fire near the ground. The fire is to heat >>the air in the balloon. Only by having a large diameter pipe >>leading up to the baoon could one "guarantee" that the heat from >>the fire would warm the air in the balloon. I think the idea of >>a considerable distance between the gondola, where the torch or >>whatever you call it, is kept and the balloon itself is a >>non-starter. >I'm increasingly amazed and amused! Does anybody actually read >the posts on this List? The idea of the cable-supported "gondola" >has nothing whatsoever to do with hot air balloons and never did! I too am increasingly amused by all this theorizing with balloons and contraptions to explain Socorro. Sounds like Mogul 4 to me! You know, the balloon train that was never launched.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:58:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:54:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:47:00 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:38:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:59:57 -0600 >>>.Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>Here's another difficulty... Zamora saw flame, and the flame >>>burnt the ground. If the envelope was at high altitude, what was >>>the flame for? >>Easy, there was an equipment malfunction! >If there was a very long tether, to a balloon, far up, there >would be no need for a fire near the ground. The fire is to heat >the air in the balloon. Only by having a large diameter pipe >leading up to the baoon could one "guarantee" that the heat from >the fire would warm the air in the balloon. I think the idea of >a considerable distance between the gondola, where the torch or >whatever you call it, is kept and the balloon itself is a >non-starter. You know, I would think the same thing prior to Martin Shough's idea of "neutral buoyancy". If the ballooncraft was intended to hop around like a LEM, then the preferred method of attaining flight is by jet bursts at the ground level. The balloon at relatively high altitude would hopefully just negate some of the weight and the jet firing would be enough to remove the remaining weight, causing the upward motion. So it do not think it was a hot air balloon, but, to fit in this far fatched hypothesis, would have to be helium or hydrogen. The LEM -like thrusters would be used to help it go up and likely the balloon will just go where the prevailing upper current winds want it to.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:03:50 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:56:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? - Shough >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:04:02 +0100 >Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:34:08 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? >>>From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:07:58 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Nuclear Reactors & UFOs? ><snip> >>>You say that the Ufocat database probably contains a >>>certain percentage of "IFOs". Yes, but it is also probable that >>>this percentage is about the same in all counties. So this >>>argument does not seem very strong to me. >>To test what you say is "probable" you would have to go back >>to the data on each of the 164 counties and redo the sums >>independently for IFOs and UFOs. If it were then found to be the >>case that IFOs and and UFOs occurred in the same proportions in >>all counties, then the conclusion you draw from Johnson's study >>might be that IFOs, like UFOs, correlate with nuclear sites. >Martin, >I don't agree with your answer on this point. >First, nobody knows exactly how many IFOs there are in the >Ufocat data base. It's just a reasonable supposition that there >is a certain number of Ifos, but there is no way to know exactly >how many. That's what I said. >Experts of the Blue Book files admit that there is a >number of cases labelled Ifos, which were probably not. So, what >were the real percentages of Ufos against Ifos, whe don't know. Again, that's what I said. >Secondly, it is just as reasonable to assume that the percentage >is about the same in all the 164 counties chosen for the >statistical test. That is a possibility, but it is only "reasonable to assume" that it is true if you can show that it would have no implications for interpreting the result whether it is true or not. >Now, if there are more Ufo observations over and near nuclear >installations, it is possible that there are also more Ifos, >just like a "noise" in a transmission. Whether or not there are significantly more UFO observations near nuclear installations than can be accounted for by a) chance, and/or b) other covariant factors, is the question at issue. You are attempting to argue in a circle. The primary problems here are ruling out possible selection bias in the group of control counties, and ruling out the possibility that the report rate correlates with (e.g.) the military presence in both control and test counties. But I don't propose to write everything out a second time. >If this is correct, it certainly does not mean that "IFOs, like >UFOs, correlate with nuclear sites." But that is precisely what it would mean (if it were true). Again you are confusing correlation and causation. >It would just mean - a reasonable assumption - that there are as >many misperceptions as usual, human nature being what it is. Or >maybe there are less, but there is again no way to determine >that. So, yor argument seems pointless to me. I realise that it does. >Just one more word on Rendlesahm-Bentwaters. Your negative >judgement on the book by Georgina Bruni - unfair in my opinion - >is not a valid argument to discard testimonies on UFOs seen >above or near the nuclear storage area of Bentwaters. For heaven's sake Gildas, who said anything about discarding testimonies? Who even said anything about Rendlesham? Answer: You, not me. You promoted Bruni's book as being of high quality; I questioned its quality, but if you were to read more carefully you would see that I limited my comment on Bruni's book to matters on which I am competent to comment, specifically Lakenheath- Bentwaters 1956. It is a fact that her summary of the case therein is a travesty of the events. It is also a fact that this reduces my confidence in her as a reliable source. What sensible person would say that reportorial innacuracy is a positive sign of a reliable source? So _If_ I wish at some time to delve into the Rendlesham incident deeply (and I might!) I will not choose this book as my primary source. This is simple prudence. O
