UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Battle Of Los Angeles 63rd Anniversary From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:53:33 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:47:19 -0500 Subject: Battle Of Los Angeles 63rd Anniversary With all the Jennings UFO Special hoopla I almost forgot the 63rd anniversary of the Battle of Los Angeles, Wednesday, February 25th, 1942. I can't believe this was overlooked for the special. http://www.virtuallystrange.com/ufo/sdi/images/battleofla.jpg Extra! Extra! Read all about it. ----- Source: UFO ROUNDUP http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1998/feb/m22-012.shtml 02-22-98 UFO ROUNDUP Volume 3, Number 8 February 22, 1998 Editor: Joseph Trainor <snip> from the UFO Files... 1942: Army Gunners Fire At UFOs Over Los Angeles On Wednesday, February 25, 1942, at precisely 2 a.m., diners at the trendy Trocadero club in Hollywood were startled when the lights winked out and air raid sirens began to sound throughout greater Los Angeles. "Searchlights scanned the skies and anti-aircraft guns protecting the vital aircraft and ship-building factories went into action. In the next few hours they would fire over 1,400 shells at an unidentified, slow-moving object in the sky over Los Angeles that looked like a blimp, or a balloon." Author Ralph Blum, who was a nine-year-old boy at the time, wrote that he thought "the Japanese were bombing Beverly Hills." "There were sirens, searchlights, even antiaircraft guns blamming away into the skies over Los Angeles. My father had been a balloon observation man (in the AEF) in World War One, and he knew big guns when he heard them. He ordered my mother to take my baby sisters to the underground projection room - our house was heavily supplied with Hollywood paraphernalia - while he and I went out onto the upstairs balcony." "What a scene! It was after three in the morning. Searchlights probed the western sky. Tracers streamed upward. The racket was terrific." Shooting at the aerial intruders were gunners of the 65th Coast Artillery (Anti-Aircraft) Regiment in Inglewood and the 205th Anti-Aircraft Regiment based in Santa Monica. The "white cigar- shaped object" took several direct hits but continued on its eastward flight. Up to 25 silvery UFOs were also seen by observers on the ground. Editor Peter Jenkins of the Los Angeles Herald Examiner reported, "I could clearly see the V formation of about 25 silvery planes overhead moving slowly across the sky toward Long Beach." Long Beach Police Chief J.H. McClelland said, "I watched what was described as the second wave of planes from atop the seven- story Long Beach City Hall. I did not see any planes but the younger men with me said they could. An experienced Navy observer with powerful Carl Zeiss binoculars said he counted nine planes in the cone of the searchlight. He said they were silver in color. The (UFO) group passed along from one battery of searchlights to another, and under fire from the anti- aircraft guns, flew from the direction of Redondo Beach and Inglewood on the land side of Fort MacArthur, and continued toward Santa Ana and Huntington Beach. Anti-aircraft fire was so heavy we could not hear the motors of the planes." Reporter Bill Henry of the Los Angeles Times wrote, "I was far enough away to see an object without being able to identify it... I would be willing to bet what shekels I have that there were a number of direct hits scored on the object." At 2:21 a.m., Lt. Gen. John L. DeWitt issued the cease-fire order, and the twenty-minute "battle of Los Angeles" was over. --- See Beyond Earth: Man's Contact With UFOs by Ralph Blum, Bantam Books, New York, April 1974, page 68. See also the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner and the Long Beach Press-Telegram for February 25, 1942. All newspaper quotes taken from "The Battle of Los Angeles, 1942" by Terrenz Sword, which appeared in Unsolved UFO Sightings, Spring 1996 issue, pages 57 through 62. Editor's Comment: Maybe the gang at the Black Vault could use the Freedom of Information Act to get the Army's Situation Reports for February 25, 1942 for the 65th and 205th A.A. Regiments. Wouldn't that be interesting reading! ----- >From Bruce Maccabee's site: http://brumac.8k.com/BATTLEOFLA/BattleofLA.html On Saturday, Febraury 19th, on SDI, Wendy Conners played a recording of a news broadcast reporting the event. It was quite chilling.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 08:10:12 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:48:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Rudiak >From: Adam Lowe <subbie.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:31:59 -0500 >Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night >Like Larry's site, the NICAP site traffic increased a few days >before the show aired. On Monday there were 511 hits compared to >186 the previous day. The traffic then decreased a little for a >couple of days but was still above the norm and then came the >1000+ hits on Thursday. On Friday we had about 840 hits but the >figures are now dropping off. The Sci-Fi network ran a bunch of their recent UFO specials on Monday, probably in anticipation of the advertised ABC special. That included the Roswell special that I was on. So my first big spike was on Monday, which I thought was because of the Roswell special being rerun, but apparently the interest from all the programs carried over to other websites such as NICAPs. (They also ran their Kecksberg and Rendlesham special.) Like the NICAP site, interest dipped on Tuesday and Wednesday returning towards normal, then hits spiked upward during the ABC special on Thursday and peaked on Friday. Weekends tend to see interest wane somewhat as people are doing other things, but interest still seems to be very high again today. Hits seem to be generated mostly by people doing web searches, but there have also been increased links to my site from various discussion groups in the aftermath of the special.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Pelicanist - Deardorff From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 08:18:42 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:51:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Deardorff >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:39:05 EST >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:21:03 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:14:15 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist <snip> >>>Thus Arnold's objects could have been conceivably concealed for >>>around 0.6-1.0 seconds as they passed behind Pyramid Peak. If >>>they disappeared one after one as they passed this landmark, >>>Arnold would have had good reason to believe they passed briefly >>>behind Pyramid, and could have used this to determine distance. >>>There are several other candidate subpeaks. Pyramid is just one >>>example. >>Thanks for pointing these out, David. Pyramid Peak at 6900 ft >>looks like a good bet to me. There's a topo map of it at: >http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=46.8069&lon=-121.8111 >Geez when will this end? I made a one-sentence personal comment >and now comes this torrent of argument. This requires a lot of >research and presentation covering hundreds of pages and won't >be resolved in an email or two, nor do I have time for this. >Too bad for your theory but Arnold drew in his one and only >drawing of the terrain scene of his sighting, done on the back >of his company's manila envelope about June 25, 1947, that the >objects were (as he captioned it) at 10,000 feet, not your 6,000 >ft speculation, and it was on a horizontal line that did not dip >down in front of Mt Rainier but actually sloped _up_ slightly >higher and apparently behind Rainier as shown by the solid line >from the sky converting to a dotted line when over Rainier. The >dotted line also trails out over Rainier, as if it was not >actually of objects seen but their unseen path _behind_ Rainier >had to be inferred by Arnold. Brad, You seem to have evidence that the rest of us have not been informed of. Is this evidence just your remembrance of a back- of-the-envelope sketch of over a half century ago? From your description it sounds like you possess it or a copy of it and could scan it up and make it available to those of us interested. We'd need to know its full provenance and genuineness also. There might be other possible interpretations
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:20:13 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 08:53:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Ledger >From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:14:54 +0100 >Subject: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >Is there any way to secure all the footage that did not make >the final cut, for posterity? Can some people (for instance, >Wendy Connors) ask for a copy of all the raw material? Yes. It will likely go for about 20-30 cents per second.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Pelicanist - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:00:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Clark >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:29:08 +0000 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:41:42 -0000 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:26:04 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>I'd be interested to know if you have any new information on the >>Trindade case. Do you? If so please could you open it up for >>discussion? >No, all I have to say is well archived in two separate >discussions at the List's Archive over the past four years. >Does anybody else have anything new, especially new evidence >which Jerry Clark promised a year or two back, which was going >to leave the 'pelicanists' with egg on their face? Hey, nice try, John! This is your way, I take it, of acknowleding - without actually having to say so - that you've given up, that you can deny the egg so manifestly plastered on your face only by pretending that it is spread elsewhere. I admire the way you change the subject, starting with the inconvenient truth we have yet to find the single elusive, missing negative witness who, according to pelicanist prophecy, is going to show up any day now to validate the indisputable truths so earnestly and touchingly proclaimed at meetings of the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. In the meantime, those of you whose interests don't extend to feathery fancy, and who are curious to know why the negative witness or witnesses are unlikely ever to come down from the sky alongside the angelic host, here's something John doesn't want you to read: http://trindade-island.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/printy-details.htm Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as we have seen, he can't.) He will pretend that the only issue is the ongoing, yet unpublished work of others, trying to distract our attention from the devastating (for him) work already in public forums. He will remind you, yet again, why you are unwelcome at the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Subscription Fee To UpDates? - Scheldroup From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:40:13 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:27:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Subscription Fee To UpDates? - Scheldroup >From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:05:19 -0000 >Subject: Re: Subscription Fee To UpDates? >>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 18:26:01 -0600 >>Subject: Subscription Fee To UpDates? ><snip> >Other objections with regard to charging for the privelege of >receiving daily output or posting are: >1. I would expect any message that I posted to be forwarded, in >spite of any formatting errors or perceived violation of >relevance etc. Well Joe, one little possible unforeseen thing might be reels of tape in the archives that wind-up storing mega spools of derogatory responses which have their relevance more to name calling then to actual subject matter. When the innocent spectator unwinds one of these reels, what he or she can't help but notice under proper lighting, is this resembles a picture that looks a lot like an atom colliding its photographic plate. When spectator starts unreeling the story further which starts at the center, then just like connect the dot, when he or she follows the lines it the picture becomes even more fuzzy as the spectator has to separate innuendo from all the name calling. He or She will wonder why they ever started at the center in the first place as they soon discover they should have started reading the book at the end first so to save time. Why would he or she pay a subscription fee to join the chaos is beyond me. I think there should be no change with respect to EBK's filtering of posts, one thing it teaches us is how to become better writers first of all, second to be more respectful of others point of view. Think of it this way, a Lister has thrown you a fastball, so your job is to puzzle-out the curve into something that resembles a straight line. If this were Usenet or some free-for-all public forum, you would likely reverse it with a more powerful curve when referring to this person as a colorful metaphor. As the Archive will show, two years ago I wrote this thing to an UpDates Lister, so this researcher has his full array of colorful metaphor, and just in a minute when my next post is
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Another Response To The Peter Jennings UFO From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:39:21 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:29:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Another Response To The Peter Jennings UFO >From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:51:11 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Another Response To The Peter Jennings UFO Special >(Another response to the Peter Jennings UFO special. This one is >by a friend of John Mack's who prefers to remain anonymous; I am >posting on his or her behalf). >----- >John and I used to have chats in his kitchen about where we >thought this phenomenon was "at", and what we thought were the >next steps the larger cultural conversation needed to take. <snip> This seems a sincere account, a fair indictment, and a valid admonition, forgetting it's a ready answer to those too easily satisfied with whatever dry bone a worshiped mainstream will
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Pelicanist - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:44:01 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:34:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Ledger >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:39:05 EST >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:21:03 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:14:15 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist <snip> >Geez when will this end? <snip> It's probably going to end when you drop your silly minute-long, horizontal flight, meteor theory, Brad. I see you proffering a great deal of math about flashes, which I think is a waste of time on both sides of the argument but no real math to support the meteor train, or any history to support it either. Not at altitudes of 2 miles or lower. If you want a peak behind Mt. Rainier, how about Granite Peak? It's on the backside of Mt. Rainier at about 10.5 thousand and slightly south east of the main peak. As for your altitude theory, you are basing your calculations on what Arnold said his altitude was. In fact he could only go with what his altimeter was reading. I've been telling you guys for years that what Arnold's altimeter was reading was calibrated using the station pressure/altimeter setting in Chehalis when he took off - it's usually right on the side of a tower or building somewhere on the mean point, windsock or wind tee, of the field-in feet - and it could have been out by a couple of thousand feet by the time he was over Mineral in the mountains. The barometric pressure in Chehalis would likely have been much different than over Mineral in the mountains. If Arnold had had a radio - which he didn't - he would have been updating his altimeter all along his track by calling various fields with radios and getting their station pressures. He might have been down around 7,000 feet - in fact he mentions they could have been 1,000 feet lower or higher than his altitude - or perhaps a bit higher than his 9k plus feet, but if much higher he would have been feeling the air thinning out. Once I get up past 9,500 feet on a warm day the density altitude - the altitude the airplane thinks it's at. Lift versus, thrust, versus drag - begins to tell on me. Breathing begins to labor for us lowlanders. Arnold mentioned that the air was really stable. This is easily determined by the fact that you aren't being thrown all over the sky by thermals. If it was nice and smooth that's the product of cool air which is great for aircraft efficiency and for "seeing". And acuity be damned. If you did enough of this you would know that seeing great distances in the air is commonplace. You can see details at fifty and seventy-five miles that would surprise you. I see nothing unusual about Arnold seeing objects at 50 miles away and the DC-4 at 15 miles. The distance between the DC-4's outer engines is about 55 feet - BTW. Note that at 15 miles Arnold was able to perceive the outer engines on the DC-4. These are about 6-7 feet long from prop spinner to the rear of the cowl fairing. One thing I notice is a bracketed phrase in Jerry's "The UFO Book" noting that both Mt. Rainier and Mt.Adams were north [should that have read "south" for Mt. Adam ?] of him. If Arnold was flying to Yakima from Chehalis, his track would have taken him between these two mountains. Mt. Adams would have been to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:55:09 -1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:56:12 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:28:50 EST >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:32:37 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>Best evidence for what? The existence of UFOs? >Michael: >Exactly. What you and the "disclosure" crowd cannot come to >grips with, it seems, is that the case has not yet been made >that the UFOs are alien spacecraft, at least not to the point >where you or I could walk into a court of law, or a history >classroom, or a newspaper editor's office, and state with >certainty that this was so beyond a reasonable doubt (perhaps >not even to the "balance of probabilities" standard, although >I'd be willing to take a crack in front of an unbiased jury in a >civil trial). >UFOs exist. That can be proved, by the very fact that there are >a fairly large number of "unidentified flying object" sightings >out there that remain unexplained. That they are alien >spacecraft remains unproved. So the need to gather evidence >continues. Thank you for revealing your position which I find to be very puzzling given the enormous evidence that is publically available from a range of sources of the validity of the ETH. I agree that our respective responses to the available information leads us to our different conclusions. Yours the inconclusive, 'we need more evidence'! And my the more conclusive, 'let's move to understanding the implications of an ET presence that is covered up'. Basically, your position is just a rehash of what has been happening for the last fifty years or so since the First Estimate of the Situation by the Project Sign team in 1948. A conclusive statement was not politically acceptable on national security grounds. Donald Keyhoe's, "Flying Saucers are Real" article/book was also conclusive about the Flying Saucer phenomen. The ETH was accepted as the most plausible explanation by these researchers. Then we have evidence from the Roswell crash, leaked documents, etc. I don't see any great merit in your cautious hard facts approach which has kept the UFO field from growing and basically sticking to more rigorous criteria for investigating sightings cases. ><snip> >>If you want evidence of what's happening with waived Special >>Access Programs dealing with reverse engineering of ETVs, >>working with EBEs, you need to work with the whistleblower >>testimonies. That's were UFO research needs to go, unless >>you are dedicated to reinventing the wheel and doing in new >>novel ways what others such as Keyhoe have done before. >I have never said that "whistleblower" testimony is worthless, >or that it should be ignored. What I maintain is that the >alleged "whistleblowers" need to be vetted with a far more >rigorous methodology than you and others have employed. Can you give me an example of a whistleblower testimony concerning reversed engineered ETVs or working with EBEs that passes your vigorous vetting standard? >><snip> >>>People like Bob Lazar, Robert Dean, Clifford Stone, Dan Sherman, >>>etc., reveal much of what is happening but many UFO researchers >>>don't want to go there. >>>Those researchers who do venture into that field are criticized >>>for being credulous and sloppy, and not having the right >>>emphasis on hard evidence when the role of national agencies in >>>manipulating hard evidence is ignored. UFO research needs to >>>move on. >>Those "researchers" are criticized for being credulous and >>sloppy for a very good reason - because they are credulous and >>sloppy. Again with Lazar. What is your response to Stan >>Friedman, who posted a detailed critique of Sideshow Bob here >>just a couple of days ago? Do you have one? ><snip> >>Oh, I see, making your argument by assertion. Researchers are >>credulous and sloppy because you say so, hmm. You make no >>mention of different methodologies being used in analysing >>different sources of evidence as I've mentioned numerous times >>in earlier posts. It seems methodology is not part of your >>lexicon. There is a rigorous alternative to the nuts and bolts >>approach to evidence but you don't want to acknowledge that. >>Argument by assertion is not very compelling. I posted my reply >>to Stan's critique of Lazar which you perhaps didn't read. >Of course I read it. You should have kept reading my post, >below. As for the "rigorous" nature of your methodology, I have >yet to see any evidence of it. What I see instead is a >predisposition to accept what these people are saying as true, >because it fits in with your belief system. That isn't >methodology. Methodology requires checking of facts, searching >for evidence, that will either support or discredit the >"whistleblower" testimony. >However, your statement above is an excellent example of one the >propagandist's favourite tools - if you can't counter a person's >argument, start attacking them personally. Just because I don't >agree that your techniques amount to a "methodology" doesn't >mean that the word "methodology" isn't in my lexicon. Your >hubris is amazing. Not a personal attack at all. You just made an assertion: "Those "researchers" are criticized for being credulous and sloppy for a very good reason - because they are credulous and sloppy." You didn't give reasons supporting your point, you just said I should refer to Stan's earlier post which I had already replied to. I responded to the hubris in your statement, it's good that you finally acknowledge that there's hubris here even though you project it on to me. <snip> >I grant that coherence and consistency are part of the parcel, >as they can be checked. Sincerity and integrity are not things >that can be checked, however - they are subjective judgements. >On what do you base your opinion that a person is being sincere? >Or that they have integrity? >Here's what I base it on - can they offer some evidence (any >evidence!) that what they say is true. Can their credentials be >verified? If not, their sincerity and integrity are, to but the >best spin possible on it, in dispute. Thank you for acknowledging the relevance of these 'soft facts', coherence and consistency can be checked. As for being subjective judgements, that's true to an extent. I'm puzzled by your point that sincerity and integrity are not things that can be checked. I think that is a very important set of criteria that can be checked. I disagree with you. ><snip> >>One can reach a rigorous conclusion that somone is telling the >>truth without hard evidence. We do that all time. Do you demand >>hard evidence to prove that your wife is telling you the truth >>when she says that she spent the afternoon shopping with >>friends? To say someone is lying simply because the hard >>evidence isn't there is a poor methodology. >This might be the most ridiculous example you've used yet, and >it demonstrates the intellectual bankruptcy of your argument. My >wife? She earned that trust, over the years, unlike the >"whistleblowers" who seem to be granted that trust from the >get-go, as soon as they appear, because they are telling a >story that backs up things in which you already believe. >And, again, don't put words in my mouth. I never said that a >person is lying simply because the hard evidence isn't there to >back up their claims. I said that this is an indicator that >their testimony is questionable, and should not be accepted at >face value. At best, it belongs in Stan's grey basket. Yes I agree, it wasn't a good example. As for the whistleblowers earning trust from the get go, I think that there are some premises that people like myself and Steven Greer operate under when we might interview a whistleblower. One is the experience that national security agencies do tamper with the evidence and intimidate witnesses. Greer has interviewed a great number of whistleblowers and that gives him a lot of experience in identifying these 'soft' facts integrity, coherence, etc., that are necessary for determining the validity of whistleblower testimony. That makes it easier for researchers such as myself who want to work with the data to understand the implications of all this. I don't set a premium on hard evidence since different agencies will and do regularly remove this evidence. So if a whistleblower comes in with a story about reverse engineering ETV or working with EBEs, the story is assessed on the merits, rather than dismissed or put into the gray basket as inconclusive. That's where your basic mistake lies, you put the inconclusive data in the gray basket and let it sit, and haven't developed the methodology for working with it. Saying we need more hard evidence is a methodology, but it's inappropriate in this case. ><snip> >>I do believe Stan went overboard when he made that claim >>regarding Lazar. That is especially the case when it comes to >>credible claims that evidence tampering is going on and efforts >>underway to undermine witness credibility. >What are these credible claims you refer to? From whom? Cite >some examples, particularly with reference to Lazar. If you have >any, I'm willing to listen, but I haven't heard any "evidence" >(your word here, not mine) so far. I did cite a number of credible claims made by Lazar, that he did work at the Los Alamos Meson facility, that he did have evidence of working for Naval Intelligence in 1989 (the W2 form), that he did have a number of witnesses corroborate the flight testing of what he claimed was a reverse engineeered ETV on three separate occasions, that he provided the name of the individual who performed the background security check on him, and there were witnesses to this interview. That confirms that he was interviewed for the purpose of gaining a security clearance for a government/military agency in 1988/89. All this shows that he did have credible claims that validate his testimony. ><snip> >>Why wouldn't it be a logical policy for a Program Manager of a >>waived Special Access Program undermine the credibility of a >>whistleblower or remove any hard evidence possessed by the >>whistleblower? >>If a program is so secret that you don't even want members of Congress >>to know its existence, would you just sit back and allow someone >>like Bob Lazar to spill the beans if you were the Program >>Manager of such a program? If you take a look at the SOM1-01 >>Majestic Document, you'll see that Ch 3, section 1.12 refers to >>discrediting witnesses and outlines some of the methods of doing >>this. >A couple of points here: >1. When you start using MJ-12 documents as evidence to support >your position, you're on shaky ground; The Woods team has done a thorough analysis of SOM1-01 and found it to be credible. In my view it was a leaked document. I think putting things into the gray box because they are 'shaky' is really inappropriate. I take it for granted that work in this field will be characterized by much uncertainty, so I'm prepared to factor that in to my analysis. You don't want to work with any thing 'shaky'. That's your choice. I do strongly disagree with that and think it masks a dogmatic methodology that keeps the UFO field from growing. >2. If you wouldn't allow someone like Lazar to "spill the beans" >why would you not just kill him. Apparently the government can >do that (or so I hear), with all sorts of untraceable methods >(or so I hear). Why not take care of the problem that way? It >seems so much simpler; Yes, there are a number of questions raised by the Lazar case. I don't have all the answers, but I do want to work with his testimony since he has in my mind provided sufficient testimony/evidence to substantiate his story. My evidentiary threshold is obviously not set as high as yours. That's why I think you are being unrealistic and you of course think I'm being credulous. So we disagree. >3. I have stipulated elsewhere that the government is capable of >altering the government records of government employees (I'm not >convinced that they've done this, but I'll accept it for the >sake of argument). What you've failed to demonstrate is how they >could do this to a person's civilian records, particularly >evidence of his alleged university studies, ie, Lazar. I'll give >Lazar a second look on the day he can produce a copy of his >degree, or his transcripts, or testimony from ONE person at any >of these institutions he supposedly attended that he was there, >and that they knew him. Even a photo in the yearbook will do. To >suggest that the government would have erased all of his records >at the time he was attending the university is preposterous, >because he wasn't in government service at that time (unless the >government has precognitive powers we don't know about). So, he >must be in the yearbook, or a register of students. Anything. >Where is it? It's interesting that you have arbitrarily set the criteria for accepting the validity of Lazar's testimony in terms of his civilian records. I agree that there are questions about his education that have not been satisfactorily answered by Lazar himself who appears evasive when it comes to his university documents. Yet he was employed as a 'physicist' at Los Alamos as the Los Alamos Monitor suggests. I don't buy the argument that the reporter just wrote down what Lazar said. If you only have a bachelor's degree you won't refer to yourself as a 'physicist' in an in house publication such as the Los Alamos Monitor which would be read by your peers. Lazar would at the minimum have had a Master's to describe himself as a 'Physicist'. ><snip> >>>Your say that "UFO research needs to move on." >>>That is a siren call that, if followed as you propose, will >>>probably finish ufology as a place for serious research. >>Again, serious research for what? That UFOs are real and exist. >>Do you need more evidence? >I need more evidence that demonstrates they are extraterrestrial >in nature, yes. Ok, that's our basic difference here. You do need more evidence and I'm sure that there are others who will agree with you on that. On the other hand, I and many others don't need more evidence to be persuaded about the ETH and want to work with the available data to see what's going on in the deep black projects. We need to find a modus vivendi where you can continue your work in finding conclusive evidence, and I can do my thing with working with material that's in the 'gray box' without conclusive hard evidence. If we can find a modus vivendi without name calling, dismissive insults, etc., that would be progress. >>>So here's my siren call... >>>I would suggest that UFO research needs to move on, all right - >>>away from you and your whistleblowers (unless they can offer >>>some proof other than their word), and back to serious study of >>>serious evidence. >>Paul, let's be serious here. Lazar offered more than his word. >>He had a W-2 form showing he worked for Naval Intelligence in >>1989, he supplied the name of the checking officer for someone >>doing security checks for prospective Navy employees, he had >>witnesses to the testing of reverse engineered ETVs on three >>occassions while he claimed to be working at S4, he had a Los >>Alamos Monitor Article in 1982 which said he was employed as a >>'physist' at Los Alamos in 1982. To be employed as a physicist >>you would need to have at least a Master's degree. So in >>addition to the completion of a Bachelor's degree in 1976 he >>must have completed a Master's degree to get the job at Los >>Alamos. Stan's assertion that Lazar was a technician and didn't >>have a Master's doesn't make sense given the Los Alamos Monitor >>story. Have a look yourself at the story: >>http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/jetcar.htm >I've checked. Stan's questions still remain unanswered. Lazar >has offered nothing to substantiate his claims that stands up >under critical scrutiny. You've repeated this a number of times despite my having supplied answers for those claims which do stand critical scrutiny. I think you are being disingenuous here. >>Also, investigators such as Knapp have provided more evidence >>that Lazar was employed at Los Alamos through the phone book >>entry and other employees verifying this. Yet this is not enough >>to be considered 'serious evidence' for his claims for working >>at S-4. What do you expect? What Lazar claims to have worked for >>is at the very least a waived Special Access Program. Don't you >>think there would be security team in place to ensure that such >>hard evidence dissappears, and that Lazar's credibility is ><undermined? >His credibility is undermined because he can neither >substantiate his government claims nor his civilian ones. >>I want UFO research to move forward into the area of classified >>programs on ETVS, EBEs, etc., and this is what many of the >>whistleblowers in Greer's Disclosure Project, and others such as >>Lazar, Robert Dean, Charles Hall, supply. You'd like more >>serioues evidence for the 'serious study' of UFOs as a real >>phenomenon. Sorry to say, but I think you are caught in a time >>warp anomaly of some kind. >One of us is caught in a time warp, all right, but it's you, not >me. You want to take people back to 1950, and Frank Scully - the >unquestioning acceptance of anyone's word so long as they are >saying the things that you want to hear, that back up what you >already believe to be the truth. >It's a condition that from hereon in I'll call "Scullyism". >There is a cure, fortunately. I and others have already set out >the prescription. I have no doubt as to whether you'll take the >medicine; alas, some cases of Scullyism are already too far >advanced to treat. >For the rest, no time like the present. Hopefully we can move beyond dismissive labels. I think I have legitimate arguments in why whistleblower testimony should be analysed despite the lack of hard evidence to conclusively prove their claims. There is considerably uncertainty here and we need to acknowledge that is a necessary condition for working in this field which has enormous national security implications. There is also the very real and acknowledged power of the Program Managers of waived Special Access Programs to set their own security procedures without any civilian oversight. Logically, it follows that unscrutinized security procedures will result in the kind of discrediting and evidence tampering I've suggested when it comes to whistleblowers. I'm glad you acknowledge that this happens but I think that your dismissal of the Lazar case shows that you are not willing to back your rhetorical support for such a process with a logical appraisal of the circumstances concerning Lazar. Lazar gives us insight into the world of black projects and the security procedures in place to deal with whistleblowers. Let me finish by repeating the question: "Can you name one whistleblower who claims to have worked on projects involving reverse engineered ETVs or EBEs that you acknowledge as credible?" If you can't, then my conclusion is that despite your 'openess' to the argument of evidence tampering by the agencies, you effectively close the door on this by your insistence on hard facts that stand critical scrutiny. I find that to be disingenous. I believe my argument that the UFO field has to move forward by seriously considering whistleblower testimonies