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:15:49 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:58:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Smith >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:17:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>1. It had no apparent conventional propulsion system such as >>propellers, rockets, or jets, and left no trail. Humm. Where did the flames come from? Still, I assume you need some sort of ducts to shoot the flames from. >>2. It was oval shaped and lacked a conventional airfoil (i.e. >>wings or lifting body shape) to support it in flight. Hummm. Could still be a gondola attached by a long thin line to a large balloon (like a cocomut to the African Swallow) . >>3. It descended and ascended vertically with a roar, but once it >>reached 20 feet altitude, it became completely silent. Hummmm. A roar. Were there lions nearby? Jet thrusters of the LEM variety would make sense. >>4. In silent mode it zipped away and disappeared in the distance >>near Six-mile Canyon in 20 seconds or less (also executed a >>sharp upward turn). That works out to approximately 1000 mph >>for its _average_ speed. (It's peak speed was probably substantially >>greater.) Sharp turns are okay depending on winds aloft for a balloon, although I wouldn't want to be inside! Okay, 1000mph rules out any balloon with or without LEM thrusters. >Also, how about the unknown symbols or letters that Zamora saw >on the craft? Was it English? Russian? Well, I have to wonder about any symbols on a craft. Red Chinese or Soviet Cyrillics? I would think an American device would be emblazened with the good ole Amercian flag and not some gibberish! >And the later sighting on April 26, reported by Orlando Gallego, >investigated by police officers, of another landing at La >Madera, New Mexico. Another balloon? Another craft? Sure, why not another balloon! If you are spies and want to drift over top secret areas in the US, then you just don't do one fly over. Or if some kind of lame LEM testers, then you don't just do one lame test do you? No you do more than one, for the adventure of it all!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Hynek Interview? - Yturria From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:20:48 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:02:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Hynek Interview? - Yturria >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:05:05 -0500 >Subject: Re: Hynek Interview? >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:15:10 -0400 >>Subject: Hynek Interview? >>"We've been talking with James Fox, whom I think you've >>spoken with, and he said you may be able to answer this >>question: >>There is an interview with J. Allen Hynek on "UFOS: 50 Years of >>Denial?" from 1985 where Hynek says that the goal of Project >>Bluebook was to coverup any questionable UFO sightings. He's >>wearing a white suit and sitting on a couch. >>By any chance, do you know who shot this footage?" >The clip I have is of Hynek with a white coat and blue shirt >sitting on a couch. He is talking about Blue Book and the UFO >coverup. >This video set was made well after Hynek died I think so they >got the footage from somewhere else. I looked in the credits, >and his clips aren't singled out. >The 2 tapes I have are titled, UFOs: Miracle Of The Unknown. The >one Hynek is on, Above Top Secret, which is part 2. They were >distributed by a company called Questar Video. P.O. Box 11345 >Chicago, Illinois 60611. Maybe contact them and ask them where >the footage originated. The customer service phone number is 1- >800-544-8422. Doubt that will do any good though. Interestingly there is an interview with J. Allen Hynek where he is wearing the same white jacket and the same blue shirt talking to a woman reporter about UFOs and goverment. The interview was on ABC's Good Morning America, sometime in 1985, I think in, Hynek's home. Information and clip may be obtained from ABC News or at:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Bad-Think? - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:55:32 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:05:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Bad-Think? - Hall >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:22:48 -0500 >Subject: Bad-Think? >A view (or two) of the problem with UFO study, and >those who have made it their avocation, or vocation: >http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com Rich, I see you can't maintain any consistency in your views; now I am after all part of the 'atrophied thinking' on the part of we ancient of days that you say plagues ufology. You specifically excluded me from your criticisms, or have you forgotten that? Now it is even our fault that UFOs have remained unexplainable for so many years. How creative! How original! How stupid! But truth will out: You object to orthodox science. Well, well, well. The old metaphysical shell game. What else is there, New Age nonscience? Somehow I'm not too surprised by this revelation since you were weaving all over the place in your arguments and apparently disdain logic and facts. It seems to me that we get very vigorous debate and discussion of issues on this List, with a mulitplicity of viewpoints. But you still object. Hmmm! You apparently have become fossilized in your thinking.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Bad-Think? - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:56:51 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:07:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Bad-Think? - Connors >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:22:48 -0500 >Subject: Bad-Think? >A view (or two) of the problem with UFO study, and >those who have made it their avocation, or vocation: >http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com Your blog view was entertaining. Everyone should read it. Reminds me of the proverbial curse of the auto mechanic... you know, where there is always the tire-kicker who talks about how they can do it better, where the mechanic doesn't do it right, etc.. Yet the mechanic is doing the actual work using actual
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:17:29 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 13:12:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies - >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:48:03 -0500 >Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:28:05 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Scientific PSI Vs. Scientific UFO Studies ><snip> >I'm not making the claims, Kyle. I am relaying what I've heard >and read from people claiming inside knowledge for roughly the >past decade. So I can't give you the detailed answer you want. <snip> >All I am saying is, when I watch the UFO story unfolding as told >on Strange Days... Indeed and this List, as well as a few other >articles and books, it is _eminently_ sensible that someone with >power over the visible governments is keeping the full UFO story >secret. In fact, I can personally find no other satisfying >explanation for what has gone on in the field. That's all I'm >saying here. Hi Eleanor, Please accept my sincere thanks for posting a reply. I fully realize that a large number of folks believe that there is a "star chamber" that rules the big picture of happenings on this planet. I have read a considerable amount of literature on the subject, prompted in the main by my own observations and distaste for our American elite. But I think every country has its own ruling elite, and these elite have things in common, but much more at odds, with agendae that run at counter purposes quite often. Hence war, political unrest, social separatism, and basic mistrust. My point was that while there are without question elites that can control some aspects of our daily perceptions, this does not imply or require a planet-wide conspiracy. Up until fairly recently, America was a bellwether for many nations on how to further policy. Not by force but by example. Other nations follow our lead on many subjects. At least they used to. As Alfred pointed out, our country has been all but hijacked, but other nations are now notably not following our lead in many areas. The Kyoto accord, nuclear proliferation, elections and the art of war have all shown the world that the US is no longer the bastion of right, freedom, and model behavior. Or democracy. There is gathering evidence that the US is becoming isolated. I suspect that just under 4 more years will complete the process. On the UFO question, there is obviously a general concensus not to give it legitimacy, but I think this is evidence that other nations have read and subscribe to the Brookings Institute report predicting panic if ET visitation were proven true. Seems plausible to me, as we have been the authority for other nations on many other such topics. I think there's a lifespan on that kind of agreement as well. And it is looking decidedly gray and unkempt. Whatever is causing the effects you describe here regularly, I'm not convinced that it is the result of a worldwide star chamber, but feel quite comfortable that our own local poobahs are capable of doing it on their own. I imagine other countries would love to have some of the tech you describe. If it is terrestrial in the first place. (I just saw the film "The Forgotten" <g>) Now, I must add that if in the next 4 years, our Constitution is altered to allow persons of foreign birth to run for President, and the GoverNator runs, I may have to (and will) rethink my position. <g> Now I must dash... gotta get my dress ready for the Bohemian Grove "Cremation of Care" ceremony. <bad joke...sorry.>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:23:41 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:34:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Sparks >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:54:48 +0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:37:24 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:47:30 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>You might as well write that a flying pig seems a possibility >>for Socorro. The point is, where is any evidence for such an >>"experimental craft?" In 40 years, nobody has ever turned up any >>evidence that such a craft existed. >Ah, but David, you miss the point here. According to Jeromian >principles (as set out in the discussion of the Trindade case) >it's not enough just for you to point out that in forty years >no-one has ever turned up with evidence to *prove* the claim. >It's actually your responsibility to find "negative witnesses", >i.e. people who can show you documentary evidence that it >_didn't_ happen. I don't know exactly how you'd do this, but I'm >sure Jerry Clark could tell you. Completely full of it as usual. Where are the 300 crew members