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: ABC UFO Special Seeing Is Being Underwhelmed - From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 14:03:47 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:57:57 -0500 Subject: Re: ABC UFO Special Seeing Is Being Underwhelmed - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:40:33 -0600 >Subject: Re: ABC UFO Special Seeing Is Being Underwhelmed >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:21:29 -0600 >>Subject: Re: ABC UFO Special Seeing Is Being Underwhelmed ><snip> >>And consider, there is no place in the effort for the likes of >>skeptibunky pelicanists and conflicted klasskurtxians as they >>are the darlings of the mainstream, anyway, and their >>regressional spewing can be had, otherwise, _everywhere_ else. >>This is forgetting, of course, that they lack the requisite >>sack to participate, regardless, in a substantive way because of >>their lack of any success in legitimate debate... >Hi Alfred, >Absolutely right. This must be a "best evidence for UFOs" kind >of thing, rather than a point/counterpoint. Point taken, Kyle. After all how many SETI dedicated productions [i.e. NOVA] have UFO researchers debunking SETI buffs. The producers don't go after the mainstream astronomers and ask them whether SETI is a waste of time. Or plumbers or creationists, for that matter. Incidentally, the black astronomer[forget his name-anyone know it?] who was on Jenning's report and was violently opposed to anecdotal rewports of witness sightings is a regular on NOVA programs-most recently the Origins of life and the birth of our planet and Solar system.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 'Ice Circles' - St. Catharines, Ontario From: CCCRN News <cccrnnews.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:04:44 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:04:21 -0500 Subject: 'Ice Circles' - St. Catharines, Ontario CCCRN NEWS E-News from the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network February 28, 2005 http://www.cccrn.ca _____________________________ Circular spots along with more random shapes in snow-covered canal ice (Welland Canal), found in early January, 2005 (not reported until February 26). While quite possibly simply areas where the ice has melted, the near-perfect circular shapes of many of them is interesting, including the sharply-defined edges. Found just before the canal was drained, as it is each winter, and the day after the snowfall. A ground photo has been posted to the CCCRN web site (see the Other Circular Phenomena in Canada Archive). _____________________________ 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 projects and events, sent free to your e-mail
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Another Surgeon's View Of 'Alien Autopsy' - From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:21:52 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:08:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Another Surgeon's View Of 'Alien Autopsy' - >From: Joachim Koch <lists.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:58:42 +0100 >Subject: Re: Another Surgeon's View Of 'Alien Autopsy' >>From: Wendelle Stevens <s18195a.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 23:20:15 EST >>Subject: Re: Another Surgeon's View Of 'Alien Autopsy' >>There seems to be a lot of unnecessary confusion about that >>Santili autopsy film, and there is no reason for it, if one was >>to look at the realities. ><snip> >>To put Michael Hesseman down for his role in this is a disgrace, >>as he is the only one I know of who really went there and did >>the spadework. I was with him. I know this was strictly real, >>and there is no doubt about it in my mind. Wendelle, I guess you haven't been following the AA threads on UpDates but there are other persons doing "spadework". Why not visit: http://www.thewhyfiles.net/gehrman.htm and tell me what you think. I certainly agree that there is a "lot of unnecessary confusion about that Santili autopsy film". I don't think this state of affairs is necessary or inevitable. I recomend "Beyond Roswell" by Michael Hesemann and Philip Mantle for starters and then a brief review of my research. >Thank you very much for this information. >I am not in the position to put Mr. Hesemann (his name and >correct spelling is: Michael Hesemann) down in any way for the >real work he has done. It is only that no one here - at least >the ones I knew - could stand his presence physically anymore >because of his egocentric behaviour to be the greatest, the >best, the most informed one with the best connections to >everyone because everyone was - in his eyes - his friend. But if >he was with you and you all could research, find and prove some >solid evidence - fine! >Regarding the film: please - and all the others are invited to >do it - have a look at the website of: >Joe Longo, SOC >President, International Combat Camera Association >http://www.soc.org/opcam/a_autopsy/alienautopsy.html Joachim, It's not Joe Longo's opinion I'm concerned with but yours. If you're going to be critical, at least you can keep up with the latest information. Theresa Carlson's research has been demolished by Neil Morris's insights and analysis of the same footage she examined. And I have verified the cameraman's story by finding the crash site he described in detail. This is not the site found by MH and Wendelle. Where have you been during the discussion of this new site information You must pay attention if you intend to have an informed opinion. >Another item: M. Hesemann - who always nearly went hysteric here >when someone dared to question the 'reality' of the AA footage - > distributed (and earned ..?) a video with the footage 'to be >the uncut material as it came from the reels'. What do you think this means? >We showed this 'Hesemann video' to a German film specialist and >he was surprised how many (!) cuts (visibly to the trained eye) >there were in the footage. Was this his opinion or did he have some objective way to measure these "cuts"? >So the suggestion is not too far away that the whole thing was >never produced on film but only on video and what we saw was the >original production on video and the allegation that there >should exist 'cans of film' is only another part of the scam. None of the above information is correct. The person who transferred the film to video has been interviewed by Philip M and has said he worked with very old and degraded film and the video was produced from that footage. >As far as I know - Kodak has never received a part of the 'film' >from a reel they would like to choose neither from Mr. Santilli >(still smiling, Ray?..) nor from his alledged German/Austrian >friend. Alone this name 'Spielberg' is too ridiculous. Are you saying that this person (Spielberg) doesn't exist? >Do you really think that there wouldn't have been any >attempt/assault by Intelligence Services to get hold of the >'cans' if they were 'real'? But nothing. Neither Santilli nor >his friend have ever reported to have been contacted or >threatened by any of those 'Black Men'. Ray has never reported his visit with US government agents, but it did occur. Ray indicated to me that it took place but any discussion "would have to be put on the back burner" >Nothing at all. The greates mystery revealed on film - and no >attempt to prevent the official announced showing in London? >Well... By that time, Ray had already shown the footage to a group of US Senators and representatives and to religious leaders. The film was in a protective vault. There wasn't much that could be done. So instead of killing Ray directly, those in the cat-bird seats selected you to represent them on the field. Onward! soldier. >And so much more... Have you viewed the uncut footage?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:05:48 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:13:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - >From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >To: <- UFO UpDates Subscribers -> >Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 5:05 PM >Subject: UFO UpDate: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program >Source: The John E. Mack Institute >http://johnemackinstitute.org/center/center_news.asp?id=249 >Feb 25, 2005 >Budd Hopkins' Response >to the ABC Peter Jennings "Seeing is Believing" TV Program >Courtesy of the Intruders Foundation >During the past year Jenning's producers interviewed me a number >of times, and because I sensed what they had in mind, I made, as >a preemptive strike, a number of careful, highly specific >observations about the UFO abduction phenomenon. All of these >crucial points - recorded by ABC on videotape - were designed to >underline the physical reality of UFO abductions and to >demonstrate the implausibility of current skeptical >explanations. >To its shame, ABC suppressed _all_ of these observations. <snip> I never saw the Jennings program, but it sounds as if what is needed is a 2-hour documentary solely on abductions. Otherwise the topic cannot get a fair hearing. (Neither can UFO crashes in that time). But you have to consider the viewers. How would the average member of the public take to a 2-hour long documentary on UFO abductions? Had there been such a program, then Budd Hopkins should have been asked to give details of, say, the 3 or 4 best abduction cases he has worked on. These cases would, presumably, be those he insists were definitely not due to sleep paralysis, and in which the abductees were not hypnotically regressed. One of them might even have 'physical evidence' in support. The program, for a fair balance, would then have had to to produce a skeptic to counter each case. It is doubtful if they could ever find one who had studied the cases in any depth. (Has any skeptic studied any particular abduction case in depth, except perhaps the Hill case?) Thus there would have been nobody to refute Hopkins on these cases, and he would have had the field to himself and, presumably, won the debate. Similarly, if Jennings had asked Hopkins to name some of the "numerous" psychologists & mental health professionals he claims accept his UFO abductions as physical events, unless these professionals were prepared to appear on the show to confirm this, we would be left in the situation (as we are), of unsubstantiated allegations. Who are these people? To name just two or three would be a start. The other possibility is that the three or four abductees should appear on the show themselves. It is exceedingly doubtful if they would be willing, due in part to the insistence on confidentiality. (Linda perhaps?) So once again, the program could make no real progress towards confirming abduction reality. There is no way the abduction topic can get even a partially fair treatment without, I suspect, at least a 2-hour program
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:15:02 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:14:26 -0500 Subject: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? Hi Listers, If you were interviewed for the ABC special, could you please drop me a line with a short account of your interview whether you were in the final product or not. My take on ABC's piece: http://www.ufowatchdog.com/abcfluff.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:21:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:16:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:22:13 -0500 >Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night >>From: Adam Lowe <subbie.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:31:59 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night >>Thanks to Larry, David, Terry and Colin for your replies. I'm >>glad that the NICAP site was not alone in seeing an increase in >>hits. >I,too, had an increase of about 50% over the daily average. >There was also an increase during the beginning of the week with >Monday being a peak, then dropping down on Wednesday and peaking >again on Friday. Hi Bruce: Your observations mirror mine almost exactly. There seemed to be some 'anticipation' of the show, 2 or 3 days before, with a bulge in site visits the day after.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:27:18 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:18:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch >From: Adam Lowe <subbie.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:31:59 -0500 >Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night >Hi Errol, List, >Thanks to Larry, David, Terry and Colin for your replies. I'm >glad that the NICAP site was not alone in seeing an increase in >hits. >Like Larry's site, the NICAP site traffic increased a few days >before the show aired. On Monday there were 511 hits compared to >186 the previous day. The traffic then decreased a little for a >couple of days but was still above the norm and then came the >1000+ hits on Thursday. On Friday we had about 840 hits but the figures are now dropping off. >I put UFO in Yahoo and the NICAP site doesn't appear on any of >the first 10 pages that I checked, but the results for >unidentified flying objects has us as the high up the first page >which may account for why our site saw such an immediate >increase. >Thanks again to all who replied. Hi Adam Maybe it had to do with all the pre-show publicity and hype. Try searching for 'ufo sightings' (no quotes) on both Google and Yahoo. You site will likely rate higher. Just plain UFO brings up music groups, alien invasion games, and every junk UFO site under the sun. For the worst of the junk sites, look for 'UFO Sightings' or
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:44:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:21:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - >Source: The John E. Mack Institute >http://johnemackinstitute.org/center/center_news.asp?id=249 >Feb 25, 2005 >Budd Hopkins' Response >to the ABC Peter Jennings "Seeing is Believing" TV Program >Courtesy of the Intruders Foundation >During the past year Jenning's producers interviewed me a number >of times, and because I sensed what they had in mind, I made, as >a preemptive strike, a number of careful, highly specific >observations about the UFO abduction phenomenon. All of these >crucial points - recorded by ABC on videotape - were designed to >underline the physical reality of UFO abductions and to >demonstrate the implausibility of current skeptical >explanations. >To its shame, ABC suppressed _all_ of these observations. <snip> >So what can one say about such a deliberately dishonest >presentation as Peter Jenning's "Seeing is Believing" take on >abductions? Perhaps one can only shrug and warn, yet again, that >the incurious members of the press and the many blinkered, >conservative scientists had better collectively pull their heads >up out of the sand and join us in our work. Whatever one's >personal attitude toward the UFO abduction phenomenon, science >insists that an extraordinary phenomenon demands an >extraordinary investigation. What ABC served up on Thursday >night was, instead, an extraordinary whitewash of the abduction >phenomenon, and a brutal suppression of the evidence for what >may well be the most portentous event in human history. >Peter Jennings and his staff should be ashamed Hi All, Budd's frustration is palpable. I can empathize/identify with Budd. But the ones I really feel for are all of you. We (abductees/witnesses) are being denied a fair public hearing. But you are being denied the facts. You are being denied the truth. And by the very experts and institutions that you trust to deliver it to you. NOVA dropped the UFO ball in 1995 and now Jennings has fumbled it yet again. In both instances 'easy way out' and intellectually lazy explanations are substituted for analysis and the weighing of facts. The 'viewer' never has to strain his/her brain by actually having to 'think their way through' the material on their own. The public is not trusted to arrive at its own conclusions. The media 'omits', officialdom 'denies', and scientists of all stripes have completely abrogated all responsibility and simply dropped the ball on this one. The 'ridicule response' that has been conditioned into the public mind on this subject almost insures that few will report at all. And as Budd mentioned above, that includes many credible, credentialed individuals whose testimony would lend much weight the collection of reports of 'alien' intervention. Alien abduction reports can only represent one of two things; either the reports are of 'events' that actually happen as the witnesses/ victims claim, or they are not and they are 'something else.' Until a proper and detailed investigation is conducted, in the public mind, it will simply remain the ravings of lunatics and fodder for punch lines. 20 years hence we will all be running around in this same squirrel cage if something isn't done to find reliable answers -NOW.-
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:46:19 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:35:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Hatch >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:23:04 -0500 >Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:14:54 +0100 >>Subject: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >>Is there any way to secure all the footage that did not make >>the final cut, for posterity? >>Can some people (for instance, Wendy Connors) ask for a copy >>of all the raw material? >One could ask, but it would highly unlikely for producers to >release un-used footage, for a variety of reasons. Both used and unused footage was gained at considerable trouble and expense. I doubt they would throw it all away. Maybe they will file it somewhere, for possible use as snippets to fill out future productions.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:41:49 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:17:10 EST >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:33:16 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:30:06 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >Your say that "UFO research needs to move on." >That is a siren call that, if followed as you propose, will >probably finish ufology as a place for serious research. >So here's my siren call... >I would suggest that UFO research needs to move on, all right >- away from you and your whistleblowers (unless they can >offer some proof other than their word), and back to serious >study of serious evidence. Paul et al, I've been unimpressed with the arguments levied against Dr. Salla and am reminded of a horse race with every runner wearing blinkers so that he can see nowhere else other than straight ahead of him. This scope of thinking is so focused that it's bordering on being myopic. Exopolitics is undeniably flawed at the moment due to the weakness of witness credibility but those within that field are not blind to this and are working at it. But what it ushers in is a new way of looking at things and that is not to be rejected. Was every one of Greer's witnesses lying or living in some bizarre fantasy world? Somewhere in all of that were various pots of gold that have bypassed many on this List. Last year, David Rudiak cornered General Wesley Clark and asked him if he had ever been briefed on the subject of UFOs. The General gave an evasive response which was nevertheless helpful. But what if he'd said, "Yes, I was and this is what they told me." We'd have all believed him like a shot. Why him and why not others? I'm prepared to give exopolitcs a chance. I'm not going to commit myself absolutely to it but I will watch it with a wary eye. I'm certainly not going to write it off. And as I read the responses to Dr. Salla which have crossed over into abuse at times, I wonder if those on this List who accuse "believers" of a religious piousness and pursuit have the insight and wherewithal to recognise that their own blind dogma
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: If Aliens Can Visit How Did They Get Here? - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:58:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:46:21 -0500 Subject: Re: If Aliens Can Visit How Did They Get Here? - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 15:57:51 -0600 >Subject: If Aliens Can Visit How Did They Get Here? >Source: Kerala Next - India >http://www.keralanext.com/news/indexread.asp?id=130627 >02-26-05 >If Aliens Can Visit, How Did They Get Here? >Space Travel Defies Human Lifespans, But There May Be Loopholes >There have been countless accounts of alien visitations around >the world, but one of the things that prompts skepticism is how >they would get here in the first place. >If aliens are from another world, they must have some >extraordinary means of travel - nothing like what is available >anywhere on Earth. It is hard to underestimate the difficulty of >going from star to star. >"The distances are so vast, the energy requirements are so >extreme, it would be very, very difficult to travel between the >stars," said James McGaha, a retired Air Force pilot. >A law of science, determined by Albert Einstein, says nothing can >travel faster than the speed of light - 186,000 miles per second. >The fastest object made by man, the Voyager spacecraft is >travelling along at 11 miles per second. At that rate, the >scientific probe Voyager, launched in 1977, would take 73,000 >years to reach the nearest star. This is one of the many totally misleading statements from the ABC special. The Voyager spacecraft has no propulsion system on it! It has been coasting since it left the vicinity of earth. It would be the equivalent of saying that at my normal walking speed it would take me 150 days to get to California. But I will be flying out on the 15th of March to speak at MUFON Orange County on March 16 and then MUFON LA on the 17th. Even from here in Fredericton, NB, it won't take 10 hours. My topic, very apropros in the context of ABC, is Government UFO Lies. I debated McGaha. As with the SETI cultists on the show, he knows nothing about UFOs and nothing aout deep space travel. It was also stated that the fastest speed we have reached for an object is 11 miles per second. This is a total lie. We physicists have created particles moving at 186,000 mps. in accelerators. >As a result, some scientists think that sort of space travel is a >waste of time. >"Scientifically, we have a rule: you want to be alive at the end >of your experiment, not dead," said Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson, >director of the Rose Center's Hayden Planetarium at the >American Museum of Natural History in New York. I am reminded of another astronomer Dr. Campbell who 1n 1941 "scientifically" proved that the required launch weight of a rocket to take a man to the moon would have to be a million million tons He was off by a factor of 300 million. There is nothing in the training and education and work experience of astronomers that give them any insight in to interstellar travel.. no less lunar travel. >Einstein's Wormhole Loophole >If humans can't travel to the stars, many scientists say >extraterrestrial life can't come here either. One would think we were the crown of creation rather than at the bottom of the heap with all of 100 years of technology behind us. 100 years ago we weren't building high speed omputers or googling anybody either I should note that 43 years ago I worked on the development of fusion propulsion systems which can eject charged particles having 10 Million times as much energy per particle as they can get in a chemical rocket. Also we tested nuclear fission rocket engines in the 1960s.On my website there is listed a video of my formal debate with McGaha. Also there is an article challenge to SETI specialists..... >However, Michio Kaku, one of the leading theoretical physicists >in the world, says many scientists are too quick to dismiss the >idea of other civilizations visiting Earth. >Einstein may have said nothing can go faster than the speed of >light, but he also left a loophole, said Kaku, a professor at the >City University of New York. In Einstein's theory, space and >time is a fabric. >Kaku explained: "In school we learned that a straight line is the >shortest distance between two points. But actually that's not >true. You see, if you fold the sheet of paper and punch a hole >through it, you begin to realize that a wormhole is the shortest >distance between two points." >A civilization that could harness the power of stars might be >able to use that shortcut through space and time, and perhaps >bridge the vast distances of space to reach Earth, he said. >"The fundamental mistake people make when thinking about >extraterrestrial intelligence is to assume that they're just like >us except a few hundred years more advanced. I say open your >mind, open your consciousness to the possibility that they are a >million years ahead," he said. >Kaku believes that only this type of civilization - millions of >years more advanced that us and capable of using wormholes as >shortcuts - could reach Earth and might be one explanation for >UFOs. >"When you look at this handful of [UFO] cases that cannot be >easily dismissed, this is worthy of scientific investigation," he >said. "Maybe there's nothing there. However, on that off chance >that there is something there, that could literally change the >course of human history. So I say let this investigation begin." There is of course far more than a handful of good UFO cases... not to say the 3000 physical trace cases collected by Ted Phillips... and ignored on ABC so they could say there was no
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 19:12:29 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:31:53 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:09:37 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:33:16 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >><snip> >>People like Bob Lazar, Robert Dean, Clifford Stone, Dan Sherman, >>etc., reveal much of what is happening but many UFO researchers >>don't want to go there. >http://www.ufomind.com/area51/people/lazar/ultimate.html >QF: Could you reveal some of your professors at M.I.T. and > Cal-Tech? >BL: Yeah, if you want. I don't have a list of them here. Dr. > Duxler I think was one of them. And Hohsfield was another. >QF: Hohsfield? > >BL: Hohsfield. H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D, or something along those lines. >QF: Would he remember you? >BL: Oh, yeah. Hohsfield I know will. >QF: These are at M.I.T. or Cal-Tech? >BL: Hohsfield was at M.I.T. Duxler was at Cal-Tech. >http://alum.mit.edu/ne/noteworthy/hockfield-thank-you.html >H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D >H-O-C-K-F-I-E-L-D >N-O-P-E <g> And of course William Duxler never taught at Cal Tech and only at Pierce JC which Lazar briefly attended. So Lazar lied through his teeth. PJC is hardly MIT or Cal Tech.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Firmage On Jennings' Documentary From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:41:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:40:55 -0500 Subject: Firmage On Jennings' Documentary From: Joe Firmage <snip> To: Frank DeMarco <snip> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:27:11 -0800 I don't offer many public comments on this subject these days, as my time is necessarily focused on other equally important agendas. But given the unique nature of the ABC broadcast, I would like to offer a few comments. 1 - Another, compatible explanation for the strengths and weaknesses of the program is this: the "limited hangout". Clearly, rational and objective observers watching the first half of the program would conclude that the core of the phenomenon is real and of ET origin, particularly if they are sufficiently well read to realize that the testimonies offered represent just a tiny fraction of the rugged observational evidence available today. Yet, from the third quarter of the program, rational and objective observers unfamiliar with the full dimensions of the evidence would likely conclude that even the most secretive of government agencies has nothing under wraps. The treatment of the history of and evidence for a highly classified, partially-privatized program involving hardware recovery and possibly much more was completely absent from the program, and any implication of such was shot down summarily by the treatment of the Roswell case. Whatever one may think of that particular case, there is no question that this program's treatment of the larger question - of the available body of evidence of classified programs involving hardware and biology - was either intentionally suppressed, or simply eliminated from the narrative due to its controversy and complexity. I'm surely willing to give ABC and Jennings the benefit of the doubt on that question. I know for a fact that very few folks are "in the loop" on issues deeper than those explicitly revealed in the program. That loop likely includes no one directly in the ABC orbit. So a purely pragmatic interpretation of the weaknesses of the program - and the desire for ratings as justification for the program in the first place - is fully sufficient to explain the approach taken by ABC. But either way, the effect, intentional or not, was the perfect limited hangout for the current administration. After all, if you're in power today, and you know that the great secret is in the process of coming out, but you'd rather the public not know how deep the military-industrial-intelligence programs really go, this program was spot on message. 2 - The arguments of the debunkers were unconvincing, to say the least. It is insulting to generations of scientists everywhere to suggest that 'eyewitness testimony is the least credible' kind of evidence. This assertion is particularly indefensible in domains that involve biological systems, where predictability of location and periodicity of phenomenon are often impossible in principle. How would a zoologist or anthropologist react to such a sweeping assertion as made by many of the physicists and astronomers interviewed in the program? Yes, the particulars of eyewitness testimony are subject to great margins of error. That is one main reason why statisticians have jobs. The implications of the statistical evidence compiled over decades of eyewitness testimony concerning this phenomenon are clear. Consider an analogy: imagine that we're all fish swimming close to one coral reef in a vast ocean. A tiny number of fish report having seen "giant beings, thousands of lengths longer that we, swimming below and around our home". Of course, blue whales are a rare sight for the Nemos of our world. Other reef fish ridicule the observers, since the observers can offer no predictable schedule or locations for observing such creatures. It is remarkably arrogant to suggest that we humans, after less than 50,000 days during which we even knew of the existence of things called "galaxies", fully appreciate the possibilities of far more ancient fish in the cosmic ocean. These arguments become even more relevent if there is a reason - like some kind of prime directive - that dictates a threshold of interaction between ancient, highly advanced civilizations and the barely newborn civilization of human beings on Earth. Why would they "land on the White House lawn" until they deem we're good and ready to join their civilization? Would we behave any differently if we were observing from above a young garden world with its more primitive children weilding nuclear matchsticks in petty conflicts that should otherwise be easily resolved? Would we wish to bequeath to them far greater powers than those they are already abusing? 3 - Which brings me to the third observation. Michio Kaku's comments are quite profound, as they represent the beginning of a wedge in the "mainstream" physics community concerning the appraisal of UFO evidence. I prefer the science of Puthoff, Haisch, Hestenes and others (polariziable vacuum interpretation of general relativity, origin of inertia and weight in charge-ZPF interactions, physical interpretation of quantum mechanical behaviors, respectively) to explain how such wonders as interstellar travel may one day become everyday. But Kaku's position is of great value in advancing the dialogue on this subject within the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Correction - ABC News Special & Stan Friedman From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:00:36 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:43:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Correction - ABC News Special & Stan Friedman All: With respect to the offer for copies of Stanton T. Friedman is Real and Do You Believe in Majic... Egads! I typed in USD by mistake!! As the smartest woman of all time - Buffy the Vampire Slayer - would say, "My bad." As an explanation, I can only plead greed. I am a both a film and television producer _and_ a lawyer, after all:) Seriously, it should of course read Canadian dollars! Otherwise, it wouldn't be much of a deal, even with the American dollar tanking on a daily basis... So, the terms remain the same, only now in Canadian dollars, ie. the good old greenback/blueback/purpleback/brownback (colour changes depending upon denomination). We're so smart up here, we have to colour-code our money!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:11:42 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:45:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - >From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:47:44 -0500 >Subject: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing <snip> >There was no mention of the more than 400 witnesses to the Roswell >event. Not all of these people are flakes or hoaxers. No, and not all of them are witnesses - not by a long shot. This is a term that is tossed around far too casually in the field of ufology, and it's overuse debases it's value when referring to true witnesses, defined by Black's Law Dictionary as: "Witness, n. In general, one who, being present, personally sees or perceives a thing; a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness." How many of those are there, really, for Roswell? How many of that number are truly credible? A much, much smaller number. When one makes outlandish claims like "400 witnesses", the real witnesses get lost in the shuffle, and it makes it easier for people to dismiss the case. >To suppport the Mogul theory, Jennings trotted out Karl Pflock >without mentioning that Karl is CIA and a former deputy >asstistant secretary of defense. So what? The implication here is that Karl is still working for them? But where is the proof? Why should they be obliged to mention it? If we thing Karl is still working for the government, and can't be trusted (a ridiculous proposition, in my view, but the one that is insinuated in Marrs' statement, above), why isn't that allegation levelled at so-called "whistleblowers" who used to (or still, in some cases, at least allegedly) work for the government? Are they hunky-dory because they're pro-UFO, but Karl isn't? What about Major Kevin Randle? What about Stan Friedman, who spent years working under security for the government? Do we only believe ex-government types when they agree with us? What about Steven Greer, who trots out his "briefing" with James Woolsey all the time? Woolsey was a lot further up the food chain than Karl. Of course, this also ignores the fact that Karl (who is a big boy, and can defend himself, but...) has repeatedly stated that some UFO sightings are extraterrestrial in nature. He, like more than a few others on this list, just doesn't buy Roswell. Fair enough. If you disagree with him, stick to the facts. I don't mind it when people disagree with Karl - heck, I do it all the time. But his past government employment is not relevant to the discussion, in any way, shape or form, unless you can show solid evidence - not