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 A List Of Ships But No Llandovery Castle From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:52:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:37:52 -0500 Subject: A List Of Ships But No Llandovery Castle Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:02:57 +0000 (GMT) From: Lawrie Williams <lawrie_williams.nul> To: forteana.nul Subj: FWD [forteana] A list of ships but no Llandovery Castle http://www.genseek.net/ships.htm This might be of interest. In a lot of accounts of paranormal events a ship is involved. Here is a web page with long lists of old ships. I have just been looking for the Llandovery Castle, but no dice, alas. Here are the old items that most relate to this: Llandovery Castle Cigar Ship Close Encounter - July 1 1947 23. GIANT IN THE SKY "Many students of such matters are convinced that the earth has been under systematic and intensive surveillence for a long time. Numerous scientists, both in and out of government, have hinted at this. Let us consider one of the major pieces of evidence. "The steamship Llandovery Castle left Mombasa on the last day of June, 1947, bound for Cape Town. On the night of July 1, the ship was passing through the Straits of Madagascar. The time was about 11 pm, when the lookout and some of the passengers noticed a brilliant light approaching rapidly, overtaking the ship and losing altitude as it did so. The light lost speed and descended to within fifty feet of the water. Then the light turned downward, a brilliant search-beam that cast a diminishing circle on the surface of the sea as the object matched its speed with that of the ship. Suddenly the searchlight beam went out - and then the object itself became visible. "All aboard the vessel who saw the thing agreed that it was a gigantic cylindrical craft of some sort, apparently metallic and about five times as long as its diameter. It looked, said the witnesses, like a huge steel cigar with the end clipped. No windows or portholes could be seen; but from the ease and precision with which it matched its speed to that of the ship and the use of the searchlight, it was quite apparent that the craft was under intelligent control of some sort. The size of the craft was nothing less than gigantic; for the witnesses, including some of the ship's officers, estimated that the thing that paced them was three to four times as long as the steamship - which meant that it would have been in excess of one thousand feet long and about two hundred feet in diameter. "After cruising along beside the Llandovery Castle for perhaps a minute, the gigantic structure began to rise silently until it was about a thousand feet above the water, then great orange streamers of flame shot from the rear of the craft and it leapt forward, rising rapidly to lose itself in the night skies. The incident was duly recorded in the ship's log, and promptly forgotten except by those who saw it." ----- Frank Edwards "Strange World" Ace Books Inc 1120 Avenue of the Americas New York N.Y. 10036 1964 Keyed in from an age-browned paper back book March 31 2001 by Lawrie Williams who notes that this was the day b4 Roswell "Air Progress" (October 1967) reported: "7,000 mph at 25,000 ft has been confirmed by radar. Silent flight has been observed by credible witnesses. High-G acceleration after long periods of hovering is witnessed almost every day.....there seem to be three basic shapes, Discs, spheres and cigars.....the discs vary from a few feet to more than 200 ft across. Those seen in daylight are almost always described as looking metallic; frequently details such as ports, domes and projections are seen......The disc shape....offers great poss- ibilities for high strength-to-weight, low drag and extreme maneuverability." I have a copy of this publication and can vouch for its
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:55:52 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:39:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch >From: Roy Hale <roy.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:48:00 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:15:53 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>I don't know what to make of the Socorro case. It is atypical >>in many ways. With reservations, I suggest you can leave >>balloons completely out of it. They inevitably weigh more than >>my imaginary weightless vacuum chamber. I invented that as an >>ideal 'Socorro Balloon' for your kind consideration. You won't >>be finding one at NASA. >But he could have simply met humanoids outside a craft? >http://www.thelosthaven.co.uk/conthumanoid.html Hi Roy:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Hynek Interview? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:06:58 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:41:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Hynek Interview? - Hatch >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:05:05 -0500 >Subject: Re: Hynek Interview? >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 21:15:10 -0400 >>Subject: Hynek Interview? <snip> >>There is an interview with J. Allen Hynek on "UFOS: 50 Years >>of Denial?" from 1985 where Hynek says that the goal of Project >>Bluebook was to coverup any questionable UFO sightings. He's >>wearing a white suit and sitting on a couch. >>By any chance, do you know who shot this footage?" >The clip I have is of Hynek with a white coat and blue shirt >sitting on a couch. He is talking about Blue Book and the UFO >coverup. >This video set was made well after Hynek died I think so they >got the footage from somewhere else. I looked in the credits, >and his clips aren't singled out. >The 2 tapes I have are titled, UFOs: Miracle Of The Unknown. >The one Hynek is on, Above Top Secret, which is part 2. They >were distributed by a company called Questar Video. P.O. Box >11345 Chicago, Illinois 60611. Maybe contact them and ask them >where the footage originated. The customer service phone number >is 1 800-544-8422. Doubt that will do any good though. >Don Ecker was one of the consultants of these videos. >Maybe ask him. >J.Allen Hynek Center for UFO studies still around? Or they >change the name? Sorry I forget. They are given credit for the >picture inserts and might be able to give you the info. ABC >wants. Hello Aaron: The Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) is definitely still around. Here is their website: http://www.cufos.org/ Here is a link to their International UFO Reporter publication: http://www.cufos.org/IUR_articles.html Best wishes