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Pelicanist - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:54:13 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:48:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Rudiak >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:39:05 EST >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:21:03 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist <snip> >>Thanks for pointing these out, David. Pyramid Peak at 6900 ft >>looks like a good bet to me. There's a topo map of it at: >http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=46.8069&lon=-121.8111 >Geez when will this end? I made a one-sentence personal comment >and now comes this torrent of argument. This requires a lot of >research and presentation covering hundreds of pages and won't >be resolved in an email or two, nor do I have time for this. >Too bad for your theory but Arnold drew in his one and only >drawing of the terrain scene of his sighting, done on the back >of his company's manila envelope about June 25, 1947, that the >objects were (as he captioned it) at 10,000 feet, Arnold thought the objects were slightly above his visual horizon. Since he said he was at 9200 feet elevation, he placed the elevation little above this. In his A.F. letter, he estimated 9500 ft, not 10,000 ft. As Don Ledger, a very experienced pilot, has pointed out previously, it is very difficult to accurately gauge the true visual horizon, especially since the nose of the plane is tilted a little bit up. Suppose the nose was tilted up ~2 degrees. If the objects were at the same altitude (neglecting the slight effects of Earth's curvature), then they would actually have been 2 degrees _below_ the planes tilt, or the "true" visual horizon. Suppose Arnold thought them at 9500-10,000 feet, then they would have been only slightly less than this by about .1-. 4 degrees, or 1.6-1.9 degrees below his upward tilt. If they were actually 2500 feet below him, or at 6700 feet elevaton, then the downward angle would have been increased by about 1.1 deg to 3.1 deg. So what this amounts to is the ability of Arnold to distinguish the true visual horizon below him from about a degree or less up or down. That's where a mistake could have happened. >not your 6,000 ft speculation, Pyramid Peak is 6900 ft. The "speculation" was based on Arnold also saying that the elevation of the objects didn't seem to change much, and when they were south of Mt. Rainier they seemed to weave in and out.of the mountain peaks there. These peaks typically run around 6000 feet, give a take a few hundred feet. >and it was on a horizontal line that did not dip >down in front of Mt Rainier but actually sloped _up_ slightly >higher and apparently behind Rainier as shown by the solid >line from the sky converting to a dotted line when over Rainier. >The dotted line also trails out over Rainier, as if it was not >actually of objects seen but their unseen path _behind_ >Rainier had to be inferred by Arnold. You seem to be be putting an awful lot of reliance on what sounds like a crude sketch on the back of an envelope and ignoring Arnold's many, many clear statements that the objects flew in _front_ of Mt. Rainier, such as saying they were on the west side of Rainier. >Arnold's drawing of what he later called the "jagged peak" >jutting out from Rainier's summit, is shown on his drawing off >to the right, not in front of Rainier down way way low where >Pyramid Peak is actually located. The "jagged peak" was >clearly Little Tahoma off to the right of Rainier's summit. If that were true, then Arnold would have had X-ray vision. Little Tahoma isn't just "right" of Rainier. It's in _back_ of Rainier and 3400 feet lower. It was _invisible_ from his altitude and position near Mineral, WA, being completely concealed by the ridge lines on the south side of Rainier. I have a Topo USA program which _proves_ this. I can generate terrain profiles to Little Tahoma from Mineral and points south. It isn't until you get at least 4 miles south of Mineral that the very tip of Tahoma might become _barely_ visible, and the tip doesn't become clearly visible above the ridges slope until about 6 miles south of Mineral. Whatever Arnold's "jagged peak" was, it clearly wasn't Little Tahoma. Brad, if you want anyone to take you meteor theory seriously, a good place to start would be with all the other reports that such a spectacular chain of meteors should have generated from areas hundreds of miles east of Rainier where the actual trajectory of such meteors would have been. They should have drawn the attention of hundreds, if not thousands of people in eastern Washington and Oregon and over Idaho and been widely reported. But since nobody knows of any such reports even after searching
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Daniel Sheehan - Hicks From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:04:34 +0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:51:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Daniel Sheehan - Hicks >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:05:55 -0600 >Subject: Daniel Sheehan [was: Applying Uncertainty Principle To UFO Research] >>From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:07:54 +0800 >>Subject: Re: Applying Uncertainty Principle To UFO Research <snip> >>Daniel Sheehan. He seems to be risking a lot (in a >>professional sense) if he were found guilty of perpetrating a >>fraud. De-barring at the least. Yet his testimony was pretty >>wild e.g. he stated that he saw photographs of crashed saucers. <snip> >While I cannot state categorically that Sheehan is not telling >the truth <snip> Is this testable? For example, would the body/bodies responsible for the law profession find the situation worth probing? I asked
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 02:19:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:55:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:20:25 -0800 >Subject: Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:13:51 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:57:30 EST >>>Subject: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special? >>They portrayed the Roswell "bit" as an attempt by everyone >>involved to make $$$ and get famous. Including Pflock, I >>suppose(and C.B. Moore). >And Klass and Korff. But we forget. When debunkers get book >deals to debunk UFOs, it's not "moneygrubbing" - it's called >"setting the record straight." When national pundits making >millions debunk it's called "journalism" or "investigative >reporting" or "the public's right to know." Isn't that the truth!! >>I wonder hw much money Jesse Marcel made from >>making up his basic Roswell story. I wonder how much money >>Jenning made disparaging Marcel... and his son, the doctor, who >>volunteered for work in Iraq. >Jennings makes millions a year punditing. No reason for him not >to play it safe. He can't bring himself to play it straight on >a lot of stories, such as the lies Bush has been telling about >Social Security. That might jeopardize his cozy job. Look at >what happened to Dan Rather. I disagree on two points. Social Security is screwed up and broken and the Democrats themselves used to say that.. until Bush wants to do something about it, now they claim its all right. Never mind that both political parties have been in essence dropping IOU's into the Social Security till to mask the true size of budget deficits. By the way, if you really look at what is going on you would see that Bush is really borrowing from FDR who advocated the use of private accounts for Social Security. Dan Rather screws up was using information from questionable sources ) then defending it until it was proven to be false. The issue with Dan was you had a producer named Mary Mapes who zealously was hunting down any dirt they could find on the President and a dude in Texas handed her a load of it, that he got from sources which he never met. Having been in the media biz, I would have tossed the information instantly... however, in the zeal to get Bush they stupidly ran with the story, defended it, then it backfired and went splat. Kind of like one guy in the UFO community and his insiders telling him that ET was going to land on a Arizona mountain top in December of 2000. Better yet mass landings in the desert sw to occur in April of 97. The only difference between what happened with CBS and what happens from time to time in ufology is CBS has a wider spread audience. Months before this small eruption Rather had already mentioned that he was planning to retire in 2005, so in essence nothing serious happened to Dan. Bottom line is CBS got screwed over by false information, much like some people in ufology who breathlessly repeat information from alleged insiders... never mind that the information can't be independently verified, its just so important (so they say) we can worry about verification later... blah, blah, blah. >><snip> >>>ABC should be ashamed of itself and should have taken Jennings >>>over the coals for providing that as commercial and newsworthy >>>product. It is literally the worst UFO special and documentary >>>I've seen and I've seen some pretty rotten UFO documentaries! >There are so many rotten ones out there, I wouldn't call it the >top stinker. The first hour was pretty good. Then the Empire >decided to strike back. I don't think the empire struck back. I personally would expect, until the day that the government comes out and says ET and UFO are real, that every UFO special put out by the main stream media will also have the various loads of skeptics and all the usuall skeptical tank explainations of balloons, pelicans, stars, misidentification, meteors and so on. Bottom line is if UFO folks want a special that doesn't spend half of its time with skeptical tidbits, then they should produce a film themselves. As I recall Paul Kimball at Red Star has done this. >>Awww, don';t be too hard on the poor chap, After all this is >>probably the first UFO documentary ever to go to press without >>Klass or Randi or Oberg or Sheaffer. >Yeah, Seth Shostak is no Phil Klass (thank God for that). But >there he was making the same dumb demands for physical proof >(his alien seat cushion), and not even bothering to look at the >available evidence. There is nothing in science that demands >something actually physical in a laboratory to establish a >phenomenon. (Should we demand an alien ham radio set if SETI >claims to have found a genuine signal?) My comment to Seth and others is I want physical proof of Dark Matter. Astronomers and scientists all tell us thru the press that dark matter exists. Since they have no actual "physical proof" and that is really an extraordinary claim then I would think Seth, CISCOP and all the other cronies on the skeptical side would be up in arms, writing letters and making comments... that is if they follow their own principles. <snip> >They didn't go into the physical properties. They deliberately >made it seem like Marcel was the sole person telling this story >and painted him as an idiot. Why didn't they mention high >ranking officers like Gen. Exon or Gen. Dubose or backed up >Marcel's story, plus a myriad of other people (e.g. Barry >Goldwater's story of LeMay denying him access to the alien >artifacts at Wright-Patterson). Exon was C/O of Wright- >Patterson for crying out loud! That was sad. <snip> >As you know, Budd Hopkins wrote a letter afterwards saying he >deliberately addressed all these issues when they were filming. >It all ended up on the cutting room floor. What sort of >balanced "journalism" is this? Not defending what Jennings productions did. The problem with any special is that the camera crews and interviewers probably taped 20-50 hours of material and out of that had to cull it down to 2 hours. Just like the broadcast media which may interview a person for 20 minutes, then cull it down to a 30 second to 3 minute sound byte. Just the nature of the business. If you had a special where you allowed every person to make his
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:24:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:57:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Kaeser >From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:14:54 +0100 >Subject: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >Is there any way to secure all the footage that did not make >the final cut, for posterity? Can some people (for instance, >Wendy Connors) ask for a copy of all the raw material? Hi Luis, I would be quite surprised if ABC was willing to give up any of the footage that was shot, but not aired. In the first place the footage may still be valuable and could be used in a future production (however likely or unlikely that may be). To give away the footage would be to give away an asset that the stockholders could later question. Secondly, the legal agreement that was signed by those who were interviewed probably defined how that footage would be used. On the other hand, I think that Don's half million would give them pause and perhaps they'd consider it (since that would be
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:24:35 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:00:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:29:08 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist <snip> >http://trindade-island.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/printy-details.htm >Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that >John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as >we have seen, he can't.) He will pretend that the only issue is >the ongoing, yet unpublished work of others, trying to distract >our attention from the devastating (for him) work already in >public forums. He will remind you, yet again, why you are >unwelcome at the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. The Pelicans can have their Pub. I'm choosey who I drink with. Why would anyone want to drink there anyway, the tables wobble in a dreary setting, they water their badly made hooch, misbrew their beer, and the loo is a freakin' mess... The Inn of Strange Days... Indeed, down the way, on the other hand, offers quality booze and inspiring settings, a more interesting and creative crowd, in addition to an eclectic milieu of progressive ideas... there's even talk of them adding rooms... Why - they _even_ offer a little Al's AlienView Ale down there! <g>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Update From Richard Dolan - 01-01-05 From: Richard Dolan <keyhole.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:17:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:04:01 -0500 Subject: Update From Richard Dolan - 01-01-05 Greetings all, Just to let you know that last night I published Part Two of my paper, Secrecy And The Death Of The American Republic. For those interested in reading it, the link is here. http://tinyurl.com/6j6vl Also, I will be appearing on Coast to Coast with George Noory for three hours starting at 11 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on Thursday, March 3. To those who wrote to me in the past week without receiving a reply, I just wanted to tell you that I appreciated your emails, and will get back to you as soon as possible.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Why Roswell Has To Be A Hoax - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:44:48 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:05:51 -0500 Subject: Why Roswell Has To Be A Hoax - Boone That's right. The Roswell Incident has to be a hoax. There's absolutely no proof whatsoever that an alien craft of any sort crashed or was recovered by the authorities as we've been lead to believe by the UFO investigators and their hours of video, tapes, books, merchandise. How did I come to this conclusion? Because the government says it's a hoax and now a major news service, ABC says it's a hoax. Both couldn't be wrong. If the claims about the Roswell Incident were indeed true it would mean that the institutions we hold to govern and inform us are run by totally incompetent people, liars, crooks, deceivers and out and out bs artists. It means that a handful of civilian investigators got the scoop that the mainstream press either didn't see, didn't care about or were told hands off and they buckled. We all know that Friedman, Berliner, Schmitt, Randle and hundreds of witnesses from layman to general in the armed forces are lying through their teeth just to make a buck and get attention. So that's why the Roswell Incident has to be a hoax. Because if it's true, if just one person were telling the truth that would make the entire news industry for the past 50 years full of more dumb knuckleheaded rump chomping underwits than a room full of comic book villain henchmen. We all know that a handful of civilians could never, ever out scoop the all powerful Fourth Estate. :)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:09:46 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:09:37 -0600 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:33:16 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >><snip> >>People like Bob Lazar, Robert Dean, Clifford Stone, Dan Sherman, >>etc., reveal much of what is happening but many UFO researchers >>don't want to go there. >http://www.ufomind.com/area51/people/lazar/ultimate.html >QF: Could you reveal some of your professors at M.I.T. and > Cal-Tech? >BL: Yeah, if you want. I don't have a list of them here. Dr. > Duxler I think was one of them. And Hohsfield was another. >QF: Hohsfield? > >BL: Hohsfield. H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D, or something along those lines. >QF: Would he remember you? >BL: Oh, yeah. Hohsfield I know will. >QF: These are at M.I.T. or Cal-Tech? >BL: Hohsfield was at M.I.T. Duxler was at Cal-Tech. >http://alum.mit.edu/ne/noteworthy/hockfield-thank-you.html >H-O-H-S-F-I-E-L-D >H-O-C-K-F-I-E-L-D >N-O-P-E <g> Aloha John, I agree that there is something definitely funny with Lazar's alleged Master's degrees at Cal Tech and MIT. From his testimonies, he seems vague and things don't check out as you say. Drexler may have just been a mistake by Lazar given the enermous psychological pressure he was under at the time. As for Hohsfield, as you say some things don't check out. Does that make him 'a liar' and the whole Lazar testimony 'bunk', as Stan says? That doesn't logically follow. The 1982 Los Alamos Monitor refers to him as a physict which implies he had at least a Master's degree. There is also evidence to support his testimony of having worked in a highly classified project in 1988/89. So while the degrees testimony don't check out, I don't dismiss everything else on this basis. here's more happening here and we don't have all the facts. We need to work with what we know for certain about Lazar, and hopefully that will clear up some of the uncertainties.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:39:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:15:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program - >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:05:48 -0000 >Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins' Response To Jennings' Program >Had there been such a program, then Budd Hopkins should have >been asked to give details of, say, the 3 or 4 best abduction >cases he has worked on. These cases would, presumably, be those >he insists were definitely not due to sleep paralysis, and in >which the abductees were not hypnotically regressed. One of them >might even have 'physical evidence' in support. >The program, for a fair balance, would then have had to to >produce a skeptic to counter each case. It is doubtful if they >could ever find one who had studied the cases in any depth. (Has >any skeptic studied any particular abduction case in depth, >except perhaps the Hill case?) Thus there would have been nobody >to refute Hopkins on these cases, and he would have had the >field to himself and, presumably, won the debate. Most skeptics haven't studied abductions carefully at all. I've never seen any of them confront the points Budd made in his statement. Other, that is, than to say that the abductees' testimony can't be reliable, or that Budd is leading them to say all these things, for which the skeptics have no evidence. So what would have happened, I think, is that the skeptics would suddenly be standing there without their pants on, so to speak. They'd be revealed as ignorant on this subject, even though they speak with such apparent certainty. Whether that wins the debate for Budd is another story; the skeptics' ignorance certainly, by itself, doesn't prove that abductions are real. But the picture that would emerge would be accurate. The skeptics really haven't confronted all this stuff. And what's the alternative? As the program actually was, the abduction researchers appear to be standing there without their pants on. (Or skirts.) Which is hardly fair. I remember talking to the producer of the NOVA show, whom I'd met during the shooting they did at Budd's house. I asked her why she hadn't mentioned the physical evidence (marks and the like) which abduction researchers allege is present. Her answer? Because they can't prove these marks are real, she didn't mention them. But that's ridiculous. She let skeptics make all kinds of unfounded assertions - theories, which the skeptics were in no position to prove. So at least let the abduction researchers say what they believe is true. The fairest thing of all would be to get Stuart Appelle to say what he thinks neither side in the debate has yet proved, as he did in his famous 1990s abduction piece, which still may be one
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Jennings' Scary Special From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:05:59 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:24:00 -0500 Subject: Jennings' Scary Special Days before the infamous Peter Jennings news special, "UFOs: Seeing Is Believing" aired I made a joke about Jennings being leaned on or something. People jumped all over me for being 'paranoid' like they had medical degrees in the mental health industries or something. Now that ufology has had it's guts kicked out I'm reading more claims from the same people who rode on me about how ABC is now disinformation, an arm of the government, yadda, yadda, yadda. Now that the shoe's on the other foot it still steps in doo. This so-called 'News Special' is growing scarier every day. We the public know for a fact what's going on and aren't snowed by the second half of that special. They didn't pull the wool over our eyes as they had intended. In fact they've brought us all closer together with more fervor than ever. I for one would have left out the abduction end from the special. I wouldn't have even over emphasized the ETH end either. Just UFOs, who sees 'em, how long, characteristics and whom to call. Yet now, you guys who haven't worked in the news business like I had can see how that business is done. If they did that sloppy and spiteful a job on this subject, just think what other mishaps are occuring with other stories like toxins in our food and water, major theft, just downright evil stuff. Take any subject matter and know that it's being handled by the same people and mindset as this last UFO 'Special'. That's scary. Scary that they actually thought we and the public would be that stupid to fall for this. We ain't. Scarier? Art Bell sided with Jennings' efforts. Noory didn't. Yet Art did? I'm bowled over. Yet I'd bet credits to Navy beans that you won't boycott Art's show because it's too much publicity. Maybe Art knows something we don't. Benefit of the doubt here. So ABC played on your thirst for publicity and credibility and you guys got taken for saps and are sore about it. Welcome to the club of human press victims. Remember, 'you' make the news. The mainstream press won't treat you with respect? Then you don't need them. Take your fights to the people instead. Team up and bury the hatchet. Pro or con. What part of the past 50 years did you not realize that the press does not like you. Did you get that? Do I have to take out a billboard to remind you? The press does not like you. Plain and simple. Yet, turn about is fair play. :)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? - Fortson From: Mike Fortson <satmike.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:08:07 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:27:43 -0500 Subject: Re: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? - Fortson >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:15:02 -0800 >Subject: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? >If you were interviewed for the ABC special, could you please >drop me a line with a short account of your interview whether >you were in the final product or not. Royce, My name is Mike Fortson. I m an 8:30 witness to the large boomerang on 3/13/97. ABC interviewed me for almost 2 hours back in October 2004 from my home in Gilbert, AZ. I tried to show them the large file cabinet I have on witness reports, FOIA s, web posts, etc. All they really wanted was me to say was I had seen an alien spaceship. Instead I told them it just wasn t ours. They had no time for anything. I gave them names&they just weren t interested.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Daniel Sheehan - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:52:11 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:01:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Daniel Sheehan - King >From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:04:34 +0800 >Subject: Re: Daniel Sheehan >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:05:55 -0600 >>Subject: Daniel Sheehan [was: Applying Uncertainty >Principle To UFO Research] >>>From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:07:54 +0800 >>>Subject: Re: Applying Uncertainty Principle To UFO Research ><snip> >>>Daniel Sheehan. He seems to be risking a lot (in a >>>professional sense) if he were found guilty of perpetrating a >>>fraud. De-barring at the least. Yet his testimony was pretty >>>wild e.g. he stated that he saw photographs of crashed saucers. ><snip> >>While I cannot state categorically that Sheehan is not telling >>the truth ><snip> >Is this testable? For example, would the body/bodies responsible >for the law profession find the situation worth probing? I asked >my brother, who is a lawyer, what he would do if he were of the >opinion a lawyer was involved in a scam. He tells me he would >contact the legal practice board in his State and make a >complaint (this is in Australia). >Would that illuminate the subject any further? Hi Simon, Perhaps if someone were to lodge a complaint, there would be some type of inquiry. Since one could not easily make a case either that Sheehan perpetrated a fraud for gain, or that anyone has suffered harm as a result, such an inquiry might reasonably result in little if any action. Also, if as I proposed as a reasonable possibility, Sheehan was indeed allowed access to images, reports, etc., which indicate validation of the ETH, cover-up, etc, I would consider it reasonable to assume that Sheehan could truthfully state that he saw what he says he saw. While this would exonerate Sheehan of any charges of wrongdoing, it would shed no light at all on the validity of the information itself, and in fact would help to support the case that Sheehan was an unwitting accomplice to a govt. disinformation campaign. Once again, if he was allowed access under such lax conditions, it strains credibility to assert that the data to which he was given such access was highly sensitive. Draconian security measures are useless if everyone just "looks the other way". If Sheehan saw truly sensitive data and was allowed to make traced sketches, etc., than several govt. employees should be certainly guilty of dereliction of duty, and Sheehan's revelation of data should have immediately subjected him to incarceration for circumventing security agreements. If he is telling the truth to us, he had to have lied to the feds. He at the very least did not admit to the security folks that he had violated the security rules he was provided and to which he agreed. This would not help him in an inquiry as to his ethics or professionalism...regardless of the veracity of the data itself.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Patricia Arnold? From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 18:50:10 -0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:03:20 -0500 Subject: Patricia Arnold? Dear List members, I am working with a TV producer who had the telephone number of Patricia Arnold, the daughter of the late Kenneth Arnold. Unfortunately that number no longer works. I therefore wondered if there was anyone on the List that had any kind of contact details for Patricia Arnold?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Invisibility Shields Planned by Engineers From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:08:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:08:22 -0500 Subject: Invisibility Shields Planned by Engineers Source: National Geographic News http://tinyurl.com/6csy4 02-28-05 Invisibility Shields Planned by Engineers James Owen in London for National Geographic News In popular science fiction, the power of invisibility is readily apparent. Star Trek fans, for example, know that the devious Romulans could make their spaceships suddenly disappear. But is the idea really so implausible? Not according to new findings by scientists who say they have come up with a way to create cloaking device. Electronic engineers at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia are researching a device they say could make objects "nearly invisible to an observer." The contrivance works by preventing light from bouncing off the surface of an object, causing the object to appear so small it all but disappears. The concept was reported today by the science news Web site news.nul It says the proposed cloaking device would not require any peripheral attachments (such as antennas or computer networks) and would reduce visibility no matter what angle an object is viewed at. Sir John Pendry, a physicist at Imperial College, London, said the concept potentially holds several important applications "in stealth technology and camouflage." While types of invisibility shielding have been developed before, the phenomenon described by Andrea Alu and Nader Engheta sounds like something that might have been witnessed from the bridge of science fiction's starship Enterprise. The concept is based on a "plasmonic cover," which is a means to prevent light from scattering. (It is light bouncing off an object that makes it visible to an observer). The cover would stop light from scattering by resonating at the same frequency as the light striking it. If such a device could cope with different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation (including visible light), in theory, the object would vanish into thin air. Plasmonic Covers Alu and Engheta investigated experimental plasmonic covers that incorporated metals, such as gold and silver, to hide visible light. When light strikes a metallic material, waves of electrons, called plasmons, are generated. The engineers found that when the frequency of the light striking the material matched the frequency of the plasmons, the two frequencies act to cancel each other out. Under such conditions, the metallic object scattered only negligible amounts of light. The researchers' studies show that spherical and cylindrical objects coated with plasmonic shielding material produce very little light scattering. These objects, when hit by the right wavelength of light, were seen to become so small that they were almost invisible. The study is supported by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which researches and develops cutting edge military technology. Some experts note, however, that cloaking devices that could enable military vehicles and aircraft, let alone spaceships, to become completely invisible to the enemy are likely to remain elusive for the foreseeable future. John Pendry, the Imperial College physicist, said that light- shielding covers would have to be customized to match the properties of each and every object they hide. It would be still more difficult to devise shields that could cope with all wavelengths of the visible spectrum=97from red to violet light=97and not just a single color. Types of invisibility shielding previously proposed by scientists depend on advanced camouflage systems, rather than objects being made to look undetectably tiny. Such systems involve light sensors that create a mirror image of the background scene on the concealed object. Despite the exciting possibilities raised by the new research,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Correction - ABC News Special & Stan Friedman From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:19:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:10:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Correction - ABC News Special & Stan Friedman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:00:36 EST >Subject: Correction - ABC News Special & Stan Friedman Offer >All: >With respect to the offer for copies of Stanton T. Friedman is >Real and Do You Believe in Majic... >Egads! I typed in USD by mistake!! >Seriously, it should of course read Canadian dollars! >Otherwise, it wouldn't be much of a deal, even with the American >dollar tanking on a daily basis... >So, the terms remain the same, only now in Canadian dollars, >ie. the good old greenback/blueback/purpleback/brownback (colour >changes depending upon denomination). We're so smart up here, we >have to colour-code our money! Yeah, but don't forget, Paul "shipping and handling" - where the serious money is made. :) Let's hope the Am-buck tanks enough that when it comes time for me to purchase my Aircraft Radio I'm not shelling out another 20 percent Cdn. My pension still comes in those multi-colored dollars.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:44:09 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:13:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:55:09 -1000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:28:50 EST >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:32:37 -1000 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>>Best evidence for what? The existence of UFOs? >>Michael: >>Exactly. What you and the "disclosure" crowd cannot come to >>grips with, it seems, is that the case has not yet been made >>that the UFOs are alien spacecraft, at least not to the point >>where you or I could walk into a court of law, or a history >>classroom, or a newspaper editor's office, and state with >>certainty that this was so beyond a reasonable doubt (perhaps >>not even to the "balance of probabilities" standard, although >>I'd be willing to take a crack in front of an unbiased jury in a >>civil trial). >>UFOs exist. That can be proved, by the very fact that there are >>a fairly large number of "unidentified flying object" sightings >>out there that remain unexplained. That they are alien >>spacecraft remains unproved. So the need to gather evidence >>continues. >Thank you for revealing your position which I find to be very >puzzling given the enormous evidence that is publically >available from a range of sources of the validity of the ETH. And I find your willingness to leap to conclusions based on evidence that would not stand up in a court of law, a university, or the media, as proving the existence of ET beyond a reasonable doubt. Of course, you blithely ignore the fact that I said I'd take my chances on the civil standard, ie the balance of probabilities. Which one of us has the rigid position, then? ><snip> >>I have never said that "whistleblower" testimony is worthless, >>or that it should be ignored. What I maintain is that the >>alleged "whistleblowers" need to be vetted with a far more >>rigorous methodology than you and others have employed. >Can you give me an example of a whistleblower testimony >concerning reversed engineered ETVs or working with EBEs that >passes your vigorous vetting standard? This answer does not address my original point, which is simply that alleged whistleblowers require a more rigorous methodology than you suggest. It is not up to me, or anyone else, to show that they're lying; the burden of proof is on you and the alleged whistleblowers to demonstrate that they're telling the truth. And, for the record, no - I have not seen any alleged whistleblower testimony that would satisfy me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they are telling the truth. However, this does not rule out the possibility that there are those out there with whom I am not familiar that would meet that standard, although if there were I believe we would all know about it by now. ><snip> >>>Oh, I see, making your argument by assertion. Researchers are >>>credulous and sloppy because you say so, hmm. You make no >>>mention of different methodologies being used in analysing >>>different sources of evidence as I've mentioned numerous times >>>in earlier posts. It seems methodology is not part of your >>>lexicon. There is a rigorous alternative to the nuts and bolts >>>approach to evidence but you don't want to acknowledge that. >>>Argument by assertion is not very compelling. I posted my reply >>>to Stan's critique of Lazar which you perhaps didn't read. >>Of course I read it. You should have kept reading my post, >>below. As for the "rigorous" nature of your methodology, I have >>yet to see any evidence of it. What I see instead is a >>predisposition to accept what these people are saying as true, >>because it fits in with your belief system. That isn't >>methodology. Methodology requires checking of facts, searching >>for evidence, that will either support or discredit the >>"whistleblower" testimony. >>However, your statement above is an excellent example of one the >>propagandist's favourite tools - if you can't counter a person's >>argument, start attacking them personally. Just because I don't >>agree that your techniques amount to a "methodology" doesn't >>mean that the word "methodology" isn't in my lexicon. Your >>hubris is amazing. >Not a personal attack at all. You just made an assertion: "Those >"researchers" are criticized for being credulous and sloppy for >a very good reason - because they are credulous and sloppy." You >didn't give reasons supporting your point, you just said I >should refer to Stan's earlier post which I had already replied >to. I responded to the hubris in your statement, it's good that >you finally acknowledge that there's hubris here even though you >project it on to me. And I told you that your response didn't sufficiently answer the questions Stan, and many others, have raised over the years. When I place their research and conclusions about Lazar next to yours, and factor in the statements that you made which started this thread, then I consider you credulous and your methods sloppy (words, I might add, that you used first; I would retain credulous, and perhaps substitute ineffective). As to where the hubris lies here, I'll leave that for others to judge. <snip> >>I grant that coherence and consistency are part of the parcel, >>as they can be checked. Sincerity and integrity are not things >>that can be checked, however - they are subjective judgements. >>On what do you base your opinion that a person is being sincere? >>Or that they have integrity? >>Here's what I base it on - can they offer some evidence (any >>evidence!) that what they say is true. Can their credentials be >>verified? If not, their sincerity and integrity are, to but the >>best spin possible on it, in dispute. >Thank you for acknowledging the relevance of these 'soft facts', >coherence and consistency can be checked. Well, dud - of course they can be checked, against other, "hard" evidence. >As for being subjective judgements, that's true to an extent. I'm >puzzled by your point that sincerity and integrity are not things that >can be