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:14:16 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:46:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Hatch >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:08:36 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 06:15:53 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons <snip> >>.. and all of this is with a weightless soup can capable of >>withstanding 14.7 PSI of atmospheric pressure without imploding. >>Need I go on? >Larry - - - >No, you needn't. I'm afraid you've maybe missed a few posts, >but nobody has been discussing the theory that you criticise. >What we're talking about is not the idea that the object Zamora >saw was a balloon but James Smith's suggestion that an object >supported by cable from an unseen large high-altitude balloon >could be quite massive. >>I have invented an ideal 'balloon' and the numbers are still >>insane. >>This is not what Zamora described. Not even a ghost of it. >>Unless Zamora saw something much further away (hence larger) >>the balloon hypothesis is absolute nonsense. ><snip> >>A modest proposal: >>Maybe the "gondola" that Zamora saw, and at first mistook for >>an overturned car, was some mundane device suspended by an >>invisible cable, the upper end firmly attached to a UFO that >>went unnoticed. >Wonderful! Have you finally sourced that Theakston's Old >Peculier, Larry? :-) >Best >Martin Hi Martin: Every so often, somebody dredges up the tired unworkable balloon theory, usually referring back to Larry Robinson. I just wanted a decent burial.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 PRG/X-Conference Press Release - 01-30-05 From: Stephen G. Bassett <Disclosure2003.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:25:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:48:15 -0500 Subject: PRG/X-Conference Press Release - 01-30-05 PRG Paradigm Research Group X-Conference 2005 Press Release - January 30, 2005 Washington, DC - PRG is announcing four more speakers for the 2nd Annual Exopolitics Expo (X-Conference), scheduled for April 22-24, 2005 at the Hilton Washington, DC North/Gaithersburg. These are researcher/activist John Greenewald, Jr., government witness Charles James Hall, researcher Ann Druffel and researcher, Richard Sauder, PhD. The conference website is: www.x-conference.com. The X-Conference is a unique event which focuses on the political, governmental and social aspects relating to extraterrestrial-related phenomena. It is produced by PRG as part of the ongoing activist movement seeking to end the truth embargo. Topics in 2005 will include: impact of the film industry, the destruction of NICAP, MKULTRA, undergroun d bases, the role of science in the exopolitics of disclosure, ET studies during the Carter administration, and much more. Attendees are signing up from the US, Canada, Europe and Mexico. Approximately 28 lecturers and panelists will present. Four speakers are being announced. New for this year: John Greenewald, Jr. - is a research/activist prodigy. He began researching government conspiracies at the age of 15, wrote his first book Beyond UFO Secrecy at 2 0, developed his own radio show at 22 and now is developing a television series at 23. Along the way he built one of the largest online communities of it's kind in the world with almost 25,000 volunteer members, over 300,000 posts on its foru ms, over 149,000 government documents, over 10,000 archived news articles, and over 14,000 photographs of military aircraft, UFOs, and much more. The Black Vault has been referenced as one of the largest technological achievements on the internet. His website has won over 60 awards. The full potential of the Black Vault is yet to be reached. It's eventual impact on a number of the most controversial issues of our time can only be estimated. To accomplish this feat John became an expert on the use of the Freedom of Information Act, and, if such statistics were known, may have filed more FOIA requests than any other individual. But his most powerful influence may yet be as an example to the rest of the Echo Boomers. As t housands of his generation follow his lead and begin challenging the structures of the emerging national security state with the aid of sophisticated technologies they have mastered as no other generation has, the extraterrestrial truth embargo, and many other embargoes, must surely collapse. Charles James Hall - One of the most difficult challenges facing researchers and activists during the exopolitical transition underway is how to deal with emerging witnesses. By witness what is meant is individuals who intersected issues and evidence pertaining to extraterrestrial-related phenomena while in the employ of the government - military or civilian - and wish to come forward publicly and tell what they know. From 1947 forward thousands of government employees have become involved with these issues either directly through their work or indirectly via chance of time and place. The further back in time and the deeper within classified facilities and programs the more difficult it become to verify stories and personal history when and if they come forward. Also of note, the deeper witnesses were in the classified realms the more extraordinary their stories. The funding re quired to properly prepare an objective, outside structure for witnesses to engage, be vetted, and relate their information is not available to the research/activist community at this time, and that is an understatement. Of course, a single wealthy American could change all that with a stroke of a pen, but as yet no one has put that pen to a large enough check.