checked. I think that is a very important set of criteria >that can be checked. I disagree with you. Now I'm puzzled. How exactly would you go about quantifying a person's sincerity? If you have a method, other than just your "feel" for the person, I'm all ears. However, as you acknowledge that these are subjective judgements, I'm not sure where you would find an objective method to test a person's sincerity. ><snip> >>>One can reach a rigorous conclusion that somone is telling the >>>truth without hard evidence. We do that all time. Do you demand >>>hard evidence to prove that your wife is telling you the truth >>>when she says that she spent the afternoon shopping with >>>friends? To say someone is lying simply because the hard >>>evidence isn't there is a poor methodology. >>This might be the most ridiculous example you've used yet, and >>it demonstrates the intellectual bankruptcy of your argument. My >>wife? She earned that trust, over the years, unlike the >>"whistleblowers" who seem to be granted that trust from the >>get-go, as soon as they appear, because they are telling a >>story that backs up things in which you already believe. >>And, again, don't put words in my mouth. I never said that a >>person is lying simply because the hard evidence isn't there to >>back up their claims. I said that this is an indicator that >>their testimony is questionable, and should not be accepted at >>face value. At best, it belongs in Stan's grey basket. >Yes I agree, it wasn't a good example. As for the whistleblowers >earning trust from the get go, I think that there are some >premises that people like myself and Steven Greer operate under >when we might interview a whistleblower. One is the experience >that national security agencies do tamper with the evidence and >intimidate witnesses. Greer has interviewed a great number of >whistleblowers and that gives him a lot of experience in >identifying these 'soft' facts integrity, coherence, etc., that >are necessary for determining the validity of whistleblower >testimony. Why? Practice makes perfect? Both you and Greer bring a belief in the ETH to the table that taints your objectivity as much as the fact that the government can and sometimes does lie (ie. change records) pushes in the other direction. That's the real problem here. This isn't to say that the alleged whistleblowers should be ignored (I never said that), but, again, only that you and Greer et al are not the best people to be doing the vetting. >That makes it easier for researchers such as myself >who want to work with the data to understand the implications of >all this. So, the implication is that the rest of us just don't understand because we don't have you're expertise? Again, I refer to the hubris thing. >I don't set a premium on hard evidence since different >agencies will and do regularly remove this evidence. Here we agree - you don't set a premium on hard evidence. That's the problem, alas. >So if a whistleblower comes in with a story about reverse engineering >ETV or working with EBEs, the story is assessed on the merits, >rather than dismissed or put into the gray basket as >inconclusive. What merits, exactly, if you have no corroborating evidence. What you're assessing the story on is your "feeling" about this person, and the fact that you are predisposed to believe his story because you buy into the ETH. >That's where your basic mistake lies, you put the inconclusive data >in the gray basket and let it sit, and haven't developed the methodology >for working with it. I want everyone to read the above very carefully - my (and others) mistake is that we put the "inconclusive" date in the gray basket. If it's "inconclusive" as you say, where else are we supposed to put it?? >Saying we need more hard evidence is a methodology, but it's >inappropriate in this case. It's inappropriate only because you say it is. Alas, that has failed to convince me. I leave it to everyone else to draw their own conclusions. Here's Doctor Salla's position: The government is altering records and tampering with evidence all the time. That makes it impossible to get hard evidence. So, we'll just accept the testimony of the whistleblowers (even the term "whistleblowers" shows that you have already accepted their testimony even before they state what it is) based on their say- so, even when hard evidence surfaces that indicates they are not being truthful (ie. Lazar). Here's mine: Treat these people and what they say with extreme caution until their stories can be verified independently. Expose and disregard those who are liars, but don't just assume they are lying without having the same evidence that you would require to prove they are telling the truth. For those cases that are inconclusive, ie no evidence that they are lying, but no corroborating evidence that they are telling the truth, place the testimony in the gray basket, but do not wholly ignore it. <snip> >>A couple of points here: >>1. When you start using MJ-12 documents as evidence to support >>your position, you're on shaky ground; >The Woods team has done a thorough analysis of SOM1-01 and >found it to be credible. In my view it was a leaked document. I think >putting things into the gray box because they are 'shaky' is >really inappropriate. If you meant the SOM1-01 document, you should have said so, as the term MJ-12 documents encompasses much more than just that (CT Memo, EBD, TF Memo, Cooper documents, etc). I don't agree that the SOM1-01 is legitimate, but at least I now know what you were talking about. >I take it for granted that work in this field will be characterized by >much uncertainty, so I'm prepared to factor that in to my analysis. >You don't want to work with any thing 'shaky'. That's your choice. I do >strongly disagree with that and think it masks a dogmatic methodology >that keeps the UFO field from growing. Yes, here is our fundamental point of disagreement. However, folks, ask yourselves the following questions: (1) who is being dogmatic here? All I want is a higher standard of evidence, even as I concede that the ETH may well be valid, that UFOs are definitely valid, that the government is capable of lying and altering records, and that some alleged whistleblower testimony may have some merit. Doctor Salla, on the other hand, insists that this is "dogmatic" and keeps ufology from growing. (2) Will Doctor Salla's "methodology" enable the field to grow, or will it just bring it into disrepute? >>2. If you wouldn't allow someone like Lazar to "spill the beans" >>why would you not just kill him. Apparently the government can >>do that (or so I hear), with all sorts of untraceable methods >>(or so I hear). Why not take care of the problem that way? It >>seems so much simpler; >Yes, there are a number of questions raised by the Lazar case. I >don't have all the answers, but I do want to work with his >testimony since he has in my mind provided sufficient >testimony/evidence to substantiate his story. This statement is so self-contradictory as to beggar belief. There are: (a) a "number of questions raised by the Lazar case", and (b) you "don't have all the answers" but somehow (c) he has "provided sufficient testimony/evidence to substantiate his story." This is the most concise summary of your position I have heard. >My evidentiary threshold is obviously not set as high as yours. That's >why I think you are being unrealistic and you of course think I'm >being credulous. So we disagree. Obviously not, and indeed we do. >>3. I have stipulated elsewhere that the government is capable of >>altering the government records of government employees (I'm not >>convinced that they've done this, but I'll accept it for the >>sake of argument). What you've failed to demonstrate is how they >>could do this to a person's civilian records, particularly >evidence of his alleged university studies, ie, Lazar. I'll give >>Lazar a second look on the day he can produce a copy of his >>degree, or his transcripts, or testimony from ONE person at any >>of these institutions he supposedly attended that he was there, >>and that they knew him. Even a photo in the yearbook will do. To >>suggest that the government would have erased all of his records >>at the time he was attending the university is preposterous, >>because he wasn't in government service at that time (unless the >>government has precognitive powers we don't know about). So, he >>must be in the yearbook, or a register of students. Anything. >>Where is it? >It's interesting that you have arbitrarily set the criteria for >accepting the validity of Lazar's testimony in terms of his >civilian records. I "arbitrarily" set the criteria in terms of his civilian records? Puh-lease. All I did was generously stipulate to the government portion of the debate so that you would focus on the civilian side, where you have failed to offer any answers to the questions raised by Stan and others. >I agree that there are questions about his education that have not >been satisfactorily answered by Lazar himself who appears evasive >when it comes to his university documents. So, Lazar, by your own admission, is "evasive", but we should still accept his testimony? Again, a fine demonstration of Dr. Salla's "methodology". >Yet he was employed as a 'physicist' at Los Alamos as >the Los Alamos Monitor suggests. I don't buy the argument that >the reporter just wrote down what Lazar said. If you only have a >bachelor's degree you won't refer to yourself as a 'physicist' >in an in house publication such as the Los Alamos Monitor which >would be read by your peers. Lazar would at the minimum have had >a Master's to describe himself as a 'Physicist'. So, Lazar is "evasive" but you'll just take him at his word about his education. How about this possibility - Lazar is lying for some reason. Does that even factor in as a possibility to you? ><snip> >>>Again, serious research for what? That UFOs are real and exist. >>>Do you need more evidence? >>I need more evidence that demonstrates they are extraterrestrial >>in nature, yes. >Ok, that's our basic difference here. You do need more evidence >and I'm sure that there are others who will agree with you on >that. On the other hand, I and many others don't need more >evidence to be persuaded about the ETH and want to work with the >available data to see what's going on in the deep black >projects. We need to find a modus vivendi where you can continue >your work in finding conclusive evidence, and I can do my thing >with working with material that's in the 'gray box' without >conclusive hard evidence. If we can find a modus vivendi without >name calling, dismissive insults, etc., that would be progress. Alas, there is no "modus vivendi" here because your "work" undermines mine. <snip> >I think you are being disingenuous here. So much for the "no name-calling" rule. <snip> >Let me finish by repeating the question: "Can you name one >whistleblower who claims to have worked on projects involving >reverse engineered ETVs or EBEs that you acknowledge as >credible?" If you can't, then my conclusion is that despite your >'openess' to the argument of evidence tampering by the agencies, >you effectively close the door on this by your insistence on >hard facts that stand critical scrutiny. I find that to be >disingenous. I believe my argument that the UFO field has to >move forward by seriously considering whistleblower testimonies >like Lazar's has merit. Again, I'm being disingenous. Hmm... As I've already answered your question above, let me flip it around for you - is there a single case of alleged whistleblower testimony that you have investigated which you have discarded as fraudulent? Names, please. If the answer is no, then I guess everyone will know who is being disingenous and who is not, won't they?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:56:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage - Ledger >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:24:26 -0500 >Subject: Re: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:14:54 +0100 >>Subject: Jennings' Un-Aired Footage >>Is there any way to secure all the footage that did not make >>the final cut, for posterity? Can some people (for instance, >>Wendy Connors) ask for a copy of all the raw material? >I would be quite surprised if ABC was willing to give up any of >the footage that was shot, but not aired. >In the first place the footage may still be valuable and could >be used in a future production (however likely or unlikely that >may be). To give away the footage would be to give away an >asset that the stockholders could later question. Secondly, the >legal agreement that was signed by those who were interviewed >probably defined how that footage would be used. >On the other hand, I think that Don's half million would give >them pause and perhaps they'd consider it (since that would be >several times the amount actually spent on the special in the >first place). Steve and Luis, Paul Kimball would have a better handle on this since I'm about 4 years out of date. But for example, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.[CBC] had footage of the boats, Cdn. Coast Guard Cutter [Lifeboat] 101 and other vessels out on the Sound next to Shag Harbour the next day as they searched for surface evidence and underwater evidence of the previously reported plane/UFO crash. When Mike MacDonald made the Shag Harbour Documentary he had to purchase that footage at the rate of $22.00 Cdn. a second. That of course would be considered footage unobtainable from other sources whereas UFO researchers testimony would go for a lot less because they can be re-interviewed. The people on the program signed off on these interviews and lose any rights to them other than what they might stipulate on the release. In the latter case, this could be why certain contributors were dumped. But again there is certain footage that ABC would have gleaned from various sources, personal archives of relatives etc. or older competing network footage which they had only that one documentary right to use the stuff and at a price. I would bet that down the road there will be an ABC special on the phenomenon with nothing to do with the Jennings Special Report title and put together by another producer, aired in prime time but up against less powerful one hour shows on other channels. It might even show up on TLC or History Channel as a one hour series production sold to them from some sub-production company of ABC.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:06:23 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:17:51 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:17:10 EST >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:33:16 -1000 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >Paul et al, >I've been unimpressed with the arguments levied against Dr. >Salla and am reminded of a horse race with every runner wearing >blinkers so that he can see nowhere else other than straight >ahead of him. This scope of thinking is so focused that it's >bordering on being myopic. I'm not being blinkered here. I'm open to a wide range of possibilities. I'm just not willing to proclaim them as facts, as Dr. Salla is. How is this myopic? It seems to me that Dr. Salla is the one advocating a "my way or the highway" approach. >Exopolitics is undeniably flawed at the moment due to the >weakness of witness credibility but those within that field are >not blind to this and are working at it. That may be, but from his proposed methodology, which is really the core of the argument between Dr. Salla and I (and others), he is blind to it. Doubt that? Read his continued defense of Bob Lazar. >But what it ushers in is a new way of looking at things and that >is not to be rejected. Actually, my point is that it's not a new way of looking at things, just contactee-ism in a different guise. >Was every one of Greer's witnesses lying or living in some bizarre >fantasy world? Somewhere in all of that were various pots of gold that >have bypassed many on this List. I don't recall anyone saying that all of the Disclosure witnesses were wackos, or liars. Indeed, I think the whole point is that there may well be some good ones out there, but they get tainted by being included in the same group as the aforementioned wackos and liars. That's what Dr. Salla's methodology causes, and it is a disservice to ufology, and to folks like you (and me) who want to see the truth, whatever it is, come out. >Last year, David Rudiak cornered General Wesley Clark and asked >him if he had ever been briefed on the subject of UFOs. The >General gave an evasive response which was nevertheless helpful. >But what if he'd said, "Yes, I was and this is what they told >me." We'd have all believed him like a shot. Why him and why not >others? This is an interesting point. If General Clark (who may have had a very good reason for being "evasive" that had nothing to do with trying to hide the truth about a cover-up) had said, "yes" Dr. Salla and others would accept that as gospel. But, when he says "no" they assume he was being "evasive" and hiding something. I think that says more about them and their position on UFOs than it does General Clark. <snip> >And as I read the responses to Dr. Salla which have crossed over >into abuse at times, I wonder if those on this List who accuse >"believers" of a religious piousness and pursuit have the >insight and wherewithal to recognise that their own blind dogma >to "the one and only method" comfortably crosses that sacred >line of devoutness. You may not be referring to me personally here, but if you are, please provide an example of where my responses to Dr. Salla have crossed the line into abuse. I can show you several where Dr. Salla have accused those of us who disagree with him of being "disingenuous" which, in case folks aren't sure, means "insincere, not frank" (Gage Canadian Dictionary). Check my posts - I have been perfectly frank, and am perfectly sincere, as, I'm sure, were others like Bruce Maccabee and Stan Friedman. Best regards,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:03:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:21:14 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:09:37 -0600 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >Aloha John, I agree that there is something definitely funny >with Lazar's alleged Master's degrees at Cal Tech and MIT. From >his testimonies, he seems vague and things don't check out as >you say. >Drexler may have just been a mistake by Lazar given the enermous >psychological pressure he was under at the time. >As for Hohsfield, as you say some things don't check out. >Does that make him 'a liar' and the whole Lazar testimony >'bunk', as Stan says? That doesn't logically follow. >The 1982 Los Alamos Monitor refers to him as a physict which >implies he had at least a Master's degree. >There is also evidence to support his testimony of having worked >in a highly classified project in 1988/89. >So while the degrees testimony don't check out, I don't dismiss >everything else on this basis. >here's more happening here and we don't have all the facts. We >need to work with what we know for certain about Lazar, and >hopefully that will clear up some of the uncertainties. Michael, you just don't get it do you? Duxler only taught at Pierce and never taught at CIT. Bob was in one of his classes while Bob was supposedly at MIT... an impossibility. You said something about the Los Alamos Monitor being a house organ. Wrong. It is a newspaper in the town of Los Alamos. I have no doubt Bob told them he was a physicist at the lab. There are thousands of professional people there. The great majority are honest. Why would they check? W-2 forms are filled out every year by businesses. There is no reason to say Bob's is genuine. No tax form. When he went bankrupt for $300,000 he listed his occupation as self-employed film processor. Read the article by Mahood that you noted. He thought Lazar, after Mahood did a lot of checking, was a fraud as well and also notes that Bob was out near the mail box many times. By the way there is no need for a person to have a Masters to be called a Physicist, and, of course Bob didn't have one or even a BS degree. In a sense he earned the latter. He wasn't a physicist. He has earned no degrees not even from Pierce. And please don't tell me that you can tell who is being honest and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 9 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 20:45:02 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:23:52 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 9 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 9 March 2, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ DAYLIGHT DISCS TRIGGER MAJOR FLAP IN UK Sunday, February 20, 2005, turned out to be "Invasion Day" for the United Kingdom as daylight discs appeared in four separate locations within minutes of each other. Mike Taylor was driving along the (motorway) A39 in Somerset, near Bridgwater, when he had his encounter. Mike reported, "I was taking my son, in the car, to his rugby club on Sunday, 20th February. It was about 9:55 a.m. We were travelling along the A39 toward Bridgwater. It was a clear blue sky, the weather was cold but bright, and the sun was behind us." "I noticed an object in the sky. I initially thought it was a low-flying (RAF) fighter jet plane. (They sometimes fly over our area--M.T.) travelling behind the trees at about 1,000 feet (300 meters). I pointed this out to my son and said, 'Oh, look at that!'" "As it cleared the trees, we got our first clear look at it. But it was nothing like any plane I had seen before. It was a silvery object with a hint of a light shade of green/blue. It was travelling very, very fast in a straight line and had a short white vapour trail." "As we watched it (travelling in a north to northwest direction--M.T.), it just seemed to melt away (disappear) leaving behind the vapour trail which gradually dissolved. My son, who is 8, said, 'Wow! It just turned into smoke!'" "I was completely flabbergasted and slightly scared by what I saw. It was very real and quite big, but I must have seen it for only 4 or 5 seconds. We had a CD on in the car (not too loud--M.T.) but I heard no noise. If it was a jet, I'm sure I would have heard something." "This is not a hoax, though I am sure I would not believe it if someone told me this account--I personally do not believe in little green men, but I cannot think of what it might have been. I crave a second and longer look at it, if you know what I mean." At 9:54 a.m., Lyn R. was at Boothtown, Halifax, West Yorkshire, when she spied "a strange object approaching from the south, from the direction of Halifax. My partner was sitting beside our front window when he shouted, 'Look at that!' By the time I had arrived, though, the object was gone." "So it was only visible for one-and-a-half seconds. He said it was a strange greeny-white colour with a trail behind as a plane would have. But it moved far too quickly. I have just tracked a plane covering the same distance, and it took 15 seconds (Meaning the UFO was traveling at an estimated 6,500 miles per hour--J.T.) Does a fighter jet run 10 times faster than a plane? Were there any RAF planes flying at this time?" "My partner and I have also seen a few strange objects over the last ten years in Todmorden and Boothtown/Queensbury, so now we've decided to report each sighting immediately. We'd be interested to see if anyone else in the area observed this." At 9:58 a.m. on "Invasion Sunday," eyewitness P.E. was at Elworth, Sandbach, Cheshire when "the UFO approached from the south. It appeared as a small flash to the left as it came into my sight. Tail of light green although the head was white. It was seen for a couple of seconds, travelling faster than a plane. It was on a horizontal flight path against a blue sky. No vapour trail. Not like anything I have ever seen before. Sort of a bullet appearance. A few thousand feet up, heading over house tops. I was not looking straight up." At 9:57 a.m. the same morning, eyewitness A.M. was "travelling along the (motorway) A470 between Llanidloes and Llangurig in central Wales. It was travelling west across the sky. It simply disappeared or burnt itself out. Two of us saw it while travelling south along the A470. A very bright yellow and violet, not very large but a longish shape. Travelling at rocket speed across the sky. It lasted maybe a couple of seconds. No idea of the height but quite high." (Many thanks to Canadian ufologist Brian Vike for these reports.) HOVERING NIGHT SAUCER SEEN IN TASMANIA "Investigators are perplexed by the sighting of a hovering, saucer-like object by three men in Australia's island state of Tasmania." "The report falls into the five percent of UFO sightings that cannot be explained, an official in Tasmania said yesterday (Saturday, February 19, 2005)." "'We checked up with the airport, helicopter companies, the navy and the Department of Defence and hit a block on all of them,' said Keith Roberts, coordinator of UFO Reports and Sightings-Tasmania." "The report Monday night (February 14, 2005) was made by a 43-year-old man from Kingston, Australia who was driving in Tasmania's Midland Highway with his sister and a friend. The woman, who said she was inclined not to believe in aliens, reported they first spotted a bright light but moments later the light appeared to be heading towards them." "She said the object was about half the size of a house and had one red pulsating light on one side and a similar blue light on the other. The woman got out of the car after pulling over and, within minutes, the object was only about 300 yards (270 meters) from them and hovering 100 feet (30 meters) above the ground." "The witness told the paper (Hobart Mercury) that as the craft came towards them, it appeared to be shaped like an oblong Australian football. But as it grew nearer, she surmised that it was a saucer shape." "Roberts said there was a similar sighting in the area in the 1970s when a driver saw a bright mass of light before his car went dead. At the moment, he said, the latest mystery in unexplained, and he hopes others will come forward with information." (See the Hobart, Tasmania Mercury for February 19, 2005, "Mystery of UFO deepens." Many thanks to Nathan Lockhart for this newspaper article.) CYLINDER-SHAPED UFO SEEN OVER KIRKLAND, WASH. On Friday, February 18, 2005, at 4 p.m., Mario L. was driving through his hometown of Kirkland, Washington (population 45,054) when he spotted something unusual in the sky. "It was a sunny day and no clouds," Mario reported, "The object was on the east side as we were traveling south. The object was just floating on the air for like about two or three minutes and then took off at a fast speed. We were facing south when we suddenly hit a curve, and that's when I decided to turn my head. And there it was in the sky." "I was inside my friend's car, and we were going home from work. That's when I saw this shiny object in the sky. The object was shaped like a pencil. The color was silver and I think it had a reflection of the sun on it. The object was about the same height (altitude) as an airliner flies." Kirkland, Wash. is on the eastern shore of Lake Washington, on Interstate Highway I-405 about 12 miles (20 kilometers) northeast of Seattle. (Email Form Report) LARGE UFO SIGHTED IN THE CALIFORNIA DESERT On Saturday, February 5, 2005, at 1 a.m., Paul T. was outdoors in Desert Hot Springs, California (population 16,582) when he saw "the UFO approach from the west. Too dark out to see any shape. It was 8,000 feet (2,400 meters) or higher, moving slower than an airplane but it sounded a lot like one. Had a long row of very bright lights along the side, with three large and also very bright lights to the rear and on the same level as the row lights. The three bright lights to the rear were spaced, and the other two were as far apart as the 'side' row was long. Also, the three lights were aimed back in the direction it came." "The (Little San Bernardino) mountains in the area are between 9,000 and 12,000 feet (2,700 to 3,600 meters). I am sure it was a lot lower than that. Don't know what it was as I've never seen an aircraft with three 'landing lights' let alone pointed back! The object's height was about 7,000 to 8,000 feet (2,100 to 2,400 meters) and it was going maybe 80 miles per hour (128 kilometers per hour)." Desert Hot Springs, Cal. is just east of Highway 62, located about 10 miles (16 kilometers) north of Palm Springs. (Email Form Report) THREE DAYLIGHT DISCS SIGHTED IN CLEVELAND On Tuesday, January 18, 2005, Gary Kubalski was at his home near Rocky River Drive in Cleveland, Ohio (population 478,403) when he spotted something strange. "I woke up at approximately 10 a.m. on the morning of January 18," Gary reported, "It's unusual for me to wake up this late. I looked out my second-floor bedroom window to an awfully bright January day of clear blue skies." "I immediately noticed two grey luminescent disks the size of nail heads traveling in formation at a high altitude, separated a football field apart, moving in an east to west direction. I knew I was witnessing something unique, because traveling in the same direction were several planes in the morning sky, one east, another southeast, and the area where I live is close to the air traffic routes to and from Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. As the disks had no visible wing shape and traveled in a swift, steady and straight motion as if on an imaginary string in mid-air, perfectly stable while going from east to west." "They eventually disappeared gradually into the horizon, blending into the clouded sky to the west." "I continued watching and, after a minute or two, a single silver disk appeared, traveling the same flight path by itself. I was still wondering about what I was seeing and questioning its validity when this craft made a striking stop in mid-air, hovering still for about five seconds, then made what I could only describe as an 'Etch- A-Sketch' (zigzag) course change by making a 90 degree change to the south for a few hundred feet, followed by a lightning-fast 90 degree course change with no gradual deviation, no radius, no curving or banking of its bodily structure." The third disc "then traveled even for some time, then reversed course back to its original heading, again disappearing into the haze of horizon. The whole event with the three disks took about 10 minutes." (Email Form Report) TRIANGULAR UFO SIGHTED OVER AURORA, ILLINOIS On Tuesday, February 15, 2005, at 8:30 p.m., the male witness was outdoors at his home in Aurora, Illinois (population 142,990) when he spotted something unusual in the sky, approaching from the southwest. "I was in my backyard, having a cigarette when I noticed something in the sky," he reported, "It was a very overcast night, and the city lights illuminated the clouds pretty well that night. I was facing east and the object came out of the southwest and was out in front of me at about a 90 degree angle. The object was just above the ceiling of clouds, and I could make out the shape of a triangle through the clouds. There was no noise and no lights that I could see, but I could see the shape very distinctly because of the lights from the city." "The object continued on a northeasterly path, moving at a high rate of speed. How fast, I'm not sure, but the whole event took about three seconds, so it was moving good. It flew in a straight line, no deviation, again, that I could see. The trees around my house have no leaves on them, so I could see the whole sky pretty well. I tracked it until it was out of sight." "I'd have to say the object was bigger than a commercial airliner and was flying at about 300 to 500 feet (90 to 150 meters) off the ground. Very low as the cloud cover was very low that night, also." "The distance it covered from when I first saw it till I couldn't was about one mile (1.6 kilometers). As for the speed, all I can say is that it was fast. If I had to guess, I'd have to say 300 to 400 miles per hour (480 to 640 kilometers per hour)." Aurora, Illinois is just south of Interstate Highway I-88, located about 20 miles (32 kilometers) west of Chicago. (Many thanks to Brian Vike for this report.) HOVERING UFO SEEN IN KILLEEN, TEXAS On Tuesday, February 15, 2005, at 6:05 a.m., Angela Ross walked into the kitchen of her home in Killeen, Texas (population 86,911). She reported, "I had been up a few short minutes making my tea. I started to fill up the pitcher with water and looked out" the window "at the sky, as it was still dark at this time. I saw what I thought was a full moon at the top of some trees, but then saw the bright object move away from the trees." "It zigzagged and then disappeared into thin air right before my eyes. I was facing west. The object was white and round and very bright. It was moving probably 30 to 40 miles per hour (48 to 64 kilometers per hour)." Killeen, Texas is on Highway 190 about 30 miles (48 kilometers) southwest of Waco. The town is just south of the U.S. Army's Fort Hood. (Email Form Report) CYLINDRICAL UFO VISITS MEXICO CITY'S SUBURBS "On (Thursday) February 17, 2005, I witnessed the transit of an unidentified flying object over the eastern regions of Mexico City," ufologist Ana Luisa Cid Fernandez reported, "I was writing an article on my computer when something made me turn to the left and look out the window. It was an elongated structure of considerable size, visible to the unaided eye, which traveled horizontally at great speed." "When I reached for my camcorder to shoot some video, the brilliant structure made a sudden reverse motion and hid behind the rooftops. I remained patient and waited for it to emerge, obtaining some good images." "I would have wanted to follow its trajectory, but my young daughter was asleep, so I contacted my colleagues so they could continue tracking the strange flying object." The UFO left Mexico City, crossing Route 136 just north of Aztahuacan and Los Reyes. It was last seen heading for Ixtapaluca and the ancient Toltec ruins at Tlapacoya. (Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Ana Luisa Cid Fernandez para estas noticias.) DAYLIGHT DISC SPOTTED IN CHILE'S FAR SOUTH On Sunday, February 20, 2005, "around 3 p.m., Walter Jara and his cousin, Luis Aguilar, saw a UFO fly over a mountain, Cerro Hornopiren," near Puerto Montt, a city on the Golfo de Ancud in Chile's far south. "According to Jara's account, the UFO flew over the summit before his startled eyes and, a few seconds later, he gathered his wits and managed to take a digital photograph of the object." "Jara said that at the moment of the photograph he was not aware that it was a flying object. He was surprised a few minutes later. At first he thought it could have been a spot on the camera lens." "But after keeping the UFO in sight for 60 seconds, his perspective and that of his camera had changed." "According to his story, the flying saucer was not visible in plain sight. However, when he zoomed the camera lens, he was able to see the object clearly." "'It was a moment of wonder and amazement,' said Jara, 'The day was clear and cloudless. The object oscillated violently in the sky. I saw that it was not a bird because they move differently.'" "He added that the UFO was grey in color and oval- shaped." "Jara's friend, Fernando Garces, said that his family lives in Hornopiren and has never seen any object with the characteristics witnessed by Walter Jara. The Meteorology Office at Puerto Montt's Tepual Airport dismissed the possibility that weather balloons could be involved, since these are launched at 8 a.m. and fly over the area for a maximum time of two hours." "According to weather official Gaston Munoz, by 11 o'clock (a.m.) the (weather) ballons have burst." (See the Chilean newspaper El Llanhique for February 21, 2005, "Eyewitness saw UFO flying over Cerro Hornopiren for 60 seconds." Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Liliana Nunez Orellana por este articulo de diario.) MOUNTAIN CLIMBER SNAPS UFO PHOTO IN ARGENTINA "An unidentified flying object of prodigious size, silver in color and with the characteristic shape of the so-called 'flying saucers,' was photographed with a high- definition camera by a Buenos Aires mountaineer during an ascent of Nevado de Cachi" mountain in northwestern Argentina, "one of the greatest challenges for South American climbers." "The photograph, of extraordinary clarity, was taken while the sportsman was at Las Pailas, an inhabited location halfway up the summit at an elevation of 3,500 meters (11,550 feet) above sea level, which includes the ruins of an ancient (pre-Columbian) Chalchaqui settlement." "The protagonist of the event was Guillermo Martin, an instructor with the Buenos Aires-based Entrenamientos de Montana (Spanish for Mountain Trainee --J.T.) club." "The photo was taken in November 2004 but was made known only last week. 'I didn't realize I had taken the shot until I saw it as a print,' Martin said, 'We researched it with speculations, and there was no error or damage to the systems. Nor does it appear that the object was the result of an undesired chemical reaction of some sort.'" "What the camera did record, for no reason, perhaps due to the 'thing's' speed, could not be seen by human eyes, according to the sportsman, who forwarded the startling images to Antonio Zuleta, a Cachi UFO researcher, also an enthusiastic mountaineer and host of a radio show on FM Radio San Jose. He also managed to send the object on a videotape." "Cachi, located 150 kilometers (90 miles) from the provincial capital" of Salta "and some 2,200 meters (7,260 feet in elevation) high, has become a worldwide center of interest for lovers of this mysterious and intriguing subject." "Martin has returned to this locale once more since last week and is attempting a new ascent of El Nevado de Cachi," which stands "6,380 meters (21,004 feet) above sea level, this time with a team of eight mountaineers." "'The day I took the photos--around noon--the skies were clear, cloudless, the sun was shining, there was no sound and the temperature was quite pleasant,' Martin told Zuleta, who in turn forwarded a transcript of the sportsman's statements to El Tribuno." Salta, capital of the province of the same name, is located 800 kilometers (500 miles) northwest of Buenos Aires, the capital of Argentina. (See the Argentinian newspaper El Tribuno for February 24, 2005, "Mountain climber photographs a large UFO." Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Mercedes Casas por este articulo de diario.) HUGE OVAL UFO APPEARS IN SASKATCHEWAN A huge oval UFO with blue lights was seen hovering over towns in southern Saskatchewan province, Canada, which are famous for their previous outbreaks of crop circles. According to Canadian ufologist Barb Campbell, "A gentleman in North Battleford, Sask. at 10 p.m. on Monday, February 21, 2005, reported 'a very large, bright, greenish-blue round object travelling northwest to southeast' over the city of North Battleford. He described the object as 'travelling slower than a falling star and unlike any plane' he has ever seen. It appeared as though it had travelled toward the hospital. The gentleman almost jumped into his car to drive down to the river to see if it had landed. The object then disappeared over the horizon." "At 10:15 p.m., a woman in Midale, Sask. happened to notice something outside her window. She yelled to her husband, 'Look out the window!' The husband then saw a large silver object emitting a green glow travel right past the window." "The husband described it as 'big, oval in shape, travelling at high speed just above the trees across the alley.' The wife said the object seemed to be rotating as it moved. The bedroom window faces northeast, and the object was travelling in a southerly direction." "The whole event took place within a matter of two or three seconds. A silverish-white trail was seen behind the object. There are houses on the other side of the alley. It was determined that the object was no more than a mile (1.6 kilometers) away from these houses." "When questioned, the husband held an orange up to his line of sight at the window, adding that this is how big the UFO was." "At the time of the incident, no electrical interference had been noticed. However, the next morning (Tuesday, February 22, 2005), when the husband was getting ready for work, he was unable to listen to the Environment Canada broadcast on VHF frequency 162.400 Megaherz." "Indeed, the SaskTel tower was off the air Tuesday and Wednesday (February 22 and 23, 2005) following. There is a major power grid close to Midale, approximately 2 miles (3.2 kilometers) away, coming from a coal-generating power plant at Estevan," 25 miles (40 kilometers) southeast of Midale. The oval UFO is believed to have crossed the border into the USA just east of Ambrose, North Dakota (population 17), a village on Highway 43 located about 70 miles (116 kilometers) north-northwest of Minot, N.D. (Many thanks to Barb Campbell for these news stories.) (Editor's Note: Extraterrestrials have a strange affinity for the name Ambrose. In the Twentieth Century, people who were taken away and never brought back included Ambrose J. Beirce (1913), Ambrose Small (1922), Ambrose Dexter (1937) and Ambrose Allen Jr. (1964).) [A map showing the path of the object is available at: http://www.ufoinfo.com/sightings/canada/050221.shtml and http://www.nwsurc.com/ssr-04-37.htm . Anyone having seen anything unusual Monday February 21, 2005 is asked to contact NWSURC at 306-893-4009 or iva e-mail at: contactus.nul - John @ UFOINFO]. FROZEN SEA DISCOVERED AT ELYSIUM ON MARS "A huge frozen sea lies just below the surface of Mars, a team of European scientists has announced." "Their assessment is based on pictures of the planet's equatorial Elysium region that show plated and rutted features across an area 800 by 900 kilometers (480 by 540 miles)." "The team thinks a catastrophic event flooded the landscape five million years ago and then froze intact." "Large reserves of water ice are known to be held at the poles on Mars, but if this discovery is confirmed by followup observations, it would be a first for a region at such low latitude." "'It's been predicted for a long time that you should find water close to the surface of Mars near the equator,' Jan-Peter Muller from University College, London, said." "'This is an area where there are a lot of river features, but no one has ever seen a sea before, and certainly no one has ever seen pack ice before,' he told BBC News." "The interpretation is based on images taken by the High Resolution Stereo Camera aboard Europe's Mars Express spacecraft. These show extensive fields of large, platy features--reminiscent of fractured ice floes found in the polar regions on Earth," which are covered with a layer of windblown dust. "Finding exposed ice at the (Martian) equator will be unlikely. Very low (air) pressure on the planet would lead to sublimation, i.e. the ice would change over time straight to water vapour." "But the research group, led by John Murphy from Open University, UK told (the science journal) Nature, that a crust of dust and volcanic ash, perhaps four to five centimetres (1.5 to 2 inches) thick, has prevented this from happening." "'The story runs that the water flowed in some kind of massive cataclysmic event; pack ice formed on that body of water and broke up; and then the whole thing froze rigid,' explained Prof. Muller." "'Large amounts of dust then fell over this area. The dust fell through the water and on top of the pack ice, which explains why the pack ice is a different hue to the area around it.'" "The water that formed the sea in southern Elysium, five degrees north of the (Martian) equator, seems to have originated beneath the surface of Mars, erupting from a series of fissures known as Cerberus Fossae." "Many of the features seen by the Mars Express have also been picked up by the Mars Orbiter Camera aboard the (USA's) Mars Global Surveyor." "The Mars Express has been in orbit around the Red Planet for a year." (See BBC News for February 21, 2005, "Mars pictures reveal frozen sea." Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for this news story.) CASSINI SNAPS PICTURES OF ENCELADUS "Saturn's small snow-white moon Enceladus has revealed a turbulent history, according to the latest images from NASA's Cassini spacecraft." Enceladus was discovered in 1789 by the astronomer Sir William Herschel (1738-1822). He named the small moon, approximately 500 kilometers (300 miles) in diameter, after a giant of Greek mythology who rebelled against the gods of Olympus. Enceladus orbits Saturn at a distance of 238,100 kilometers (147,950 miles). "The moon is covered in smoking ridges, chasms and scratches, which probably means that the moon has been squeezed and stretched." "Cassini passed within 1,200 kilometers (720 miles) of Enceladus on Thursday, February 17, 2005, "taking detailed photos of the surface, revealing details as tiny as 60 meters (200 feet) across." "Enceladus is a geologist's paradise,' said William McKinnon of Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. 'It has endless sets of closely-spaced fractures and faults.'" "He added that there are also blocks of high terrain and a variety of rifts." "This is all evidence of a tumultuous past, according to Paul Schenk of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas. 'It has been pulled, stretched and compressed in multiple episodes of deformation and relaxation.'" "The gravity of Saturn and another moon, Dione, are probably combining to distort the interior of Enceladus, causing" the folding and fracturing. "The same processes may have destroyed old craters, heating the surface so that it slowly slumps--even causing floods of icy lava." "'I'm betting that liquid ammonia-water is involved,' says McKinnon. He also points out what seems to be volcanic ice ridges." "And Enceladus's bright surface suggests there may be even more energetic volcanism at work. It is the brightest object in the solar system, so close to pure white that it must be covered in fresh ice--or snow--fired out of ice geysers. These geysers might blast some of the snow into orbit around Saturn, forming the (big) planet's tenuous E-ring, suggest scientists." "They are looking out for volcanic plumes on the moon's horizon, where they will be the easiest to spot against the inky blackness of space." UFO Roundup editor Joseph Trainor said he was "still hopeful" that someday Enceladus would become the home of a space colony of UFO enthusiasts. "It'll happen long after my time," Trainor said, "But I'm hoping that future ufologists who keep the Roundup going will someday transmit our weekly newspaper from Enceladus." "Actually, Enceladus is a good choice for space homesteading," he added, "There's plenty of snow, which can be melted down into water. The water can be used in hydroponic gardens to grow vegetables. Water can also be broken down via electrolysis into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen can be used for cooking and energy; the oxygen for spacesuits to explore the terrain. Best of all, you have a great view of Saturn--the ringed planet fills much of the sky!" Trainor said he envisioned a space colony made up of "small homesteads, a science complex, a school and public library, and a central community center with the offices of UFO Roundup on the top floor. Truck farming will probably be the main industry. We'll sell fresh produce to passing alien spacecraft." (See New Scientist for February 18, 2005, "Survey shows Enceladus a 'geologist's paradise.'" Many thanks to Steve Wilson Sr. for this article.) BRITISH ROBOT SUB SUNK BY A USO? "Lost: much-loved robot submarine, last seen under 200 meters (660 feet) of Antarctic ice last Wednesday," February 16, 2005, "answers to the name Autosub." "The British unmanned research submarine," valued at 1.5 million pounds sterline, "was investigating the waters below the Fimbul ice shelf when it became trapped. Scientists don't know what went wrong, but say the submarine is stuck and is unlikely to be rescued." "Gwyn Griffiths, an ocean engineer at the Southampton Oceanography Centre" in UK, "who built the Autosub, said, 'It isn't going to come back. We've lived with this vehicle for eight years, and it's done 382 missions. But every time we put it out, there's a chance it isn't going to return. It was sort of inevitable.'" "Scientists sent the submarine under the ice shelf, one of the most inaccessible and poorly-known environments on Earth, to collect information about the role of the ocean in climate change. It was also to investigate whether global warming is accelerating, how the ice melts and what sort of creatures live in Antarctic waters." "The conditions and terrain on the ice shelf are so treacherous that collecting data at the surface, even using tethered robotic vehicles, is dangerous." "The seven-metre (22-foot) Autosub, also known as an automatic underwater vehicle, was about to return to the British Antarctic Survey's research ship James Clark Ross on Wednesday." "Instead, it began to broadcast a distress signal from a position about 10 miles (16 kilometers) from the ship under the 200-metre (660-foot) thick ice sheet." "The sub is not remote-controlled--its route is programmed before departure, and it uses an onboard system to navigate." "Powered by 5,160 D-cell batteries, it can run for about 300 miles (500 kilometers) over several days." "The vehicle is not insured--scientists knew that if it got into trouble under the ice, it would be impossible to rescue." (See The Guardian of UK for February 21, 2005, "Has anyone seen our submarine?") 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, Mars and Saturn-- 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 Reports and Experiences, UFO + PSI Magazine
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:24:54 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:29:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:11:42 EST >Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:47:44 -0500 >>Subject: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing ><snip> >>There was no mention of the more than 400 witnesses to the Roswell >>event. Not all of these people are flakes or hoaxers. >No, and not all of them are witnesses - not by a long shot. This >is a term that is tossed around far too casually in the field of >ufology, and it's overuse debases it's value when referring to >true witnesses, defined by Black's Law Dictionary as: >"Witness, n. In general, one who, being present, personally sees >or perceives a thing; a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness." >How many of those are there, really, for Roswell? How many of >that number are truly credible? A much, much smaller number. >When one makes outlandish claims like "400 witnesses", the real >witnesses get lost in the shuffle, and it makes it easier for >people to dismiss the case. >>To suppport the Mogul theory, Jennings trotted out Karl Pflock >>without mentioning that Karl is CIA and a former deputy >>asstistant secretary of defense. >So what? The implication here is that Karl is still working for >them? But where is the proof? Why should they be obliged to >mention it? >If we think Karl is still working for the government, and can't >be trusted (a ridiculous proposition, in my view, but the one >that is insinuated in Marrs' statement, above), why isn't that >allegation levelled at so-called "whistleblowers" who used to >(or still, in some cases, at least allegedly) work for the >government? Are they hunky-dory because they're pro-UFO, but >Karl isn't? What about Major Kevin Randle? What about Stan >Friedman, who spent years working under security for the >government? Do we only believe ex-government types when they >agree with us? What about Steven Greer, who trots out his >"briefing" with James Woolsey all the time? Woolsey was a lot >further up the food chain than Karl. >Of course, this also ignores the fact that Karl (who is a big >boy, and can defend himself, but...) has repeatedly stated that >some UFO sightings are extraterrestrial in nature. He, like more >than a few others on this list, just doesn't buy Roswell. Fair >enough. If you disagree with him, stick to the facts. >I don't mind it when people disagree with Karl - heck, I do it >all the time. But his past government employment is not relevant >to the discussion, in any way, shape or form, unless you can >show solid evidence - not just insinuation - that it should be. Karl's past CIA history may or may not be relevant, but that was not the focus of my 2003 MUFON paper, Critiquing The Roswell Critics. His character assasination of Pappy Henderson, John Kromshroeder, Blanchard was much more relevant as well as the fact that there are so many holes in the Mogul explanation... so secret was Mogul that there were flights just allowed to fall in the desert without chase planes or retrieval teams. No fancy figured tape has ever been provided. No launch matches the date, Galganski showed the quantity of material was wrong. It ignores "Found last week" on July 8 papers etc etc etc. I never worked for the US Government except in December, 1952, when I worked for the US Post office in Linden, New Jersey, for 2 weeks at Xmas while a sophomore at Rutgers U. in New Brunswick, New Jersey. My professional employment in the USA was always for various industrial concerns on Government sponsored contracts... not for the government itself. I have also on many occasions noted that many people referred to as witnesses, especially in the Roswell case, were not
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 New UFO Map Of South Atlantic Ocean From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:43:42 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:55:47 -0500 Subject: New UFO Map Of South Atlantic Ocean Hello all: I just put up a new UFO Sightings map, this time for the South Atlantic Ocean. http://www.larryhatch.net/SATL.html Like the SE Pacific and Indian Oceans, there are very few sightings at sea. This map includes the Trinidade photo event (look just east of 30-degrees West) which is a bit brighter than the others. Actually there are 5 Trinidade listings here, all from 1957- 1958. They appear as one or two because of the scale of the map and the unique pin-point location. One busy spot at the lower left is the Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 1 Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:12:04 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:57:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night - Hatch >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:27:18 -0800 >Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night >>From: Adam Lowe <subbie.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:31:59 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Website Traffic Increase Last Night My last sentence was edited to fix mis-spelled words, thus losing the meaning. >For the worst of the junk sites, look for 'UFO Sightings' or UFOs. Please note purposeful mis-spellings: For the worst of the junk sites, look for 'UFO Sitings' or UFO's. (with apostrophe!)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Jim Marrs onUFOs: Seeing Is Believing - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 18:59:40 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:08:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Jim Marrs onUFOs: Seeing Is Believing - Kimball >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:24:54 -0400 >Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:11:42 EST >>Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>>From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:47:44 -0500 >>>Subject: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing Stan: Lord knows I don't want to get into a tussle with you at the same time as I've got Michael Salla to deal with, but a couple of points follow...:) <snip> >Karl's past CIA history may or may not be relevant, but that was >not the focus of my 2003 MUFON paper, Critiquing The Roswell >Critics. Never said it was. Back to the original point - Karl's past is not relevant, period, unless someone can demonstrate that it is. It is only mentioned because it will presumably convince some people that he's still working for "them" against "us". In my view, saying "may or may not be relevant" is no better than saying "it is". <snip> >I never worked for the US Government except in December, 1952, >when I worked for the US Post office in Linden, New Jersey, for >2 weeks at Xmas while a sophomore at Rutgers U. in New >Brunswick, New Jersey. My professional employment in the USA was >always for various industrial concerns on Government sponsored >contracts... not for the government itself. This is hair-splitting (although perhaps I should have been more precise with my language in the original post). By working under security, as you did, on government-sponsored projects, you were working for the government, if not quite "for" the government. From Top Secret/Majic: "After the University of Chicago awarded me a masters degree in physics in 1956, I got a job at General Electric Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion (ANP) department in Evendale, just north of Cincinnati, Ohio. As the name of the department indicates, we were working on nuclear-powered high performance jet aircraft, and so our research was classified Secret Restricted Data. The program was jointly sponsored by the Atomic Energy Commission and the Air Force... The government provided facilities, fissionable materials, and a budget of more than $100 million a year." >I have also on many occasions noted that many people referred to >as witnesses, especially in the Roswell case, were not >witnesses. They were persons spoken to who knew nothing. >Sometimes they could provide info on where witnesses might be, >but they had neither seen nor heard anything themselves. Never said you did.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Dick Hall's Views On The Peter Jennings Special From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 00:06:44 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:12:45 -0500 Subject: Dick Hall's Views On The Peter Jennings Special I was among the many serious UFO advocates whose videoed interviews and other contributed materials were left on the cutting room floor by the Peter Jennings Production people. Am I upset? No, it goes far beyond that. I am angry, depressed, and feeling that my almost lifetime effort to fight for serious attention to UFOs has come to naught, and here I am.... well, most of the images I think of are X-rated. The Journal of Scientific Exploration asked me to review the program, so I did that for them. In that review I tell about my extensive interactions with several members of the production staff and all the material that I provided to them, only to feel like Charley Brown once again as Lucy pulled the football away at the last minute. What they told me the program would be, and what all of us viewed, are two quite different things. I am beyond fed up, I'm outta here. I'm an old firehouse dog, so I am likely to jump up and follow the fire engine and start barking when provoked to do so, but the ignorant crap of the Greer's, Salla's, and other 'disclosure' freaks (not to mention the skeptibunkers) turns me off so totally that I can't help but wonder about who they are and where they are coming from, and whether they are disinformation agents. Yes, I am becoming paranoid, but not about government plots - "the government" is too diffuse and disorganized to be suspect - but instead about what some arrogant, self-serving, sub-group of government and their handmaidens may be up to. E-mail me privately if you wish. I may or may not have the time
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:53:54 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:15:03 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:17:10 EST >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>You say that "UFO research needs to move on." >>That is a siren call that, if followed as you propose, will >>probably finish ufology as a place for serious research. >>So here's my siren call... >>I would suggest that UFO research needs to move on, all right >>- away from you and your whistleblowers (unless they can >>offer some proof other than their word), and back to serious >>study of serious evidence. >Paul et al, >I've been unimpressed with the arguments levied against Dr. >Salla and am reminded of a horse race with every runner wearing >blinkers so that he can see nowhere else other than straight >ahead of him. This scope of thinking is so focused that it's >bordering on being myopic. Hi Stuart I've thought about this a bit, and I now agree it is fair comment that Salla's exhortation to "move on" may have got some of us more annoyed than is really warranted. As you say, we don't really have strong evidence that all of his whistleblowers must be liars or fantasists, and it would be unreasonable to insist that they must be. It is hard to resist the temptation to point out that Michael's own strategy of conviction-based action rather than evidence- based deliberation sanctions disregard of such standards of evidence and thus shoots itself in the foot. I've said something similar myself. But I now retract it. The reason I retract it is because of what I believe is a misunderstanding on both sides. Michael is wrong to require - or to have given the impression of requiring - a sea-change in methods and focus from ufology in general. We in turn are wrong to lampoon his point of view on the basis of what is arguably a kind of logical sophistry, because he is actually being quite realistic. It seems to me that the situation has two components that merit two different responses. There is the scientific issue and there is what we might call the "systems audit" issue. The former, in a cartoon version of itself anyway, assigns a one-dimensional value to the status of a problem, a rating on the axis of truth- untruth. But the audit process is a matter of determing and minimising risk, and risk is two-dimensional, the product of an assessable _loss_ and a _probability_ . Michael is approaching the issue with an auditor's brief. For example, a company audit might reveal an information security issue that has trivial data-protection implications and a very high probability of occurrence. On the other hand, there might be a situation where failure of controls on data access could lead to very large financial or legal consequences, but the probability of failure is very small. The systems auditor's job is to consider the product of the loss and its probability to calculate the risk, then prioritise the various risks and the measures needed to circumvent them. Analogously, the existence of whistleblower testimony represents a risk which is a product of the probability of its truth and the potential cost of failing to react to it. Even if the probability of its truth is very small, if the potential costs of failing to react are very large then the audit risk can be significant. Now obviously this is fraught with subjective judgements. Nevertheless the audit approach is very widely subscribed too - in the form of hard cash - by businesses and other organisations that live or die by the bottom line. The resolution, it seems to me, is that a sound organisation requires both types of activity. That the "productive" engineers and the creative theorists will despise that parasitic alien lifeform known as the systems auditor, who periodically comes around and seems to insist everyone do things his/her way, is just a fact of life. The auditor goes away, and everyone else gets on with their business as though he/she were of no account. Which is as it should be, as they have a wholly different understanding of the nature of risk and different jobs to do. Yet this is a sensible division of labour that just might help prevent the company that writes the cheques going into receivership. Another illustration is apt to the whole UFO evidence issue, and concerns the meaning of scepticism. The seminal Greek sceptic philosopher Pyrho (I may have spelt that wrong) was put in a spot when his aged philosophy teacher fell in a ditch. Pyrho stood and thought, and thought some more, and eventually decided that all arguments in favour of pulling the old man out were strictly inconclusive, so he did nothing and went on his way. Sensible? I don't think so. The correct conclusion was not that no action was justifiable, but rather that no commitment to a belief was justifiable. Pyhro couldn't prove conclusively ahead of time that rescuing his mentor was "a good thing"; only the act of following through on the strength of that conjecture could demonstrate whether it was or not. This is a reasonable position for ufology in general. There is no definitive, tangible proof of exotic phenomena, but everyone here understands that a pessimistic strategy dictated by its past absence will never disclose such proof in future. We are all (unless we are direct percepients) doing some kind of risk- benefit analysis based on a degree of intuition. If we accept that the probability of extraterrestrial visitation (or some analogue) is at all non-zero, then an audit-based approach to assessing risk with regard to whistleblower testimony must be valid. It just is not value-free scientific curiosity. It's a wholly different activity, and as long as the difference is understood - by Michael as well as by everyone else - there need be no conflict. The trouble starts when the auditors start trying to dictate scientific strategies.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:39:31 -1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:17:38 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:03:52 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:09:37 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs ><snip> >>Aloha John, I agree that there is something definitely funny >>with Lazar's alleged Master's degrees at Cal Tech and MIT. From >>his testimonies, he seems vague and things don't check out as >>you say. >>Drexler may have just been a mistake by Lazar given the enermous >>psychological pressure he was under at the time. >>As for Hohsfield, as you say some things don't check out. >>Does that make him 'a liar' and the whole Lazar testimony >>'bunk', as Stan says? That doesn't logically follow. >>The 1982 Los Alamos Monitor refers to him as a physict which >>implies he had at least a Master's degree. >>There is also evidence to support his testimony of having worked >>in a highly classified project in 1988/89. >>So while the degrees testimony don't check out, I don't dismiss >>everything else on this basis. >>here's more happening here and we don't have all the facts. We >>need to work with what we know for certain about Lazar, and >>hopefully that will clear up some of the uncertainties. >Michael, you just don't get it do you? Duxler only taught at >Pierce and never taught at CIT. Bob was in one of his classes >while Bob was supposedly at MIT... an impossibility. Aloha Stan, I understood the point you were making about Duxler and I said that Lazar probably confused the institutions in his response. In that sense it may have been little more than a mistake on his part. As for being at MIT and CIT at the same time, I know he claims to have done his Master's degree at CIT first and then MIT. As for dates, I don't have the transcipts for what he exactly said so there may have been some errors there as well. So it's possible he just erred given the enormous pyschology pressure he was under. Let's not forget that he claims to have been targetted for assassination, was being harassed, had financial concerns. Answering detailed questions about his background may not have been a priority for him. What was the priority was his story and he was prepared to take a lie detector test and apparently did well. That strengthen's his case, and answers in part your accusation that he is lying. >You said something about the Los Alamos Monitor being a house >organ. Wrong. It is a newspaper in the town of Los Alamos. I >have no doubt Bob told them he was a physicist at the lab. There >are thousands of professional people there. The great majority >are honest. Why would they check? Thanks for the clarification. Why do you imply that Lazar lied in the 1982 story about being a physicist? I think a fair minded person would assume that he is telling the truth rather than make the assumption you are making. Let's not forget that your main case was that he lied in 1989 when he came out with the S4 story. The evidence may be inconclusive for that, but that doesn't mean he lied in 1982 about being a physicist. You are making some incorrect assumptions here based on your interpretation of the validity of the 1989 claims. An inconclusive set of claims in 1989 does not mean he lied in 1982 when he got what appears to be his first regular job and was describing his position. >W-2 forms are filled out every year by businesses. There is no >reason to say Bob's is genuine. No tax form. When he went >bankrupt for $300,000 he listed his occupation as self-employed >film processor. Read the article by Mahood that you noted. He >thought Lazar, after Mahood did a lot of checking, was a fraud >as well and also notes that Bob was out near the mail box many >times. Yes, I did read Mahood's article and Lazar's background is definitely unstable. It seems he was driven by many interests and that got him into financial problems. Building rocket cars isn't cheap, I assume. Financial difficulties doesn't in any way detract from the substance of Lazar's claims concerning S4. As for the W-2, it's evidence and was traced by the reseachers associated with George Knapp to Naval Intelligence in Maryland. The zip code on the W-2 refers to Naval Intelligence - how would Lazar have known that? No, my conclusion is that the W-2 is genuine and that Lazar was working on a waived SAP with Naval Intelligence in 1988/89. Also when Knapp confirmed Lazar's employment at Los Alamos, he said that some of the employees that remembered Lazar warned not to talk about him and were afraid about the consequences of doing so. Also, Los Alamos denied Lazar worked there up until 1994 and then finally admitted so. Why what there motivation in doing this? All this is in the public domain and I still have not found adequate responses to the evidence compiled at: http://www.karinya.com/travel2.htm >By the way there is no need for a person to have a Masters to be >called a Physicist, and, of course Bob didn't have one or even a >BS degree. In a sense he earned the latter. He wasn't a >physicist. He has earned no degrees not even from Pierce. And >please don't tell me that you can tell who is being honest and >sincere. The right answer is that all conmen seem to be honest >and sincere. and that nobody can be sure of that judgement. I think we reach here the crux of the matter concerning Lazar. You say he earned no degrees, not even a Bachelor's. So if we follow the logic of your position further, then he got a job as a technician in the Los Alamos Meson Facility in 1982 - a world class facility, with only a High School diploma from 1976 where he finished in the bottom third, and some credits from Pierce Junior College to support his application. So that means that between 1976 he has done just a few credits at Pierce, with no degree to show for six years, and then gets what appears to be plum position at a world class facility as a technician. That doesn't make sense. Anyone employing technicians to support the scientists at Los Alamos would want to be sure that the people they employ are up to it. The scenario you've painted doesn't hold up. No one would have employed Lazar with the scenario you've supplied. It's more plausible that he did get to complete degrees, at the very least a bachelors, but more likely a master's to support Lazar's claim of being a physicist. I am aware of the protocol in the use of degrees by professionals to describe themselves and one simply doesn't call oneself a Physicist with just a bachelors degree. The only exemption may be someone who has a track record as an inventor, science author for ten years or more. But Lazar was just starting at Los Alamos so my assumption is that he was following convention that one doesn't describe oneself as a physicist with just a bachelors degree. Do you have examples where describing oneself as physicist is a common practice for those only with a bachelors degree? As for being able to tell who is being honest and sincere. I agree that one should rely more on gut feeling. In the case of Lazar, I've just looked at the evidence he has supplied, the investigations conducted by Knapp, corroborating witness testimonies, and conclude he is telling the truth about his experiences at S4. That's just a logical conclusion from what is availabe. Your position that Lazar is a liar and a con man isn't consistent with the evidence that is publically available. Finally, I do have to aplogise for an error in one of my early posts to you. You asked if I still had my diplomas and I said no. Well, I did a search and found them hidden away with my transcripts. So I have to withdraw my anecdotal support for Lazar's claim that he had lost his diplomas. Fortunately, I can hang mine up on the wall again so I don't forget I have them. Now I know the real reason why professionals put their diplomas up on walls.