&nbs; p; Not surprisingly, those who do come forward face difficult challenges and are often treated very poorly. While this process is difficult but necessary, PRG believes it is essential that all emerging witnesses be given respect and considerations. If not, others will simply refuse to come forward at all. Charles Hall was a weather observer in the Un ited States Air Force during the mid-sixties. He was stationed at Nellis Air Force Base and the Indian Springs gunnery ranges outside Las Vegas, followed by a year in Viet Nam. After the service, Charles married and earned a Masters degree in Nuclear Physics at San Diego State University. He also did post graduate work at the University of Maine at Bangor. The necessities of life and family pushed memories of the terror and unprecedented experiences on the Indian Springs gunnery ranges i nto the background, but they couldn�t be forgotten. Charles James Hall has come forward with an extraordinary story. He has written three fact-as-fiction books, the Millennial Hospitality series and recently began speaking publicly. He is being engaged by researcher and journalist, Paola Harris, researcher David Coote and others. The process is underway. Returning from last year: Ann Druffel - In her recently published book Firestorm, a biography of scientist and extraterrestrial phenomena researcher Dr. James E. McDonald, she details a very important episode in the history of the citizen/science movement - the orchestr ated dismantlement of NICAP. She returns to talk about this important series of events, the turn around of Admiral Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter and the destruction of James McDonald. Ann Druffel began investigating sighting reports in the Southern California area in April 1957 with the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), which was directed by research pioneer Major Donald E. Keyhoe, USMC (Ret.). She became acquainted with Dr. James E. McDonald through his contacts with the Los Angele s NICAP Subcommittee from 1966 to 1971. After NICAP's demise in 1970, she joined the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and the then newly-formed Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS.) She has researched over 2,000 Los Angeles Basin reports, including alleged landings, photo cases, close encounters with physical effects on witnesses and terrain, alleged "abduction" reports and other extraterrestrial related phenomena. A prolific writer, Druffel has contributed over 180 articles t o numerous journals and magazines. She wrote the book How to Defend Yourself Against Alien Abductions and co-authored Tujunga Canyon Contacts with parapsychologist, D. Scott Rogo. Richard Sauder, PhD - In order to fully appreciate the power of the United States government to make and keep secrets, conduct sequestered research on extraordinary technologies and control material and personnel throughout a five decade cover-up, it is extremely helpful to understand the extend of under ground facilities which have been constructed within and without the U.S. Dr. Sauder is perhaps the leading researcher in this important area. He is the author of three books: the "underground" (pun intended) bestseller, Underground Bases and Tunnels: What is the Government Trying to Hide?, which represents his first substantial work on the underground bases issue, the esoteric Kundalini Tales, which deals with paranormal and mind control themes, and his latest book, Underwater and Underground Bases, which expands the scope of his earlier work to include military plans for manned bases and tunnels beneath the sea floor. He was the first person to systematically popularize the mysterious topic of underground bases and tunnels by delving into the open literature, government and industry paper trail. Richard has discussed his work on numerous radio and television programs including Art Bell's Dreamland, Coast to Coast AM with George Noory, Lo u Gentile Show, Laura Lee Show, Strange Daze with Don Ecker, Jeff Rense's Sightings on the Radio, Zoh Hieronimus Show, Uri Geller Show, BBC, FOX News (Phoenix) and Ted Loman's UFOAZ Talks. He has presented at the Whole Life Expos in Las Vegas and Los Angeles, the International UFO Congress in Laughlin, Nevada, the Leeds (U.K.) International UFO Conference, the National UFO Conference in Bordentown, New Jersey, HUFON (Houston MUFON) and Orange County MUFON. His writings and interviews have appeared in such diverse hard copy and electronic publications as NEXUS Magazine, UFO Magazine (U.S. and U.K.), Atlantis Rising, UFO Universe and on the Rense.com website. His underground bases research commenced in 1992 and continues to the present day. He has a B.A. in sociology, an M.A. in Latin American studies, an M.S. in forestry and a Ph.D. in political science. He currently resides in San Antonio, Texas. Other speakers already announced include: Dr. Lynne Kitei, MD, Alfred L. Webre, JD, Paul Davids, Michael S. Heiser, PhD, Jaime Maussan and Richard Dolan. Speaker information will be posted in the Speaker sect ion at: www.x-conference.com. Contact: Stephen Bassett 202-215-8344 ________________________________________________________ Paradigm Research Gr oup E-mail: ParadigmRG.nul URL: www.paradigmclock.com Cell: 202-215-8344 4938 Hampden Lane, #161 Bethesda, MD 20814 _________________________________________________________
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:19:41 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:49:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' >From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:40:31 -0500 >Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' Observatory >>From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> >>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:23:01 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Subject: Re: Russia & Uzbekistan Construct 'SETI' Observatory ><snip> >>Two other York U. researchers and myself have also proposed >>using the ground based 70 metre radio telescope to emit a strong >>radio pulse towards two gravitationally balanced points in space >>60 degrees in front and 60 degrees behind the Moon's orbit and >>to listen for an echo (more of an active rather than a passive >>radar experiment). I have reasons to believe that there is a >>debris field in this region of space consisting of meteoroids >>and other ET garbage left over since the creation of the Earth- >>Moon system. <snip> >What exactly do you mean by "60 degrees in front [or behind] the >Moon's orbit"? >The orbit is pretty close to a circle - and I'm not clear >whether you mean 60 degree arcs in the plane of the orbit, or >some other direction. >Also why would a point in space return an echo? >Does this have anything to do with "libration points" (which >I've never understood.) Being simple minded, I can only conceive >of one point between the Moon and Earth where gravity would >exactly cancel. <snip> Hi Eleanor! In the vicinity of the Earth and the Moon (or any two other large objects) there are five points where the gravitational forces and the motion of a third body will balance out so that the relative positions of the Earth, Moon and the third body will remain the same with respect to each other in space. These five points are know as Lagrange or Libration Points. Two of these stable points (L4 and L5) are located 60 degrees in from and 60 degrees behind the Moon in its orbit around the Earth. It is believed by some that the Earth-Moon system was formed when a Mars-size object collided with the proto-Earth scattering debris out into space. Over a relatively short period of time, much of this debris would have graviationally fallen back to form the present Earth and Moon. If any debris located at any of these five Lagrange Points had just the right speed and direction of motion, they would have remained there in space for a very long time. I suspect that this debris (or even Mars chocolate bar wrappers or other garbage tossed by ETs from their spacecrafts passing by these Lagrange Points) may still be there. Although at least two space "companions" of the Earth have been discovered, there have also been many unconfirmed reports of natural(?) satellites in orbit around the Earth, including a few from the pre-Sputnik years (eg. John P. Bagby in JBIS, etc.). What attracted my attention were reports of very faint extended patchs of light in the night sky that moved at the same rate as the Moon at the Earth-Moon L4 and L5 points. Could these patchs of light be debris fields consisting of very many tiny objects that are too small to spot even with a large optical telescope? If this is the case and the average separation between these tiny objects is about the wavelength of radio/radar waves or less, then their existence could be confirmed by listening for a radio echo. Although we had the necessary expertise, the money (just a few hundred dollars!) and two radio telescopes (a 70 meter dish in the Ukraine to send out the radar pulse and the new 100 meter dish in West Virginia that was still undergoing engineering tests at the time but could be used by us to listen for the radio echo), technical problems with the radar equipment prevented us from performing this experiment. Now both radio telescopes are too busy with spacecraft communications work and radio astronomy research projects. Maybe others will one day do this radar search of debris in orbit at the L4 and L5 points around the Earth. If passive radar using many radio receivers spread all over the surface of the Earth can be used to detect the Moon about 1/4 of a million miles away, then we may also be able to detect much weaker
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Mysteries Lurk Between The Walls Of Capitol Hill From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:55:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:55:39 -0500 Subject: Mysteries Lurk Between The Walls Of Capitol Hill Source: The Seattle Post Intelligencer - Seattle, Washington http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/lifestyle/209835_mysterymuseum.html 01-31-05 Mysteries Lurk Between The Walls Of Capitol Hill Museum By D. Parvaz Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter The truth is out there - heck, it could even exist in a basement in Capitol Hill. Amid the bars, fetish shops and cool-kid boutiques on Broadway you'll find Seattle Museum of the Mysteries. If for some reason you miss the museum's name on the brown awning outside, just look for the purple-clad dwarf inhabiting the stairwell (hello, photo opportunity!). The space downstairs can be underwhelming. You may find either one of the museum's co-directors, Philip Lipson or Charlette LeFevre, manning the front desk. Pay the $3 suggested donation and go inside to see... a room lined with shabby bookshelves. Wait. Don't leave. It's three bucks - you can't even buy a large latte for that kind of chump change. In a city accustomed to high-tech razzle-dazzle, this place is an oddity. It's a bit like the dusty basement of an eccentric aunt or uncle. Those old bookcases hold some pretty neat stuff - and if you just let your guard down, you could get sucked into all the ghost stories, UFO tidbits and Bigfoot info. "We're really not into the whole New Age thing," says Lipson, adding, "We're not really true believers either." In other words, he and the other members of the Seattle UFO Paranormal Group (which formed in 1998) just find this stuff interesting. They opened the museum a year ago, and Lipson says they've been thrilled with the response. "We get all sorts of people through here," he says, including large groups of school kids. There's a little bit here for everyone. From ghost stories and photos of apparitions in Seattle Landmarks (Did you know Pike Place Market is haunted?) to information on the gadgets used by the Amateur Ghost Hunters of Seattle Tacoma (A.G.H.O.S.T.) - they actually use equipment to hear the voices of ghosts, like Michael Keaton does in the movie "White Noise." If UFOs are more your speed, you're in the right spot: The first official UFO sighting took place near Mount Rainier on July 24, 1947. It turns out someone else spotted a UFO on July 21 of the same year over Vashon Island, but the July 24 one is considered the first official, reported sighting. You can hear a tape recording of Kenneth Arnold, the man who clocked the UFOs flight between Mount Rainier and Mount Adams at just under 2 minutes, being interviewed by a radio station. It's oddly gripping: There's a sense of wonder in Arnold's voice that's infectious, nearly 60 years later. For those who like their mysteries in a more organic package, there's Bigfoot - a map of sightings, replicas of casts, photos, etc. This isn't to say that there really is or isn't a Bigfoot, but somehow the idea of a big, friendly giant ape-type roaming through heavily wooded areas is kinda sweet. There's much more in there - the shelves are crammed with books on all sorts of conspiracies, and, yes, Elvis has a place there, too. "We're hoping to offer something to inspire people's sense of wonder," says Lipson. To that end, you'll find some non sequiturs there - a little something on Frances Farmer (the tragic Seattle actress), mysterious and overlooked inventor Nikola Tesla and even an oxygen bar ($5 for a five-minute treatment). Why this stuff? Because all of them have an outsider-ish element to them. Farmer was forcefully institutionalized; Tesla (aka the Forgotten Father of Technology) died a pauper despite his prolific knack for invention and innovation. As for the oxygen tank: "Well, that's just here because it's considered alternative," says Lipson. "It's not accepted by the traditional medical community." Ultimately, he says the museum should be a place where people feel free to come in, take a load off and chat about whatever -- a community center of sorts. "We're a lot of different things to a lot of different people," says Lipson.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Rebuttle To 'Extraordinary Evidence' Quote? From: Scott Dagilis <scottdagilis.nul> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:16:54 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:58:22 -0500 Subject: Rebuttle To 'Extraordinary Evidence' Quote? Hi All, A colleague posted the following as a sig in his email: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. --Carl Sagan" and I wanted to reply with a quote I heard that goes something like this: "The validity of a claim is unrelated to its believability". Does anyone know the exact quote and who gave it?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 02:26:49 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:02:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Ledger >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:13:05 -0000 >Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:12:12 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons >Dissimilarities to the Apollo module are very relevant if >anyone is arguing that the Socorro object was actually an Apollo >module. I'm not. I'm not sure anyone else is either. They have in the past, Martin. I'm nipping it in the bud before we get into that nonsense again. >>I think the balloon theory in all of it's aspects is a non- >>starter. >It may be a non-finisher, but what we need to do is to do a >_better_ job of trying to make it work than Robinson, Reynolds & >>co., and still fail. Get rid of the strongest and strangest >versions of it, not just the weakest and most obvious. Until >then it will remain a runner. Why must it be a runner since it doesn't match the scenario? Following the reasoning that we must knock down all arguements no matter how off-the-wall brings us back , in the end, back to the possibility of the biggest off -the-wall explanation of them all, that this was an intelligently controlled vehicle of an extraterrestrial nature. Then where are you.? Rather than searching through the archives of the "silliest aerial vehicles of the 20th century", someone try explaining the mechanics of this teathered object that has it's own apparent power source dangling from some unseen balloon at some unknown altitude. First how heavy is that teather? Depends on how thick, how long and what it was made of. Is it strong enough to lift the ovoid on the ground, but heavy enough to interfere with the ground object's ability to rise? A-ha a possible reason for the balloon at altitude, to take up the weight of the teather. What's the teather's purpose? Possibly to to keep this balloon from getting away. Why? Because ballons like these are hard to come by specially if they are supplied with these nice teathers. Sort of like the donkey, the stick and the carrot story isn't it. In some of these explanations I'm thinking we should actually pay attention to what the witness said. And I love the fact that Zamora said that he didn't see anyone inside the suits, just the suits running about. Following the reasoning of the forgoing, these entities were personalities of little substance. The clothes made the man [or alien] so to speak. It's a pretty good bet that this dreamed up prototype wasn't some military contraption. If it was then military helicopters
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Re: Socorro & Balloons - Stuart From: Chaz Stuart <Daydisk2.nul> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 02:17:54 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:03:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Socorro & Balloons - Stuart Hmmm... I wonder if Gary T. Wilcox saw the same "suspended" object complete w/ two little men on his New York farm earlier the same day? (April 24, 1964).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Jan > Jan 31 Aliens Of The Deep From: Joe McGonagle <joe.nul> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:50:25 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:05:20 -0500 Subject: Aliens Of The Deep "Stanford graduate student Kevin Hand explores the potential for life on Europa, an icy moon of Jupiter, for his doctoral work with geological and environmental sciences Associate Professor Christopher Chyba. Like most astrobiologists and planetary scientists, Hand must do his research from afar. He can't ride a rocket 365 million miles to Europa, drill into the ice-capped