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 23:11:53 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:19:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? >From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 02:19:42 -0500 >Subject: Re: Did You See That Peter Jennings UFO Special!? <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 20:00:10 -1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:24:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:44:09 EST >Subject: Re: Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:55:09 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:28:50 EST >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>>>Best evidence for what? The existence of UFOs? >>>Michael: >>>Exactly. What you and the "disclosure" crowd cannot come to >>>grips with, it seems, is that the case has not yet been made >>>that the UFOs are alien spacecraft, at least not to the point >>>where you or I could walk into a court of law, or a history >>>classroom, or a newspaper editor's office, and state with >>>certainty that this was so beyond a reasonable doubt (perhaps >>>not even to the "balance of probabilities" standard, although >>>I'd be willing to take a crack in front of an unbiased jury in a >>>civil trial). >>>UFOs exist. That can be proved, by the very fact that there are >>>a fairly large number of "unidentified flying object" sightings >>>out there that remain unexplained. That they are alien >>>spacecraft remains unproved. So the need to gather evidence >>>continues. >>Thank you for revealing your position which I find to be very >>puzzling given the enormous evidence that is publically >>available from a range of sources of the validity of the ETH. >And I find your willingness to leap to conclusions based on >evidence that would not stand up in a court of law, a >university, or the media, as proving the existence of ET beyond >a reasonable doubt. Of course, you blithely ignore the fact that >I said I'd take my chances on the civil standard, ie the balance >of probabilities. Which one of us has the rigid position, then? Paul, you do admit to the possibility of government agencies tampering with evidence so that means you concur to the possibility of a distorting factor in the investigatory process and to whatever evidence is available for a hypothetical court case. So it stands to reason that this is no ordinary investigatory process which would be conducted in conformaty with the normal investigatory processes and stand up in a court of law. To simply say that one needs to strictly apply the evidentiary standards in a 'normal investigation' ignores the distorting factor which you agree is a possibility. How would you factor that possibility into your investigatory process? Would you lesson the value of hard evidence if your starting premise is that hard evidence can be withheld, tampered, altered by agencies that operate above and beyond civil law and civilian agencies? There is an inconsistency in your position here of maintaining that the normal standards of a court of law should apply to whistleblowers, while admiting to a possible distorting factor in the evidentiary process. >><snip> >>>I have never said that "whistleblower" testimony is worthless, >>>or that it should be ignored. What I maintain is that the >>>alleged "whistleblowers" need to be vetted with a far more >>>rigorous methodology than you and others have employed. >>Can you give me an example of a whistleblower testimony >>concerning reversed engineered ETVs or working with EBEs that >>passes your vigorous vetting standard? >This answer does not address my original point, which is simply >that alleged whistleblowers require a more rigorous methodology >than you suggest. It is not up to me, or anyone else, to show >that they're lying; the burden of proof is on you and the >alleged whistleblowers to demonstrate that they're telling the >truth. And of course if you set the burden of proof at the 'normal level' for a court of law we get nowhere since there is no hard evidence when it comes to classified projects involving EBEs, ETVs. Many of the whistleblowers in the Greer Disclosure Project came forward to declare what they observed to be happening in classified projects during their military/government service and their preparedness to testify before Congress. A Congressional investigation is more appropriate than a court system since Congress is not burdened by the standards set in the normal court system. I don't want to in any way to demean the judicial system in place in Canada, the US, etc. These have developed over time to deal adequately well with the full range of civil and criminal justice issues. However, the civil courts are not designed to deal with national security cases. Congressional committees have more experience in that arena. It's not up to me to conform to the evidentiary standards of a court of law which are inappropriate in cases that directly impact on national security issues. Also the burden of proof is not on the whistleblowers to prove their cases. They can supply their testimonies, names, credentials, events, they witnessed, etc., and this can be investigated as thoroughly as possible by an appropriately designed investigatory process. Only a specially tasked investigatory committee that is able to systematically take into account all the factors we have respectively raised makes sense. However, such a committee will never eventuate if UFO researchers don't push for one. You unfortunately see no need since you apply normal court room standards to whistleblower testimony. That is a mistake. >And, for the record, no - I have not seen any alleged >whistleblower testimony that would satisfy me, beyond a >reasonable doubt, that they are telling the truth. However, this >does not rule out the possibility that there are those out there >with whom I am not familiar that would meet that standard, >although if there were I believe we would all know about it by >now. Your position is that whistleblowers need to be vetted more rigorously than I or others have done so. By your own admission, no whistleblowers have passed your rigorous vetting mechanism. Basically, all the whistleblowers don't give enough hard evidence to substantiate their claims about EBEs, ETVs, etc. You haven't established a methodology for vetting whistleblowers at all. You've established a method for systematically excluding from serious study a whole category of evidence that conclusively supports the ETH. That's a serious methodological error. It shows you haven't followed through the logical conclusions of suppression of the ETH, suppression of UFO evidence, etc. Why don't you have a look at Michael Swords article on the Original Estimate of the Situation. There's enough there to get you on the right track. http://www.ufoscience.org/history/swords.pdf >><snip> >>>>Oh, I see, making your argument by assertion. Researchers are >>>>credulous and sloppy because you say so, hmm. You make no >>>>mention of different methodologies being used in analysing >>>>different sources of evidence as I've mentioned numerous times >>>>in earlier posts. It seems methodology is not part of your >>>>lexicon. There is a rigorous alternative to the nuts and bolts >>>>approach to evidence but you don't want to acknowledge that. >>>>Argument by assertion is not very compelling. I posted my reply >>>>to Stan's critique of Lazar which you perhaps didn't read. >>>Of course I read it. You should have kept reading my post, >>>below. As for the "rigorous" nature of your methodology, I have >>>yet to see any evidence of it. What I see instead is a >>>predisposition to accept what these people are saying as true, >>>because it fits in with your belief system. That isn't >>>methodology. Methodology requires checking of facts, searching >>>for evidence, that will either support or discredit the >>>"whistleblower" testimony. >>>However, your statement above is an excellent example of one the >>>propagandist's favourite tools - if you can't counter a person's >>>argument, start attacking them personally. Just because I don't >>>agree that your techniques amount to a "methodology" doesn't >>>mean that the word "methodology" isn't in my lexicon. Your >>>hubris is amazing. >>Not a personal attack at all. You just made an assertion: "Those >>"researchers" are criticized for being credulous and sloppy for >>a very good reason - because they are credulous and sloppy." You >>didn't give reasons supporting your point, you just said I >>should refer to Stan's earlier post which I had already replied >>to. I responded to the hubris in your statement, it's good that >>you finally acknowledge that there's hubris here even though you >>project it on to me. >And I told you that your response didn't sufficiently answer the >questions Stan, and many others, have raised over the years. >When I place their research and conclusions about Lazar next to >yours, and factor in the statements that you made which started >this thread, then I consider you credulous and your methods >sloppy (words, I might add, that you used first; I would retain >credulous, and perhaps substitute ineffective). >As to where the hubris lies here, I'll leave that for others to >judge. I just wrote another post to Stan on the Lazar case so I'll let the forum decide who makes the more compelling case concerning Lazar's testimony. ><snip> >>>I grant that coherence and consistency are part of the parcel, >>>as they can be checked. Sincerity and integrity are not things >>>that can be checked, however - they are subjective judgements. >>>On what do you base your opinion that a person is being sincere? >>>Or that they have integrity? >>>Here's what I base it on - can they offer some evidence (any >>>evidence!) that what they say is true. Can their credentials be >>>verified? If not, their sincerity and integrity are, to but the >>>best spin possible on it, in dispute. >>Thank you for acknowledging the relevance of these 'soft facts', >>coherence and consistency can be checked. >Well, dud - of course they can be checked, against other, "hard" >evidence. I don't see how you need hard evidence to determine whether someone is being coherent or consistent. I've marked many Master's theses where a student's grade was determined by the coherence and consistency of their arguments. No hard facts were necessary. >>As for being subjective judgements, that's true to an extent. I'm >>puzzled by your point that sincerity and integrity are not things that >>can be checked. I think that is a very important set of criteria >>that can be checked. I disagree with you. > >Now I'm puzzled. How exactly would you go about quantifying a >person's sincerity? If you have a method, other than just your >"feel" for the person, I'm all ears. However, as you acknowledge >that these are subjective judgements, I'm not sure where you >would find an objective method to test a person's sincerity. As for integrity and sincerity, these are subjective factors that come with experience. When one has done field work interviewing people you develop over time some experience about who is telling the truth. I've done quite a bit of field work in areas involving human rights abuse. Experience, not just hard evidence, is enought to determine a persons integrity and sincerity. <snip> >Both you and Greer bring a belief in the ETH to the table that >taints your objectivity as much as the fact that the government >can and sometimes does lie (ie. change records) pushes in the >other direction. That's the real problem here. This isn't to say >that the alleged whistleblowers should be ignored (I never said >that), but, again, only that you and Greer et al are not the >best people to be doing the vetting. The premise in the ETH and national security agency interference comes from an analyis of the evidence. The most compelling in my mind was the whistleblower testimony Greer and others have been able to put out into the public arena. This is not a belief, just a logical conclusion from my analysis of the evidence provided by whistleblowers and others. Please don't try to paint on me one of those dimissive 'true believer' lables. Thanks. >>That makes it easier for researchers such as myself >>who want to work with the data to understand the implications of >>all this. >So, the implication is that the rest of us just don't understand >because we don't have you're expertise? Again, I refer to the >hubris thing. Yes, I've noticed you keep using the hubris term. As I said before, you are correct that there is considerably hubris happening in this dialogue. I don't agree with you as to the source. >>I don't set a premium on hard evidence since different >>agencies will and do regularly remove this evidence. >Here we agree - you don't set a premium on hard evidence. That's >the problem, alas. >>So if a whistleblower comes in with a story about reverse engineering >>ETV or working with EBEs, the story is assessed on the merits, >>rather than dismissed or put into the gray basket as >>inconclusive. >What merits, exactly, if you have no corroborating evidence. >What you're assessing the story on is your "feeling" about this >person, and the fact that you are predisposed to believe his >story because you buy into the ETH. I have not said anything about 'feeling' whether a person is right or not. I analyse their testimony in the context of all the information that is available about them, and the larger information pool concerning the subject matter at hand. I reach my conclusions based on my ability to be able to reason things through and reach a logical conclusion. I was hired by a number of different universities to teach graduate students to develop a similar research methodology. My teaching and research record was sufficient to get me hired and to get more academic positions if I wanted to continue a conventional career. The universities didn't hire me because I advertised my superior ability of 'feeling' the truth about a subject matter. >>That's where your basic mistake lies, you put the inconclusive data >>in the gray basket and let it sit, and haven't developed the methodology >>for working with it. >I want everyone to read the above very carefully - my (and >others) mistake is that we put the "inconclusive" date in the >gray basket. >If it's "inconclusive" as you say, where else are we supposed to put it?? The data is inconclusive by virtue of a lack of hard evidence according to conventional standards. That's why I postulated an exopolitics uncertainity principle. Bascially working with the inconclusive data is where you'll get most information about the ETH. In working with such data, however, one needs to develop rigorous social science criteria. >>Saying we need more hard evidence is a methodology, but it's >>inappropriate in this case. >It's inappropriate only because you say it is. Alas, that has >failed to convince me. I leave it to everyone else to draw their >own conclusions. >Here's Doctor Salla's position: >The government is altering records and tampering with evidence >all the time. That makes it impossible to get hard evidence. So, >we'll just accept the testimony of the whistleblowers (even the >term "whistleblowers" shows that you have already accepted their >testimony even before they state what it is) based on their say- >so, even when hard evidence surfaces that indicates they are not >being truthful (ie. Lazar). That's simplifies my position quite a bit. We need to consider _all_ whistleblower testimony. However, we don't have to accept it as all true. Just because a whistleblower has a story to tell, doesn't make it true or worth incorporating into the pool of data. There is always a possibility of inconsistencies, poor recollection, and disinformation sown in without the whistleblower being aware. So it's pretty complex. We definitely need to sort out the wheat from chaff. >Here's mine: >Treat these people and what they say with extreme caution until >their stories can be verified independently. Expose and >disregard those who are liars, but don't just assume they are >lying without having the same evidence that you would require to >prove they are telling the truth. For those cases that are >inconclusive, ie no evidence that they are lying, but no >corroborating evidence that they are telling the truth, place >the testimony in the gray basket, but do not wholly ignore it. I'm glad you don't want to wholly ignore testimony in the gray box. That means we have some agreement there. How do you propose not ignoring it? I haven't seen much discussion on this forum about the utility of discussing whistleblower testimonies in the gray box. Does your rhetorical support translate into any concrete suggestions? ><snip> >>>A couple of points here: >>>1. When you start using MJ-12 documents as evidence to support >>>your position, you're on shaky ground; >>The Woods team has done a thorough analysis of SOM1-01 and >>found it to be credible. In my view it was a leaked document. I think >>putting things into the gray box because they are 'shaky' is >>really inappropriate. >If you meant the SOM1-01 document, you should have said so, as >the term MJ-12 documents encompasses much more than just that >(CT Memo, EBD, TF Memo, Cooper documents, etc). I don't agree >that the SOM1-01 is legitimate, but at least I now know what you >were talking about. In my earlier post I referred to the "SOM1-01 Majestic Document'. I didn't use the plural so it was clear I was refering to just one document. >>I take it for granted that work in this field will be characterized by >>much uncertainty, so I'm prepared to factor that in to my analysis. >>You don't want to work with any thing 'shaky'. That's your choice. I do >>strongly disagree with that and think it masks a dogmatic methodology >>that keeps the UFO field from growing. >Yes, here is our fundamental point of disagreement. >However, folks, ask yourselves the following questions: >(1) who is being dogmatic here? All I want is a higher standard >of evidence, even as I concede that the ETH may well be valid, >that UFOs are definitely valid, that the government is capable >of lying and altering records, and that some alleged >whistleblower testimony may have some merit. Doctor Salla, on >the other hand, insists that this is "dogmatic" and keeps >ufology from growing. Yes, you want to maintain a higher standard of evidence which to date has not been passed by one whistleblower claiming to have information about projects concerning EBEs/ETVs. Your threshold is way too high. You'd have more credibility if you could cite one whistleblower who worked on such projects passing your threshold. >(2) Will Doctor Salla's "methodology" enable the field to grow, >or will it just bring it into disrepute? >>>2. If you wouldn't allow someone like Lazar to "spill the beans" >>>why would you not just kill him. Apparently the government can >>>do that (or so I hear), with all sorts of untraceable methods >>>(or so I hear). Why not take care of the problem that way? It >>>seems so much simpler; >>Yes, there are a number of questions raised by the Lazar case. I >>don't have all the answers, but I do want to work with his >>testimony since he has in my mind provided sufficient >>testimony/evidence to substantiate his story. >This statement is so self-contradictory as to beggar belief. >There are: >(a) a "number of questions raised by the Lazar case", and >(b) you "don't have all the answers" but somehow >(c) he has "provided sufficient testimony/evidence to > substantiate his story." >This is the most concise summary of your position I have heard. I don't see the inconsistency here at all. Lazar's case is a puzzle. It gives answers to some questions but raises many others in the process. Of course I don't have all the answers, that's why I'm here. To share information and methodologies. Yes, Lazar has provided sufficient to prove his point. >>My evidentiary threshold is obviously not set as high as yours. That's >>why I think you are being unrealistic and you of course think I'm >>being credulous. So we disagree. >Obviously not, and indeed we do. >>>3. I have stipulated elsewhere that the government is capable of >>>altering the government records of government employees (I'm not >>>convinced that they've done this, but I'll accept it for the >>>sake of argument). What you've failed to demonstrate is how they >>>could do this to a person's civilian records, particularly >>evidence of his alleged university studies, ie, Lazar. I'll give >>>Lazar a second look on the day he can produce a copy of his >>>degree, or his transcripts, or testimony from ONE person at any >>>of these institutions he supposedly attended that he was there, >>>and that they knew him. Even a photo in the yearbook will do. To >>>suggest that the government would have erased all of his records >>>at the time he was attending the university is preposterous, >>>because he wasn't in government service at that time (unless the >>>government has precognitive powers we don't know about). So, he >>>must be in the yearbook, or a register of students. Anything. >>>Where is it? >>It's interesting that you have arbitrarily set the criteria for >>accepting the validity of Lazar's testimony in terms of his >>civilian records. >I "arbitrarily" set the criteria in terms of his civilian >records? Puh-lease. All I did was generously stipulate to the >government portion of the debate so that you would focus on the >civilian side, where you have failed to offer any answers to the >questions raised by Stan and others. >>I agree that there are questions about his education that have not >>been satisfactorily answered by Lazar himself who appears evasive >>when it comes to his university documents. >So, Lazar, by your own admission, is "evasive", but we should >still accept his testimony? >Again, a fine demonstration of Dr. Salla's "methodology". I don't see why that should be a problem. If Lazar wanted to hide something that he felt would in some way damage him, then that doesn't diminish from the validity of the testimony he does offer. He did say in an interview with George Knapp that he didn't want to discuss the universities he got his Masters from because he was doing work for them, that somehow would damage his financial status. Message was, he didn't want to go there. Fair enough. He has to live. >>Yet he was employed as a 'physicist' at Los Alamos as >>the Los Alamos Monitor suggests. I don't buy the argument that >>the reporter just wrote down what Lazar said. If you only have a >>bachelor's degree you won't refer to yourself as a 'physicist' >>in an in house publication such as the Los Alamos Monitor which >>would be read by your peers. Lazar would at the minimum have had >>a Master's to describe himself as a 'Physicist'. >So, Lazar is "evasive" but you'll just take him at his word >about his education. How about this possibility - Lazar is lying >for some reason. Does that even factor in as a possibility to >you? >><snip> >>>>Again, serious research for what? That UFOs are real and exist. >>>>Do you need more evidence? >>>I need more evidence that demonstrates they are extraterrestrial >>>in nature, yes. >>Ok, that's our basic difference here. You do need more evidence >>and I'm sure that there are others who will agree with you on >>that. On the other hand, I and many others don't need more >>evidence to be persuaded about the ETH and want to work with the >>available data to see what's going on in the deep black >>projects. We need to find a modus vivendi where you can continue >>your work in finding conclusive evidence, and I can do my thing >>with working with material that's in the 'gray box' without >>conclusive hard evidence. If we can find a modus vivendi without >>name calling, dismissive insults, etc., that would be progress. >Alas, there is no "modus vivendi" here because your "work" >undermines mine. Yes, that's the problem. You consider my methodology to undermine yours, so mine shouldn't be seriously considered by UFO researchers. So you see no modus vivendi and just want to continue with your 'tried and true' adherence to hard evidence. And you have said on a number of occasions that I am hubristic and dogmatic. Wow. ><snip> >>I think you are being disingenuous here. >So much for the "no name-calling" rule. ><snip> >>Let me finish by repeating the question: "Can you name one >>whistleblower who claims to have worked on projects involving >>reverse engineered ETVs or EBEs that you acknowledge as >>credible?" If you can't, then my conclusion is that despite your >>'openess' to the argument of evidence tampering by the agencies, >>you effectively close the door on this by your insistence on >>hard facts that stand critical scrutiny. I find that to be >>disingenous. I believe my argument that the UFO field has to >>move forward by seriously considering whistleblower testimonies >>like Lazar's has merit. >Again, I'm being disingenous. Hmm... >As I've already answered your question above, let me flip it >around for you - is there a single case of alleged whistleblower >testimony that you have investigated which you have discarded as >fraudulent? Names, please. Touche. My approach is to look at the testimony of an individual whether it be whistleblower, contactee, remote viewer, and analyse it terms of the criteria I've spelt out before. How coherent it is, how consistent it is with other information I have, the integrity of the whistleblower, etc. There are some individuals that don't pass my criteria. One is Colonel Billie Faye Woodard whose testimony I declined to use when I investigated his case based on the evidence I could find. Another 'whistleblower' is a Vietnam Veteran who contacted me after a Coast to Coast interview I did. He wanted me to take up his case involving some information concerning military intelligence and extraterrestrial contact. When I investigated him, I chose to decline since I felt there was much to much about his case that had red flags for me. I don't want to give his name since he got quite angry with me and threatened legal action if I ever cited any of his material. So yes, there are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Firmage On Jennings' Documentary - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:27:03 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:28:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Firmage On Jennings' Documentary - Ledger >From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:41:48 -0500 >Subject: Firmage On Jennings' Documentary >From: Joe Firmage <snip> >To: Frank DeMarco <snip> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:27:11 -0800 >2 - The arguments of the debunkers were unconvincing, to say >the least. It is insulting to generations of scientists >everywhere to suggest that 'eyewitness testimony is the least >credible' kind of evidence. This assertion is particularly >indefensible in domains that involve biological systems, where >predictability of location and periodicity of phenomenon are >often impossible in principle. >How would a zoologist or anthropologist react to such a >sweeping assertion as made by many of the physicists and >astronomers interviewed in the program? Yes, the particulars of >eyewitness testimony are subject to great margins of error. That >is one main reason why statisticians have jobs. The implications >of the statistical evidence compiled over decades of eyewitness >testimony concerning this phenomenon are clear. >Consider an analogy: imagine that we're all fish swimming close >to one coral reef in a vast ocean. A tiny number of fish report >having seen "giant beings, thousands of lengths longer that we, >swimming below and around our home". Of course, blue whales are >a rare sight for the Nemos of our world. Other reef fish >ridicule the observers, since the observers can offer no >predictable schedule or locations for observing such creatures. >Joe Joe There is much sense in every paragraph you wrote but I must add my dismay, along with your own, at the remarks by the scientific block on the Jenning's program. Since anecdotal or eye-witness testimony is basically all that most of us have to work with, It behooves me to defend them. Not because they are always right but that they at least report what they've seen with what limited capacity these non-scientists possess. Imagine that world of non-science where eyesight is not required, in the nursing profession, the police forces, air traffic control, piloting an aircraft or a space shuttle or the ships at sea. I must admire the skills of precision machinists who work by touch with their cutting machines. Leaving the facetious behind-or maybe not-will astronomers now no longer need optical telescopes-the shutting down of Hubble now makes sense. Will biologists and lab technicians throw away their microscopes. And how about television programs like the Peter Jennings report. Why videotape it when all we really need is someone from the scientific community to tell us that indeed the program existed and that they were right and we were wrong. Obviously we couldn't make the decision on our own because we- the great unwashed, the ignorant masses -are perceptually impaired. Shermer's testimony was, in my opinion, self serving. After all, you can't continue to publish a periodical [from whence comes your income] if you go on television and tell everyone that there is something to the UFO phenomenon and you only deny everything because it's profitable and puts food on the table. He lectures about and writes about "Why People Believe Weird Things". Why indeed? I like the SETI concept but not the closed-mindedness of their scientists. But I guess if I was making a living at it I wouldn't admit to the possibility of the ET here and now either, because what would I be trying to prove other wise. Why try to prove there's life elsewhere in our universe when their damn pilots are zipping around in out skies. Observation has been the basis of science for hundreds of years. Newton "sees" an apple fall to the ground and history is made in physics. But how do we know he actually saw that apple fall? Were there other witnesses. Was data collected, the freshly broken stem examined, the impact trauma to the ground below carefully measured with control samples taken from outside the impact site. And what about the damage to the apple? Since it's all anecdotal, can we really be expected to believe that that apple actually fell...down? Can I now assume that what my eyes tell me is no longer valid?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:06:20 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:33:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:24:35 -0600 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that >>John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as >>we have seen, he can't.) He will pretend that the only issue is >>the ongoing, yet unpublished work of others, trying to distract >>our attention from the devastating (for him) work already in >>public forums. He will remind you, yet again, why you are >>unwelcome at the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. >The Pelicans can have their Pub. I'm choosey who I drink with. >Why would anyone want to drink there anyway, the tables wobble >in a dreary setting, they water their badly made hooch, misbrew >their beer, and the loo is a freakin' mess... Ah, how little you know the home-life of the Greater British Pelican. It's favoured watering holes include glorious Victorian gin palaces with polished granite pillars, gilt-encrusted domes, stained-glass windows worthy of Chartres, and loos so resplendent with their marbled walls, polished brass fittings, mahogany doors and mosaic floors that architectural students and awestruck American tourists take guided tours around them to gasp at their majesty. On other days, of course, we may take our discussions to smart, glossy city-centre bars, or the historic riverside tavern where the passengers on the Mayflower took their last taste of good English ale before setting off on their brave voyage. Or perhaps one of our friendly, unpretentious 'locals' where the barmaid had your favourite tipple ready on the bar without you even needing to ask, and where, in the words of the song: "everybody knows your name". If there's one thing we know about, Mr Lehmberg, it's good pubs!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:40:04 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:35:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:29:08 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>No, all I have to say is well archived in two separate >>discussions at the List's Archive over the past four years. >>Does anybody else have anything new, especially new evidence >>which Jerry Clark promised a year or two back, which was going >>to leave the 'pelicanists' with egg on their face? >Hey, nice try, John! This is your way, I take it, of >acknowleding - without actually having to say so - that you've >given up, that you can deny the egg so manifestly plastered on >your face only by pretending that it is spread elsewhere. And this is your way of saying that the new evidence that was going to give the sceptics "a smack across the chops" has never materialised and/or never existed. >I admire the way you change the subject, Jerry, I learnt it from the master... you. >starting with the >inconvenient truth we have yet to find the single elusive, >missing negative witness who, according to pelicanist prophecy, >is going to show up any day now to validate the indisputable >truths so earnestly and touchingly proclaimed at meetings of the >Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. Jerry, you're making things up again. I have never predicted that one of your so-called 'negative witnesses' will turn up, any more than you predicted that an actually-existing real witness would turn up, other than Barauna and his chums from the Underwater Club. >In the meantime, those of you whose interests don't extend to >feathery fancy, and who are curious to know why the negative >witness or witnesses are unlikely ever to come down from the sky >alongside the angelic host, here's something John doesn't want >you to read: >http://trindade-island.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/printy-details.htm >Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that >John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as >we have seen, he can't.) I have looked at Martin Shough's piece, particulalry the section concerning the missing military witnesses. At first sight I can see nothing in it that has not already been covered by earlier discussions on UpDates. However it is a long and carefully researched piece and deserves longer consideration. I shall, with ebk's indulgence, return to it at some length in the future. >He will pretend that the only issue is >the ongoing, yet unpublished work of others, trying to distract >our attention from the devastating (for him) work already in >public forums. He will remind you, yet again, why you are >unwelcome at the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. 'The Pelican' is a very fashionable 'gastropub' in London's Notting Hill, where prices are far too high for impoverished sceptics who never get offered lucrative publishing contracts or generous payments from shadowy security agencies to spread 'disinformation'. However Pelicanists of all persuasion, whether they hold unfeasibly sceptical or implausibly gullible viewpoints are welcome at Magonia's informal meetings which are held at the more reasonably-priced Railway pub, just across the road from Putney Station in South West London. The next one is this coming Sunday, 6th March, starting around 7.15 pm. Cheers!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Why Roswell Has To Be A Hoax - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:17:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:57:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Why Roswell Has To Be A Hoax - Bourdais >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:44:48 EST >Subject: Why Roswell Has To Be A Hoax >That's right. The Roswell Incident has to be a hoax. >There's absolutely no proof whatsoever that an alien craft of >any sort crashed or was recovered by the authorities as we've >been lead to believe by the UFO investigators and their hours of >video, tapes, books, merchandise. >How did I come to this conclusion? >Because the government says it's a hoax and now a major news >service, ABC says it's a hoax. >Both couldn't be wrong. >If the claims about the Roswell Incident were indeed true it >would mean that the institutions we hold to govern and inform us >are run by totally incompetent people, liars, crooks, deceivers >and out and out bs artists. Greg and All, I don't see the situation that way, from the other side of the Atlantic. For all open minded observers, there has been obviously a policy of secrecy going on for half a century. But peole who organized it were not necessarily "incompetent"! They may have had very good reasons for it. I don't mean this as an excuse, just as an effort at rational analysis. What about the risk of grave cultural shock in case of brutal revelation? I have not seen the ABC show (I should receive a copy soon, having helped a bit), but it is clear that a line was drawn to exclude, or put in doubt, such sensitive subjects as Roswell and abductions. There is a Roswell hoax, and it's the Mogul hoax, first promoted by "our best debunker", as Col. Cavitt called him. Of course, they must have undestood that at ABC. About abductions, the comments of Budd Hopkins show beyond doubt that they knew what they were doing in denying his arguments. The idea that they did not have enough time does not hold water. They just chose to take the skeptic side. So, the ABC program gives us a good picture of what is now acceptable and not acceptable, about UFOs in the big media. In all, it may even be argued that it is a rather positive step.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 ET Are You Out There? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:03:39 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:03:39 -0500 Subject: ET Are You Out There? Source: IOL.Co.ZA [IOL is owned by Independent News & Media along with 14 national and regional newspapers in South Africa] http://tinyurl.com/43k7h 03-01-05 ET Are You Out There? Tokyo - Two Japanese observatories started a probe on Tuesday to find signs of extraterrestrial life using radio and optical telescopes, in Japan's first government-backed search for aliens. "I don't think it would be any wonder if life like us exists somewhere else as space is vast," said Mitsumi Fujishita, radioastronomy professor at Kyushu Tokai University, who heads the research. The five-day search is being done jointly at the Nishi-Harima Astronomical Observatory, run by western Hyogo prefecture which includes the city of Kobe, and the state-run Mizusawa Astrogeodynamics Observatory in northern Japan. There have been earlier Japanese efforts to detect signs of aliens but this is the first such search involving a state-run organisation, according to researchers. The Mizusawa observatory using a radio telescope with a diameter of 10m is trying to find radio waves while the Nishi-Harima observatory, with a two-metre reflector telescope, aims to detect light. They will focus on the area near the Hydra constellation where an American researcher detected radio waves in 1988. Another researcher said it "will be very difficult to find signs as we don't know which radio waves would come at what time or from where". "Even if they cannot detect anything, however, it is important to find out what it (the lack of detection) means scientifically," he said. Japan is drafting an ambitious space programme, with a goal of a manned station on the moon by 2025, after successfully sending
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Are We Alone? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:08:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:08:57 -0500 Subject: Are We Alone? Source: Universe Today.Com http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/are_we_alone.html 03-01-05 Are We Alone? Jeff Barbour Summary - The chances are very high that you will encounter another intelligent life-form in the course of your life and when you do it may come as a big surprise. When, for instance, did you last visit the zoo? Remember those chimpanzees - very smart. And how about those dolphins at the marine aquarium? Brilliant! And that cat of yours is probably smarter than you think - but your dog will never admit it. Finally that grey parrot your Uncle Ned has may actually know what its talking about! Ultimately by paying attention to signs of intelligence on Earth, we may also come to recognize signs of intelligence amongst the stars. Full Story - "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860) Are we alone? Given the immensity of the Cosmos, a mathematical impossibility. Will we ever come to know we are not alone? That's a tougher question. But should first contact occur today we could be in for a shock1. So right now may be a good time to prepare. And perhaps the best way to prepare is to imagine the possibility... Numerous psychological studies have shown that "imagining a thing" makes us more receptive to the possibility. In fact many of the great breakthroughs in scientific thought came about as a result of the proper use of the creative imagination. Sir Isaac Newton saw the motions of all moons and planets everywhere in the simple fall of a ripe apple from the boughs of a tree. Albert Einstein perceived the relativity of all time and space while contemplating the accelerated motion of a trolley car moving away from the face of a public clocktower. We human beings might want to take a few moments and think about how we will respond should ET make an appearence in our small corner of the cosmos. So, take a moment and relax. (Yes it's true, deep breathing does help!) Imagine a universe populated with many and diverse forms of intelligent life. Extend yourself through time and space toward distant systems of suns and planets. See simple organisms thrilling to the rhythms of light and matter working in harmony to develop ever more sophisticated life-forms. Follow the earliest interstellar craft as they move tirelessly from system to system toward some distant beckoning beacon of promise. Surf beams of radiant energy flung like arrows from far away lighthouses upon the Ocean of Space. Someday such imaginings may be confirmed by rock solid science - perhaps SETI will detect an indisputable signal from beyond, or "Michael Rennie" emerges as an emissary from the Galactic Federation of Planetary Systems trailed by Gort - the Wonder Robot. Given the likelihood that such space-faring or highly communicative intelligences exist, and given all the billions of years for off-world intelligence to develop the means to travel and communicate, plus our own recent efforts to find them out, why don't we know already? One, and possibly the very best answer is "We aren't ready." The human imagination also has its down-side: Imagine the initial shock and ridicule as we humans attempt to upright a world overturned by what for many will be an impossible event. Consider also how governments and institutions, groups and individuals, have responded to similar reports in the past. Remember "Mars-rock"? Do we hear much of it now? And what about pilot Hap Arnold's "flying saucer" report. Can we really say that we have taken clear-headed, scientific looks at such things? Or is our normal response one of incredulity and ridicule? Hmmmm... To know is to see truth wherever it may be found. No, we're not saying that UFO's have visited the Earth. What we are saying is that our response to those who make such claims is often one of ridicule and disrespect. Is it not possible that compassion and open-mindedness would be more appropriate? So let's seek truth where it can be found - right here on Earth. We can start by looking for unsuspected signs of intelligence around us2. Let's take a clear-eyed look at our animal friends by setting aside prejudices concerning their intelligence. Those goldfish in the aquarium can be surprisingly sensitive about things. Walk near the tank during the day and they ignore you. Come feeding time, and you are the most interesting thing in the world to them. To be sure we are very unlikely to learn that the universe is suffused with intelligence until we get past our own anthrocentrism. It took a lot of hard work (and self-sacrifice) by Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo just to get western society to finally step "up to the edge" and see that the Blue Planet is most definitely not flat nor does it act as the axis around which all things celestial swing. And even with the signs of intelligence abounding on our homeworld today we persist in thinking that all creatures exist for us, our amusement, our purposes. Under such conditions can we possibly appreciate how truly intelligent they are? And to be more germane, do we really think ET might want to come out and play with us under such circumstances? Today we don't seem to be ready to accept anything other than the myth of being alone. Yes, one way to tell this does have to do with how we relate to other creatures on the Blue Planet, but there are other reasons to doubt our readiness as well. Consider our political institutions; Why is it that our leaders and their associates spend so much time "down-playing" the truth of things, presenting specious arguments to motivate behavior, or putting controversial issues into the spin cycle? Is it because of hidden political or economic agendas? Or possibly because they don't believe we can handle reality3? Meanwhile high overhead, ET approaches the Earth - third stone from the Sun - and initiates a scan of the EM spectrum. Newscasts portray crisis after crisis, violence, conflict, bloodshed, environmental degradation. How would you - an intelligent being from elsewhere respond? Personally, I'd activate the cloaking device. ET is no dummy - he/she/it is after all an intelligent life-form possessed of advanced technology. One scan of Earth's broadcast media and ET soon comes to see that this is not a place to be trifled with: The natives are restless. Emotion overrules reason. Reaction upstages proaction. Nations practice deception and ill-will in relationships - internal and external. Angry voices shout each other down - not just on the streets but in the houses of governance as well. We are not a happy bunch. And yet the future remains always a bright star of possibility. Hope springs eternal in ET's breast (or left antibular thorax as the case may be...) ET of course, has seen such things before. Countless worlds of lesser and greater advancement have been encountered. Before ET learned the wisdom of keeping a safe distance, he-she-it actually tried to help a few troubled worlds such as our own. In the end ET may have had to overcome shock, ignorance, even bloody insurgencies. Costs were great, rewards few. Now ET waits - waits for us to pass certain tests - tests defined in some intragalactic protocol: "The Prime Directive". So the hailing frequencies are locked down. ET goes stealth. "Subspace" signals are transmitted to ET Central: "Earthlings are still at it. Planet approaching ecological crisis. Species dying off. The few have much, many have little. Schedule re- visit next solar maximum. Report over and out." Today our instruments can peer back to the very threshold of the Big Bang - nearly 13.7 million lightyears distant in time and space, millions and millions of galaxies, billions and billions of Suns. Who knows how many planets - many equal to or superior to our own in fecundity and arability. Some populated as yet only by single-cell organisms. Others by beings possessed of no organic form whatsoever. It doesn't even take the imagination to see the possibility anymore. Those of us interested in astronomy also read and watch science fiction. All the heavy lifting has been done for us. Fantastic lifeforms dwell in fabulous environs undergoing incredible adventures: Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon Five - you name it - we've seen it. And yes, many of us believe in our hearts - but even so, we want to know. Even now we scan the heavens seeking proof. The SETI project is bringing its array of parallel narrow-band scanning recievers on line. We hope against hope that some not-too-circumspect intelligence is out there broadcasting narrowband signals intentionally (or not) seeking to conclusively demonstrate their presence in our universe. Will SETI find them out? And if so, how will we respond to the reality? It is possible to uncover intelligence in this way, but intelligent life-forms not only learn from experience but in advance of experience as well. Do we here on Earth choose to project our presence intentionally into the interstellar medium4? No - that particular notion has already been discarded and perhaps wisely so. We know what we are like - others could be worse! Psychology plays a big role in choices made by intelligent creatures. When they don't trust others, they "down-play" the truth or offer specious arguments. When they make mistakes, they put things in the "spin cycle". When they see other intelligences doing these kinds of things with great regularity they know that contact is to be avoided. Perhaps this is at essence in first contact protocol. Until truth is welcomed - even at the expense of notions held dear - a world is not ready. Otherwise the cost of engagement is too high, benefits too low, and outcomes too unpredictable - or worse - dangerous. But we may detect extraterrestial intelligence in other ways. It's a solid assumption that all advancing technologies pass through a broadband em broadcast phase. During such an era civilizations "leak" evidence of their existence. Unfortunately, even our largest radio telescope would be hard pressed to detect broadband transmissions - such as Earth's - from as close as the Alpha Centauri system. Meanwhile the window on em broadcast may even be closing here on earth. How many of us watch television programs delivered by antenna today? Less than a half-century ago every house had its own "rabbit ears". One-hundred years from now we may be EM mute... We might also intercept a signal in transit between two worlds. Such an event would be serendipitous - luck would play a huge role. First we would have to be more or less line of sight. Why? Because the tighter such a signal is foused the further it travels without attenuation. Although laser (and maser) transmissions do diffract over great distances, we would still need to be well-placed to pick one up. Meanwhile such signals may not necessarily be narrow band in frequency. Why? Because phase-modulated transmission may be the most efficient way to transmit pictures, sounds, and data across space5. Despite all these barriers to revelation what practical steps can we now take to prepare for some future "first contact"? Assisted by writers of science fiction and purveyors of motion pictures, we've already made a start by imagining the possibility. Animal behaviorists have helped prepare us by investigating various types and degrees of intelligence in the natural world. Psychologists and socioligists have done the same thing in the realms of our own species. Meanwhile on an individual basis we can all learn to pay more attention to intelligence as seen within our families, among friends, associates - and even strangers. (Perhaps especially strangers.) All this makes us more aware of what intelligence is and how it is communicated. On the broadest possible levels we must all further our ability to welcome and speak truth - despite any pain it may leave in its wake. Having done our own personal work, "homeworld work" can go forward. Collectively we can work together to expunge the seeds and uproot the weeds of war on the planet. Although this means holstering our weapons, it also means overcoming a persistent propensity toward propaganda, religious strife, scientific contention, and undue corporate economic advantage. And of great importance at this time is the need to be more supportive of other homeworld species - irrespective of intelligence. Ecology teaches us that every creature plays an important role in Earth's biosphere. Perhaps it should become a matter of human education, demographical planning, economics, and political activity to ensure that this particular insight truly guides our choices and behavior. After all so long as we remain exploitative of lesser species no truly intelligent extraterrerestial species is likely to have much to do with us. Scarier still, if there are any "bad boys" out there, they could easily rationalize "taking over the joint". So let's say we clean up our act. What happens next? Isn't that enough? To live in a world where truth multiplies, nature is respected, intelligence is recognized, and peace reigns supreme is actually quite appealing in itself - for most intelligences worthy of interstellar relations. But this article is not about social transformation per se - it's about the very real possibility of first contact - something that could transpire even before our children take a leading role in the unfolding story of human history. Are we ready to get ready? If intelligence can germinate here, it can flower elsewhere. Why, of course, it's all so - "self-evident!" 1 The 1997 hit movie "Contact" (based on a novel by Carl Sagan) portrayed the many and varied ways in which human beings responded to scientific proof of the existence of advanced extraterrestrial intelligence. 2 According to a BBC News article a captive African grey parrot named N'kisi has a vocabulary of almost one thousand words, shows evidence of a sense of humour, and devises new words and concocts phrases as needed. 3 Irrespective of its overall merits, US efforts to topple an Iraqi dictatorship were found to be based on overstated evidence. (See Conclusions of Senate's Iraq report) Such misuses of information often occur when a government is unable to speak plainly to its citizens concerning matters of importance. 4 In an article published by the title Quantum Communication Between the Stars? SETI Institute member Seth Shostak recalls the heated response of England's Astronomer Royal to the ad hoc messaging of M13 during a 1974 ceremonial at the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico. 5 The narrower the frequency used to transmit data through space the higher the signal-to-noise ratio. The most efficient mode of such transmission is to digitally switch a carrier frequency "on and off". Such serial modes of transmission however, are very slow at transfering large amounts of data through space in short amounts of time. Such signals are however very useful for saying things like "look at me I am here!". About The Author: Inspired by the early 1900's masterpiece: "The Sky Through Three, Four, and Five Inch Telescopes", Jeff Barbour got a start in astronomy and space science at the age of seven.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:07:34 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:12:01 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:06:23 EST >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:17:10 EST >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:33:16 -1000 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs Hello Paul ><snip> >I'm not being blinkered here. I'm open to a wide range of >possibilities. I'm just not willing to proclaim them as facts, >as Dr. Salla is. How is this myopic? It seems to me that Dr. >Salla is the one advocating a "my way or the highway" >approach. As I understand what Michael is saying, I don't think he's asking anyone to change their ways particularly, just to widen their horizons a little and to consider other sources of information. I certainly don't feel he's being adamant. The problem here Paul is that there is such a monstrous clash of philosphies and approaches that it is difficult to see a meeting point. As I read it, I don't believe it's a case of both sides compromising and meeting in the middle. I think it is "our side" that has to move a bit. As long as one is circumspect, what would be wrong with that? >>Exopolitics is undeniably flawed at the moment due to the >>weakness of witness credibility but those within that field >>are not blind to this and are working at it. >That may be, but from his proposed methodology, which is >really the core of the argument between Dr. Salla and I (and >others), he is blind to it. Doubt that? Read his continued >defense of Bob Lazar. I suppose Lazar is as good an example as there is of the problem that exists. Grant Cameron's approach to this type of scenario is interesting. He feels that some elements are trying to get the truth out gradually but wish to retain control of how this is done. So you get hold of a suitable individual, feed him some info and then take his legs away from under him. That way, the truth is out there (sorry for the cliche)in some shape or form, no doubt mixed in with a load of BS, and yet the situation doesn't run away from those in control. So it may be that some of what Lazar has said is actually true. That doesn't help us of course because we then have the problem of separating the wheat from the chaffe. But because Lazar comes over as dodgy, our inclination is to write him off completely. Michael says we shouldn't. I think that's reasonable but I acknowledge that gray basket will get very full. >>But what it ushers in is a new way of looking at things and >>that is not to be rejected. >Actually, my point is that it's not a new way of looking at >things, just contactee-ism in a different guise. I think that comparison is harsh. Even allowing for the different age we now live in and a more generally cynical public, even back in the 50s and 60s many were disbelieving of contactee claims, although I acknowledge there was a popular swell as well. But even back then, I think the difference between someone claiming to have been on board a space ship and someone saying that they worked for this or that military institution and had evidence of an alien presence would have been evident to most. >>Was every one of Greer's witnesses lying or living in some >>bizarre fantasy world? Somewhere in all of that were various >>pots of gold that have bypassed many on this List. >I don't recall anyone saying that all of the Disclosure >witnesses were wackos, or liars. Indeed, I think the whole >point is that there may well be some good ones out there, but >they get tainted by being included in the same group as the >aforementioned wackos and liars. That's what Dr. Salla's >methodology causes, and it is a disservice to ufology, and to >folks like you (and me) who want to see the truth, whatever it >is, come out. Then perhaps, instead of writing Greer off as an egocentric maverick intent on making money, as some do, perhaps we should be applying pressure to him to improve his filtering processes and so attempt to bring us on board with him. God forbid but maybe work with him? >>Last year, David Rudiak cornered General Wesley Clark and >>asked him if he had ever been briefed on the subject of >>UFOs.The General gave an evasive response which was >>nevertheless helpful. But what if he'd said, "Yes, I was and >>this is what they told me." We'd have all believed him like > >a shot. Why him and why not others? >This is an interesting point. If General Clark (who may have >had a very good reason for being "evasive" that had nothing >to do with trying to hide the truth about a cover-up) had >said, "yes" Dr. Salla and others would accept that as gospel. >But, when he says "no" they assume he was being "evasive" and >hiding something. I think that says more about them and their >position on UFOs than it does General Clark. With respect Paul, I don't think Michael would say any such thing. That would seem to suggest that anybody in a military uniform who denies knowing anything about the ET situation is lying, which is ridiculous. And Clark was helpful with his evasive reply. He said enough to extrapolate some interesting lines of thought, one being that "they" aren't helping us. ><snip> >>And as I read the responses to Dr. Salla which have crossed >>over into abuse at times, I wonder if those on this List who >>accuse "believers" of a religious piousness and pursuit have >>the insight and wherewithal to recognise that their own blind >>dogma to "the one and only method" comfortably crosses that > >sacred line of devoutness. >You may not be referring to me personally here, but if you >are, please provide an example of where my responses to Dr. >Salla have crossed the line into abuse. I can show you >several where Dr. Salla have accused those of us who disagree >with him of being "disingenuous" which, in case folks aren't > sure, means "insincere, not frank" (Gage Canadian >Dictionary). Check my posts - I have been perfectly frank, >and am perfectly sincere, as, I'm sure, were others like >Bruce Maccabee and Stan Friedman. I'm not referring to you personally Paul but I will add as a purely personal observation that I think you're overreacting slightly to being called disingenuous. When all is said and done, and having previously indicated that I thought there was a gulf between you that couldn't be breached, your stated position in your oprevious response to Michael, I thought was quite positive; >Treat these people and what they say with extreme caution >until their stories can be verified independently. Expose and >disregard those who are liars, but don't just assume they are >lying without having the same evidence that you would require >to prove they are telling the truth. For those cases that are >inconclusive, ie no evidence that they are lying, but no >corroborating evidence that they are telling the truth, place >the testimony in the gray basket, but do not wholly ignore it. I think you overstated and oversimplified Michael's position and I wouldn't be at all surprised if his true stance wasn't too far off from what you've written above, perhaps with some modification. I certainly have no difficulty with what you wrote and yet bizarrely we are debating from opposite positions. The answer to that perhaps might be in our own personal perceptions of Dr. Salla.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 New Resort To Land In Roswell From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:16:28 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:16:28 -0500 Subject: New Resort To Land In Roswell Source The Roswell Daily Record - New Mexico http://www.roswell-record.com/archives/030105/news05.html 03-01-05 New Resort To Land In Roswell Arwen Ungar Record Staff Writer In two years and a few months, 34 acres north of town might never look the same. The spot is the proposed future landing zone for Earth Station Roswell, a super resort that will be built to lodge 1,224 people a day. Thomas Armstrong, owner of Roswell Screen Printing, has been working on the project for two years and plans to break ground in July. He recruited Gene Frazier, a local designer and architect. Initially Frazier was reluctant because he had retired but eventually he agreed to design the resort, Armstrong said. "Our goal is to cut the ribbon in July of 2007," Armstrong said. Armstrong said the UFO community needs to have a strong centralized base for the movement. He also described 18 specific reasons why Roswell is the right place for the station. Some of his reasons are; Roswell is known for the UFO crash of 1947, Roswell has a commercial airport and is isolated yet has many visitors from all over the country and the world. "We were looking for the perfect place to allow the world to gather in one place =96 in essence, a central clearinghouse for all things extraterrestrial. If necessity is the mother of invention, then Roswell is the only place in the world where everyone would trek for the disseminations of UFO and extraterrestrial knowledge and information," according to his Web site. The Earth station is designed to have several large buildings built in the shapes of space ships. The Mothership may contain a hotel, shuttle crafts, a restaurant, a full-service spa and meeting and banquet rooms. The Crater is designed to be a 1,000 seat concert arena with live broadcasting capability. The Aurora will be a 700 seat theater entirely devoted to science fiction movies. Plans are in development for the Milky way cafe, an R.V. shop, a shopping arena and a communication tower. All of the detailing of the ship will be intricately designed to look exactly as a spaceship would look. If plans go through Armstrong would move his downtown store location to the earth station. Armstrong said there are enough local managers and staff members in the area to keep the station running. "I don't put a whole lot of stock in it," said Dusty Huckabee, head of the Main Street Roswell Project. "They still have a lot of fundraising to do". Julie Shuster, director of the UFO International Museum in Roswell, said the museum has not been contacted about moving to the new complex and would not consider moving if asked by Armstrong. Funding for the project is entirely private, Armstrong said. He said he has secured some of the funding and has secured pledges from other individuals.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Goatsucker Sighted, Details to Follow From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:24:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:24:00 -0500 Subject: Goatsucker Sighted, Details to Follow Source: Outside Magazine - Santa Fe, New Mexico http://outside.away.com/outside/magazine/0996/9609fego.html Outside Magazine, September 1996 Goatsucker Sighted, Details to Follow Strange beast plunders Puerto Rico, Florida, Mexico Livestock drained of blood, entrails Citizens ignore authorities' appeal for calm By Bucky McMahon Canovanas, Puerto Rico - An unwelcome anniversary is being celebrated here, one that elicits not joy from the citizens of this and neighboring towns, but anxiety. It was a year ago this month that the residents of Guaynabo, a suburb of San Juan, awoke to a troubling scene: Strewn about in the yards of several homes were the still bodies of two rabbits, two guinea fowls, and a dozen chickens. Their necks were neatly perforated by double-fang bites, and their corpses had been drained of blood. Two days later, in Can=FCvanas, a small city of 37,000 people located 30 miles east of San Juan, Michael Negron, 25, discovered an agile, erect, two-legged creature hopping animatedly in the dirt outside his house. "It was about three or four feet tall, with skin like that of a dinosaur," he said. "It had eyes the size of hens' eggs, long fangs, and multicolored spikes down its head and back." These two incidents, the first in a pattern of unusual events that have swept across Puerto Rico and much of the rest of the Western Hemisphere over the last 12 months, seemed to warrant further investigation. A few days spent not long ago questioning the citizenry of this rainforest hamlet produced the following details. The creature seen by Mr. Negron did not display friendly behavior. The morning after the sighting, Mr. Negron's brother, Angel, 27, observed the same beast crouched over the family goat, Suerte. Attempts by Mr. Negron to roust the mysterious creature succeeded, and it retreated hastily into the jungle. Mr. Negron then turned his attentions to Suerte, lying dead in the yard. The goat had been neatly slit open and disemboweled, its warm viscera glistening in the morning sun. Gazing upon the scene, Mr. Negron later admitted to being struck by the surgical care that had been exercised upon his goat. It was his opinion that the unfamiliar predator had been browsing expertly through the goat's entrails, looking for something. In the months following these encounters, other sightings were reported in the vicinity of Can=FCvanas, a densely populated city of ramshackle shacks and pastel cement homes perched on steep, lush hillsides. At least 15 people witnessed the creature. One Can=FCvanas townsperson found his cow lying dead in a field with two punctures in its neck. Another man, who maintained a small chicken aviary on the roof of his home - guarded by the family dog, Too - found the aviary plundered and the fowl dead. Later, the dog was located behind the house, trembling "in a state of fear," according to the farmer. On another occasion, the creature paused on the sidewalk outside the home of Madelyne Tolentino, studying her as she hung her laundry out to dry. Mrs. Tolentino, 31, joined her husband and a neighbor in a hurried attempt to tackle the animal - which she described as both alien-looking and kangaroolike, with powerful hind legs and a strong sulfurous odor - but the beast managed to escape. Disturbed by these developments, residents asked Can=FCvanas mayor Jos=8B Soto Rivera to mount a campaign against the animal, which had acquired the name el chupacabras, the goatsucker. Mr. Soto, 52, agreed. "Whatever it is, this creature is highly intelligent," he later explained to the viewing audience of Cristina!, a Spanish-language talk show taped in Miami. "Today it is attacking animals, but tomorrow it may attack people." Midnight Jungle Searches Given Mr. Soto's personal involvement with the goatsucker, his perspective seems necessary when examining how a community is affected by the invasion of a vampiric, possibly otherworldly predator. Happily, Mr. Soto agreed to sit for a lengthy interview, reclining in a leather chair at his mayoral headquarters, which occupies a prominent location on the town's shaded square. Known locally as Chemo, a nickname from his days as a standout boxer, Mr. Soto is a quiet, ruggedly handsome man with a thin, dapper mustache. Before becoming mayor, he also pursued careers as a soldier, a mailman, and a police detective. Mr. Soto said that on October 29, the Sunday before Halloween, he led an evening expedition of 200 Civil Defense employees and other volunteers into the dense jungle surrounding Can=FCvanas. They dressed in camouflage and armed themselves with torches, nets, spearguns, pistols, and other weapons. Seeking to capture a live goatsucker, they erected large, metal traps, baiting them with goats and small cattle. "We're close," Mr. Soto recalled saying, referring to his prey. "I can smell him." Unfortunately, the goatsucker eluded the posse that evening, and it continued to do so on subsequent weekly hunts. "We've never seen him," Mr. Soto acknowledged, speaking between occasional interruptions from his cellular phone. "We can't catch him or beat him." Rabbits Slain on Long Island But even as Mr. Soto redoubled his efforts, the goatsucker's range grew, on a northwesterly track, with a flurry of sightings in south Florida, Texas, California, Mexico, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic. Reports detailing the goatsucker's movements arrived daily. Fears of imminent human casualties - the driving force behind Mr. Soto's campaigns against the creature - were realized on April 15 of this year, with the first goatsucker assault on a human. Juana Tizoc, 21, received multiple bites and lacerations after being attacked by a goatsucker while strolling the fields near her family's farm in the town of Alfonso Calderon, in northern Sinaloa, Mexico. Ms. Tizoc described being set upon by the creature after it descended from the sky on "weblike" appendages - a detail confirming the hypothesis that several species of the creature exist, both winged and nonwinged. On May 10, a rooster fell victim in Mendota, California, and the Fresno County Department of Agriculture subsequently logged ten complaints of goatsucker activity, prompting worried parents to cancel their children's prom outings. According to the St. Petersburg Times, 69 animals were attacked and killed on May 14 in the Miami neighborhood known as Sweetwater. The victims included geese, goats, chickens, and ducks. By May 17, half of Mexico's 32 states had registered attacks involving the creature. These escalating reports led some communities in the United States to make light of the situation, an all too common reaction to unexplained phenomena. At the annual Puerto Rico Day festival in New York City, scores of paraders fashioned goatsucker costumes in an attempt to find levity in the tragedies befalling their homeland. On May 19, several pranksters in Cambridge, Massachusetts, claimed to have observed the creature, a sighting that was later determined to be specious. "I knew it was headed our way," Cambridge Chamber of Commerce staff member Alison Dowd later mused in the Boston Herald. "But I had no idea it was already here." And yet that same week, out on Long Island, New York, an actual goatsucker struck the Bayshore home of Miguel Lopez, 42, dispatching a dozen chickens and seven rabbits with its classic double-fanged bite. In the fearful months since the attack on Mr. Lopez's animals - and continuing up to and presumably after Outside's press date - goatsuckers have drained, killed, and mutilated hundreds of domestic livestock throughout the hemisphere, and, operating in increasingly brazen fashion, have effected scores of thus far nonlethal attacks on humans. DNA Results Inconclusive seekers of the goatsucker typically turn to mr. soto for assistance and advice. recently he entertained a group of 13 members of beyond boundaries, a UFO phenomena research group led by Jorge Mart=8Cn, publisher of the periodical Evidencia Ovni. Mr. Soto introduced the visiting scholars to one of his constituents, a woman who had located a goatsucker nesting site. The woman had earlier brought samples of the creature's "oddly shaped" dung and hair - with minute traces of goatsucker flesh attached - to the mayor, who promptly sent them for dna testing. (the results proved inconclusive). Despite this laboratory setback, Mr. Soto perseveres, methodically stalking his prey using all techniques available to him. He maintains a thick file devoted to his adversary, with depositions from witnesses and experts, photos of the dead livestock and of the baited traps, and his own notes on the case. The victims on Mr. Soto's conscience are many - some 200 innocent animals, several of which he was personally acquainted with, including horses, cattle, sheep, rabbits, peacocks, parakeets, a Doberman pinscher, and a rottweiler. Mr. Soto notes that some theorists have speculated that the creature may be the product of a gene-splicing lab, the abnormal result of industrial pollution, or part of a Central Intelligence Agency plan to destabilize the region. Mr. Soto himself believes that the goatsucker is extraterrestrial, drawn to Puerto Rico by the Arecibo Observatory, the world's largest radio telescope, which nightly receives data from the planets beyond. "In my thoughts I know this is something from another world," he said. Recently, the mayor shared his thoughts with an American television program, Unsolved Mysteries, and its host, Hollywood actor Robert Stack. Eyewitness observations, the mayor noted, have provided a profile of the creature that is highly detailed: a cock's crest atop a simian head; large, red eyes; a long, lipless mouth with a flickering reptilian tongue; small, attenuated arms that are webbed for flight and that terminate in three curved claws; and dorsal spines of iridescent beauty that are capable of changing colors, depending on the goatsucker's prevailing mood. At the mayor's request, Dr. Carlo Soto (no relation) performed autopsies on the dead livestock, and his report tells of deep, precisely inflicted puncture wounds "inconsistent" with any known animal. The goatsucker apparently has highly specialized teeth of the length and diameter of a common drinking straw, with the same efficient liquid-sucking qualities. Dr. Soto observed that the goatsucker's victims show an odd resistance to rigor mortis, and what little blood remains at the crime scenes resists the ordinary tendency to coagulate, thus remaining eminently drinkable. Observed at Close Range Ismael Aquayo, Can=FCvanas's Chief of Civil Defense, is a slight- framed, bespectacled public servant who now spends most of his working days pursuing the creature. On a recent muggy afternoon, he agreed to lead this reporter on a round of goatsucker-related investigations. Mr. Aquayo climbed into one of his department's large utility trucks and set out for the fern-shrouded rainforest. Known locally as El Yunque, the rainforest is the last remaining expanse of wilderness in this densely populated commonwealth of four million people. Among the practitioners of the island's many Afro-Caribbean religions, such as Santeria and Obeah, El Yunque remains a place of mystical power. Not infrequently, foresters discover small altars alongside the rivers, speckled with blood and ceremonial wax. Sacrificed chickens, their throats slit, can be seen floating down the forest's many streams, surprising tourists and picnickers from the city of San Juan. Arriving at Campo Rico, a barrio of 3,000 people, Mr. Aquayo turned onto a side street and parked beside a tin-roofed garage, where he spoke for a moment with Miguel Tolentino, 35, an automobile mechanic and the husband of Madelyne Tolentino, the woman who spied the creature while hanging out her laundry. Early on the morning in question, Mr. Tolentino had just begun repairs on a truck when, opening the hood, he flushed a goatsucker from its resting place beneath the vehicle. He saw it only for a second before it leaped away. Mr. Tolentino described the goatsucker as bounding, with little apparent effort, high over the trees - a leap that was later measured at approximately 40 feet. Later that same day the goatsucker returned to the Tolentinos' neighborhood. It paced down the street, walking upright like a man, but slightly crouched. It stopped to stare at Madelyne Tolentino with its ovoid eyes. Mrs. Tolentino boldly stared back. Because this remains the longest close-proximity sighting of the goatsucker yet recorded, proper import should be given Mrs. Tolentino's observation. The goatsucker appeared to be about three feet tall. It was brownish to black in color and seemed to have no hair on its abdomen. Its eyes were large and jellylike, with no apparent pupils. It was at this point that the Tolentinos rushed the animal and the goatsucker bounded away. Mrs. Tolentino saw the goatsucker one more time - a rare second sighting - on January 2 of this year. She was driving home and smelled the distinct, sulfurous indicator of goatsucker activity. Then, gazing up into the sky above her, Mrs. Tolentino spotted it - the goatsucker, floating in the air, rising and dipping almost gracefully. "Like a butterfly," she said. No End in Sight The Tolentinos' encounter is only one of the many entries in Mr. Soto's growing dossier on the goatsucker, which on the morning after this reporter's excursion with Mr. Aquayo, was laid open across the mayor's large polished desk. Sightings and tales of the goatsucker increase daily with - to Mr. Soto's visible discomfort - no end in sight. "As a farming community," he said, "we can't relax knowing that this goatsucker is out there killing our animals. He could take out a child, a woman, a defenseless man." Mr. Soto is up for reelection this November and plans to frame the upcoming campaign around an "anti-chupacabras ticket." In the meantime, he still hopes to capture a live specimen. "Something very strange is going on in our town," he said at the close of the interview, "and the world simply does not want to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Not So Keen On Socializing With Aliens From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:34:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:34:59 -0500 Subject: Not So Keen On Socializing With Aliens Source: The Oakland Tribune - California http://www.insidebayarea.com/rayorrock/ci_2589948 03-01-05 Not So Keen On Socializing With Aliens Whenever I see a space movie, I think about the Pioneer satellite we sent up about 30 years ago. That was the one containing a brass plaque with information about Earth, so that if members of another civilization found it, they would be able to tell what we looked like and where to find us. I can't recall everything that was on that determined doodle =97 there were several cabalistic scratchings =97 but I do remember that the central drawing imm-ediately caught the eye. It was a depiction of two figures =97 a man and a woman =97 and both of them were naked as jaybirds. I mean, not one stitch. The rest of it was a complete mystery to me. I'll be the first to admit I'm no scientist, but if I'd found that plaque, I wouldn't have had the slightest idea what it was supposed to mean. And I live on Earth. The only part of the plaque I did understand was the picture of the naked man and woman. I studied that drawing for a long time =97 particularly the picture of the naked woman =97 and finally came to the conclusion that if I'd stumbled across that slab of brass lying in the dirt, I would have assumed that it was either an ad for a massage parlor or something that had fallen off the back of a Playboy delivery truck. In this whole scenario, however, it seemed to me that nobody had asked what I consider a very important question: Do we really want to communicate with people from another planet? Have you ever thought about what would happen if we made contact with another civilization? Well, I have, and it's enough to make you have a couple of drinks and go lie down somewhere. For one thing, they might not be friendly. And if they were friendly, then we'd have to encourage them to come visit us. With our current budget problems, the last thing we need right now is a bunch of tourists who don't even carry any money. In the spirit of interplanetary friendship, we'd have to invite them over for dinner. Would you like to have a group of weird- looking creatures walking (or creeping or slithering) around your house? I'm not talking about the relatives who come over to your place for Thanksgiving. I mean even weirder than that. There is also no reason to suppose that their eating habits are the same. How would you feel about sitting down to dinner and watching your guest proceed to shove a handful of mashed potatoes up his nose? Or stick a carrot in his ear? Or worse? What would that do to your appetite? I think we're just darned lucky that none of these attempts to contact another planet has succeeded. As Strother Martin kept saying in Cool Hand Luke, "What we've got here is a failure to communicate." I just hope it stays that way. In fact, it might not be a bad
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Pelicanist - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:14:53 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:38:31 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Clark >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:40:04 +0000 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:29:08 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>Hey, nice try, John! This is your way, I take it, of >>acknowleding - without actually having to say so - that you've >>given up, that you can deny the egg so manifestly plastered on >>your face only by pretending that it is spread elsewhere. >And this is your way of saying that the new evidence that was going to give the sceptics "a smack across the chops" has never materialised and/or never existed. 'Fraid not, old man, but it's the sort of quantum leap in logic and speculation that virtually defines pelicanism. >>I admire the way you change the subject, >Jerry, I learnt it from the master... you. Wish I couldn't say that's a nice try, John, but unfortunately, it's more like a feeble wheeze. Now, to the point you're trying to evade.... >>starting with the inconvenient truth we have yet to find the >>single elusive, missing negative witness who, according to >>pelicanist prophecy, is going to show up any day now to validate >>the indisputable truths so earnestly and touchingly proclaimed >>at meetings of the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. >Jerry, you're making things up again. I have never predicted that one of >your so-called 'negative witnesses' will turn up, any more than you >predicted that an actually-existing real witness would turn up, other >than Barauna and his chums from the Underwater Club. As Martin Shough demonstrates - and as you do just now, once again - the notion that there were no additional witnesses is sheer pelicanist fantasy. Along with a host of other evidence you're ignoring and which Shough eloquently brings forth, the absence of a single negative witness, crucial to the pelicanist interpretation, continues to render your hoax notions - to use one your favorite words, the one that started this whole thread - ridiculous. So where _is_ that single negative witness? I thought you Magonians were big believers in falsfication. Sadly, I guess it's because the hoax hypothesis about the Trindade witnesses is so easily falsified that you have to change the rules on this one. I expect that pigs will fly before that negative witness, mysteriously missing now for nearly five decades, shows up - and yet there ought to have been not just one, but a whole lot of them. Do you think the CIA got to them, John? >>Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that >>John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as >>we have seen, he can't.) Prediction confirmed. >I have looked at Martin Shough's piece, particulalry the >section concerning the missing military witnesses. At first >sight I can see nothing in it that has not already been covered >by earlier discussions on UpDates. However it is a long and >carefully researched piece and deserves longer consideration. I >shall, with ebk's indulgence, return to it at some length 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 > Mar > Mar 2 Forgotten Flying Saucer Rusting In Russia From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:45:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:45:24 -0500 Subject: Forgotten Flying Saucer Rusting In Russia Source: Frank Warren's Blog Spot http://tinyurl.com/3ughh 02-28-05 Forgotten Flying Saucer Rusting In Central Russian Aviation Center [Picture: http://tinyurl.com/4zfjr] Mos News 2-24-05 A unique 'flying saucer' developed by Russian inventors is aging at an aviation plant in Central Russia, the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper wrote on Thursday. The 'saucer' was invented in the late 1970s. The constructors joined a fuselage and wings into one thick "wing", before trimming and rounding its edges. The saucer can lift more than half its weight, and its inner volume is 8-10 times bigger than the saloon of the plane it was made from. The aircraft can take off from any surface with the help of an air cushion. In 1988 it started test flights in Nizhny Novgorod but was moved to Saratov after an accident. U.S. aviation constructors visited Nizhny Novgorod and attempted to make their own saucer, but failed because of a defect in the Soviet model. Later the Soviet constructors managed to remove the defect. Specialists at the Saratov plant quoted by the paper complained about the indifference of the Russian authorities towards the "saucer" project. In 1993, it was financed by the Security Council, State Committee of Problems of the North (the saucer was going to be used in the North of Russia), and forestry agencies. However, after 1999 state financing stopped. In September 2003, officials from the U.S. Congress visited
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Frustration From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:49:59 -0500 Subject: Frustration Hello fellow Listerions, Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our frustrations with where things have ended up after all these years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. Over the weekend I was going to formulate my answers for his journal but I had so much frustration that on Sunday I sent him the email below: ----- Hello Dick, I want to thank you for asking me to be interviewed and post answers to your questions regarding UFO investigation. A few days ago I was willing to do so but over the last day or two I have decided I am no longer interested. As I said to you over the phone, I had come to the conclusion that the only way UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the government voluntarily decided to release all that it knows regarding UFOs. To me UFOlogy has come to a point where nothing really significant will be revealed unless the government comes forward or some undoubtable and spectacular event such as the landing of a craft, a crash, or aliens speaking publicly takes place. Despite the hard work of people with integrity in the UFO field we have not crossed the significant barrier from claims and evidence to proof. As I mentioned to you I suspect that the government knows a great deal more than they will admit, keeps it highly classified, and has its own reasons for witholding that information. It may have valid reasons for secrecy that I could only be aware of and perhaps would agree with if I were in that position. In the past James McDonald made valiant efforts at getting the US Congress and the UN to take this matter seriously. Unfortunately that did not happen. I feel that in public UFOlogy (sic) these days the lunatics have taken over the asylum. With The Disclosure Project, Stephen Bassett, and Exopolitics, and Art Bell having turned things rotten, attempts to get information from our government have turned into a bad joke. There is no question that people in top levels of government are aware of the situation and aware that a great deal of Americans want answers but they have not come forward. No congressional hearings have been called for and interested officials have not been able to get access to significant information and to bring it to the public. That may never happen until those holding such information decide it is the time for it to be disclosed. MUFON started out with good goals but never maintained the integrity I was looking forward to when I got involved with them ages ago. There is hard work being performed by many legitimate researchers in the field but it does not come near to answering the most important questions. Perhaps "UFOlogy (sic) is dead" as you stated, is true. Things will continue to go round and round and fill in some blanks but we are not really getting anywhere. I expressed to you that I still had an interest in those cases in which there was interface between UFOs and our military. This weekend I have spent a lot of time reexamining the 1967 Malmstrom AFB missile case, the 1968 Minot AFB case, the 1975 Northern tier cases, NORAD cases, the Fort Dix/McGuire AFB case, the Iranian case, the Belgian flying triangle case, and the Rendlesham case. If I were to not know anything about any other UFO cases the above cases alone would convince me that UFOs are real. Unfortunately in all those cases and their analyses there is no real ground left to investigate them further. Going forward seems to require access at levels we can not reach through the FOIA. In the McGuire AFB case I read through all the information posted on Frank Ridge's NICAP site. I appreciate all the work, Len Stringfield, you, and others did to get information. Sgt. Morse could not get others who had worked around him to come forward and support his story. Even the State Police gave him the bum's rush. I read through the mini conference you, your brother, and Bruce Maccabee had with him and he certainly sounded sincere. On the report of the incident that Morse presented there were others named but without their social security numbers or other identifiers it would be very difficult to track them down 27 years after the incident. Even if they were tracked down and supported his story where would that get us toward proof? A couple of members of congress asked for information from the Air Force and were told that documents (including AFOSI) had been destroyed. I still think that beyond the initial reports the records of the actual investigations and what happened afterwards most likely do exist and are being witheld. The same applies to all the military cases. Dick, in view of all the above I no longer have any "juice" (motivation, desire, interest) to write anything regarding how to go about an investigation. It just seems to me a rote exercise without meaningful purpose. It feels like something I would have to make myself do versus something I want to do. In many ways that is what I meant when I said I have really pulled back in recent years. I haven't done a field investigation in ages. I follow what goes on but I mostly lurk and only post on Updates when something outrageous (like Salla) gets my attention. I suppose I feel very discouraged that after decades of UFOlogy (sic) it has not grabbed the golden ring. The more I think of the Peter Jennings show the more I get pissed off and think what a waste it was. Today I read Budd Hopkins' post and it really illustrated what a hatchet job they did on abductions. In many ways the show led nowhere. They presented the Minot Air Force case and the police flying triangle case which I am sure intrigued the average viewer but ABC did no investigative work behind those reports and into the government leading towards what information the government may be witholding. They showed Michio Kaku but did not help establish a method for further scientific investigation. They left the viewer believing that some of this UFO stuff may be true but did not establish any direction and methods for establishing that truth. Dick, I have no ego need to get into your publication and I am sincere in my feelings I have expressed. I seem to have come to the end of the road in terms of being active in the UFO field. I forgot where the penpal site is for me to renew my subscription. Take care, Josh ----- I will continue to lurk out here, following UFO UpDates and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:40:13 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:54:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:06:20 +0000 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:24:35 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 09:32:51 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>Should he be so foolish as to respond, we may be assured that >>>John will not address any of this. (Simple reason for this: as >>>we have seen, he can't.) He will pretend that the only issue is >>>the ongoing, yet unpublished work of others, trying to distract >>>our attention from the devastating (for him) work already in >>>public forums. He will remind you, yet again, why you are >>>unwelcome at the Sceptics' Club at the Pelican Pub. >>The Pelicans can have their Pub. I'm choosey who I drink with. >>Why would anyone want to drink there anyway, the tables wobble >>in a dreary setting, they water their badly made hooch, misbrew >>their beer, and the loo is a freakin' mess... >Ah, how little you know the home-life of the Greater British >Pelican. It's favoured watering holes include glorious Victorian >gin palaces with polished granite pillars, gilt-encrusted domes, >stained-glass windows worthy of Chartres, and loos so >resplendent with their marbled walls, polished brass fittings, >mahogany doors and mosaic floors that architectural students and >awestruck American tourists take guided tours around them to >gasp at their majesty. Now see, forgetting for a moment that the preceding is largely descriptive of what is most sociopathic about civilization in the aggregate, "there you go again..." right out of the gate. We were using _metaphor_, Mr. Rimmer. Maybe that's a little beyond those intellectually retarded by the badly distilled liquor consumed in the realm of wobbly tables, (another metaphor just so you'll know). Besides, we were talking about the depressed environs of watering holes regarding a select and hubristic _class_ of individuals, individuals not reflecting the "loos" you, too wistfully I observe, describe. >On other days, of course, we may take our discussions to smart, >glossy city-centre bars, or the historic riverside tavern where >the passengers on the Mayflower took their last taste of good >English ale before setting off on their brave voyage. We were just starting to get over the regressive affects of _that_ lot, too. >Or perhaps >one of our friendly, unpretentious 'locals' where the barmaid >had your favourite tipple ready on the bar without you even >needing to ask, and where, in the words of the song: "everybody >knows your name". You would be the Postman Cliff Clavin, I presume. I only _aspire_ to Woody. <g> >If there's one thing we know about, Mr Lehmberg, it's good pubs! [...erp...] "Eng-ga-land swings like a pendulum do..." Mr. Rimmer. Moreover, I'm proud of my AlienView brew and association with its facilitating distillers, and don't have to sneer at others because I suspect it's of a lesser quality or know its badly brewed. It's neither. Finally, I save my sneering for those who, too reflexively, sneer. Oh, and _do_ try to get that period after my "Mr." when you address me, won't you, Sir? I take pains with _all_ of yours. First it's a "period" and then it's civility altogether. Punctuation _is_ important and I suspect yours may be the hint of a glove in my face - another metaphor, Sir. Nes't ce pas?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 2 German Experts Row Over Star Disc From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:01:13 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:01:13 -0500 Subject: German Experts Row Over Star Disc Source; The Guardian - London, UK http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1427600,00.html 03-01-05 Ancient Sky Map Or Fake? German Experts Row Over Star Disc Luke Harding in Berlin The Guardian One of Germany's most acclaimed archaeological finds - a 3,600- year-old disc depicting the stars and the planets - is at the centre of a dispute following claims that it is a modern forgery. According to Germany's museum establishment, the Sky Disc of Nebra is the oldest depiction of the heavens discovered and offers an insight into the Bronze Age mind. But the authenticity of the disc has been challenged by one of the country's leading archaeologists, Peter Schauer of Regensburg University. He told a court in Halle that the artefact was nothing more than an amateurish forgery. Prof Schauer said that the ancient-looking green patina on the artefact was not old at all, and had probably been artificially created in a workshop using acid, urine and a blowtorch. The indentations on the disc's side, meanwhile, were also not made by a Bronze Age tool but were done by machine, he said. "My colleagues don't want to believe it. But there is little doubt that the disc is a fake," he told the Guardian yesterday. "It looks very nice. It has the sky and the stars. You can even see the Pleiades. But I'm afraid it's a piece of fantasy." The disc was allegedly found in 1999 by two amateur metal detectors. They claimed that they discovered it in a muddy field close to a prehistoric hill fort near the east German town of Nebra, with two ancient swords and jewellery. The amateur archaeol ogists then attempted to sell the disc to various German museums for 1m marks. Police in the Swiss city of Basel eventually arrested the pair and they were convicted of handling stolen goods. They are appealing against the sentence, arguing that if the disk is a fake they should not have been convicted in the first place. Last week a judge in Halle called Prof Schauer as an ex pert witness after he wrote a letter to the Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper last November saying that the disc was a fake. Other experts, though, have poured scorn on the professor's testimony. "An examination of the patina confirms its ancient origins _ I have no doubt that it does indeed come from the Bronze Age," another professor, Josef Riederer, told the court. Tests revealed that the disc had come from the Nebra site, yet another expert, Gregor Borg, claimed. The case is embarrassing Germany's curatorial establishment, which had hailed the disc as the most sensational archaeological discovery of the last century. The disc, with its gold appliqu=E9s, was the oldest concrete representation of the cosmos to date and a key find not only for archaeology but also for astronomy and the history of religion, experts claimed. It probably belonged to an early Bronze Age prince, they added, who would have exchanged goods across Europe. Thousands of Germans have flocked to an exhibition in Halle to see the disc. Yesterday, however, Prof Schauer said the disc could have been manufactured by shamans from Siberia, and was probably no more than "two or three hundred years old". Asked whether he might be wrong, he replied: "I spent 19 years examining finds from across
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: German Experts Row Over Star Disc - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 08:36:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:30:18 -0500 Subject: Re: German Experts Row Over Star Disc - Reynolds On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:01:13 -0500 UFO UpDates - Toronto writes: >Source; The Guardian - London, UK >http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1427600,00.html >03-01-05 >Ancient Sky Map Or Fake? German Experts Row Over Star Disc >Luke Harding in Berlin >The Guardian >One of Germany's most acclaimed archaeological finds - a 3,600- >year-old disc depicting the stars and the planets - is at the >centre of a dispute following claims that it is a modern >forgery. Our guy Shane has posted an article and a BBC video about the Star Disc at our blog-site:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Strange Circles At 9 de Julio Argentina From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:27:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:34:44 -0500 Subject: Strange Circles At 9 de Julio Argentina Source: CIUFOS La Pampa Date: March 1, 2005 On January 27, 2005 at the "9 de Julio" Air Club, strange circular marks were detected on the runway grass. Jorge Marcelo Ayram, the person in charge of the club, discovered the odd imprints while mowing the runway apron. Upon being consulted about the origin of the circles, he pointed out that his watchdog had been restless on the previous evening, disturbed and howling, prompting her owner to get up to check on her. The time was 0200 hours and Ayram, by now standing next to his dog, saw a strange light toward the front of the air station. At first he believed it was the full moon, when the size of the phenomenon and its sudden disappearance caused him to think otherwise. On February 18, researchers from CIUFOSLAPAMPA discovered that three circles - aligned with each other and aimed northward - were on the surface. The first measured some 80 cm in diameter, the second 1.30 meters in diameter, and the third some 10 - 12 meters in diameter.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Frustration - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:31:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:40:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Smith >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration <snip> >Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. <snip> >I will continue to lurk out here, following UFO UpDates and >other sources but I have also lost my spirit towards getting >these matters to be taken seriously by the public. Hello Josh, I sympathize with you completely. It does seem to be a waste of time doing investigations. However, I do not agree with you that we must wait for the government to come clean on UFOs. We can still do scientific field studies of UFOs using passive radar, infrasound and stereo imaging. Admittedly these take more money and time than we likely can devote to the subject, but at least they would put us in a place where we are not dependent on government information. Perhaps if we apply for a grant in tracking bolides and meteors and get some funding from the government but just happen to also be able to detect UFOs, then that would be nice. So take a break! Its easy to get burned out on this if you work too hard and get little out of it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Frustration From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:18:06 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:44:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration >Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings >special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. >He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History >and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last >Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in >regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. >Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. >Over the weekend I was going to formulate my answers for his >journal but I had so much frustration that on Sunday I sent him >the email below: Josh, Richard, and List, I have a friend that I've recently met, who has a decided skeptical view of the field of ufology. However, this wasn't a viewpoint that was written stone. She is willing to discuss the subject with an open mind, but so far the information she's seen in the media has left her un-convinced. In anticipation of the Peter Jennings special I suggested that she might find it interesting and she agreed to watch it. She came away with two points that she hadn't been aware of. First of all, she came away from the show with the understanding that the Government hasn't been forthcoming with information and did all it could to de-emphasize what was being seen in the skies. Secondly, she had not been aware of the "good" witnesses to UFO events, such as policemen and military pilots. We on this List would probably think it incredible that someone wouldn't know these as facts already, but that's likely not to be true for most of the general public. Most people are far more concerned about day-to-day events and give little thought to UFOs or Alien Abductions. More importantly, these two points are critical and lay the foundation for further research and potential allegations. I think it was important that they were heard by at least one viewer who had been skeptical of the genre prior to the show. This doesn't mean that my friend will now joing MUFON or seek further answers, but she doesn't think of UFO researchers as a bunch of "Nuts" chasing lights in the sky anymore, which I view as a positive step. The show could have spent more time on better cases and left the abduction and crash site stories for another show, but I won't try to second guess the editing decisions. I think that many had unrealistic expectations, including the network which had the lowest share of the audiance for last Thursday. When you think of the fact that the program lost out to Survivor, it gives one an idea of where this genre rates with most television viewers. I believe that Richard is correct, in that the greatest harm to the field of ufology is coming from those within the genre. The noise level generated by the throngs
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Ufology [was: Frustration] - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:24:51 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:47:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufology [was: Frustration] - Clark >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration Hi, Josh, I don't want to go into the substance of your message because we're both busy and have other things to do, but I am curious about this: >UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the >UFOlogy (sic) these days the lunatics have taken over the asylum. With >"UFOlogy (sic) is dead" as >UFOlogy (sic) it has not grabbed the golden ring. Are you using "(sic)" as a play on "sick"? If so, fine; you think ufology is in an unhealthy state (uh, when isn't it?). Otherwise, I am afraid your meaning escapes me. "Ufology," as it's usually spelled these days, has been an accepted phrase since the 1950s and can be found in most dictionaries. In fact, it is the only English word ever successfully devised (that is, to enter into wide usage), to characterize the field of UFO study and interest. Maybe when it was first devised half a century ago and shocking the sensibilities of some delicate reader and writer, "(sic)" might defensibly have followed the phrase. Like it or not, however, "ufology" exists because (1) people use it and (2) no plausible substitute has ever been offered and accepted. I suspect that few of us would find it convenient to participate in a pursuit that has no name (or one so arcane that nobody understands you when you express it) or that requires a mouthful of words when one will do. I'm glad I had it to use when I wrote my encyclopedia, or I'd have been in real trouble. From time to time, I hear someone muttering about the word's inadequacy on one ground or another, but really, there are few perfect words, and ufology has no more to answer for than any number of other neologisms. (Some words even have multiple, inconsistent meanings - "presently," for instance, means both "now" and "eventually" - but we live with that.) Ufology's meaning is obvious enough to just about anybody, and that's the mark of a word that can function in the world and that, consequently, has staying power. I think the more unwieldy "UFOlogy" went out of fashion because naive speakers (including, oddly, the onetime head of a major American UFO organization) sometimes pronounced it "yoo-eff-oh- ology," which does not trip easily off the tongue and so ought to be discouraged.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Dick Hall's Views On The Peter Jennings From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:34:31 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:51:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Dick Hall's Views On The Peter Jennings >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 00:06:44 +0000 >Subject: Dick Hall's Views On The Peter Jennings Special >I was among the many serious UFO advocates whose videoed >interviews and other contributed materials were left on the >cutting room floor by the Peter Jennings Production people. Am I >upset? No, it goes far beyond that. I am angry, depressed, and >feeling that my almost lifetime effort to fight for serious >attention to UFOs has come to naught, and here I am.... well, >most of the images I think of are X-rated. <snip> "X-rated" for violence the presumption. <g> When I reflected on the distorted spin provided to those who were included in Jennings' shill of abortive apostasy I think a lack of inclusion in it might reflect an individual's absolute quality and value to the field overall. Those who could be wrongly maligned and marginalized, were, looking at Hopkins and Freidman et al. Those who could _not_ be marginalized were not even alluded to. You and Dr. McDonald, for instance, and perhaps to some degree Dr. Salla or even Dr. Greer. A solution to the UFO conundrum is not likely to be found in any one book or discipline. Dr. Mack understood this I think. The thought of you bowing out of the rat race is a discomfiting one, Sir. Ufology won't be dead until one can no longer hide a googolplex of galaxies behind a grain of sand at arms length, as the HST has shown us, and what else are you going to do anyway? We need roots in this thing that go back as far as yours do, Mr. Hall. You threw your dice over 50 years ago it's late in the game to be discouraged by others with a possibly sincere interest in UFOs even seemingly cross-purposed to yours. Please take some time to reconsider. Besides, if you drop out then corporate media has realized its wet-blanket agenda, and the smirking, hijacked, and corrupted mainstream is allowed to proceed merrily on its way.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Lazar Redux [was: UFO Whistleblowers...] From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:16:24 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 09:00:52 -0500 Subject: Lazar Redux [was: UFO Whistleblowers...] >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:39:31 -1000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:03:52 -0400 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 12:09:37 -0600 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >><snip> >>W-2 forms are filled out every year by businesses. There is no >>reason to say Bob's is genuine. No tax form. When he went >>bankrupt for $300,000 he listed his occupation as self-employed >>film processor. Read the article by Mahood that you noted. He >>thought Lazar, after Mahood did a lot of checking, was a fraud >>as well and also notes that Bob was out near the mail box many >>times. >Yes, I did read Mahood's article and Lazar's background is >definitely unstable. It seems he was driven by many interests >and that got him into financial problems. Building rocket cars >isn't cheap, I assume. Financial difficulties doesn't in any way >detract from the substance of Lazar's claims concerning S4. As >for the W-2, it's evidence and was traced by the reseachers >associated with George Knapp to Naval Intelligence in Maryland. >The zip code on the W-2 refers to Naval Intelligence - how would >Lazar have known that? No, my conclusion is that the W-2 is >genuine and that Lazar was working on a waived SAP with Naval >Intelligence in 1988/89. ><snip> Michael, "brothel-physicist-brothel", but I see these career options advertised in "physics today" all the time!, right next to obituaries. Get serious! I think Stan did provide one more accurate up to the minute 6 letter-explanation, how one persons seedy lifestyle can be used to describe a few of the businesses in around Las Vegas. A few of them apparently are in no danger of losing their reputation among ethical and moral righteous people. John http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/timeline.htm 1985: Per the April 1994 issue of Omni magazine, "...while on vacation in Nevada, he (RL) wound up buying into a legal Reno brothel; the investment proved so profitable that he didn't have to return to full time employment for a while". Per Good, it was owned by RL and Carol, and called the "Honeysuckle Ranch" in northern Nevada. In the bankruptcy papers filed in 1986, no mention is made of any ownership of income from a brothel. July 21, 1986: RL files for bankruptcy. In the file, under penalty of perjury, RL stated his occupation was a Photo Processor, that he was self employed at his residence, and had been so for 6 years. 1988: RL met John Lear, precise date unknown. (1) December 1988: RL began claimed work period at S-4.(1) June 5, 1990: RL was arrested in Las Vegas for pandering. (6)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Flying Saucer Midget Pilot In Mexico From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:33:44 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 09:04:40 -0500 Subject: Flying Saucer Midget Pilot In Mexico Source: Frank Warren Blog http://tinyurl.com/6tua8 The Washington Herald 3-10-1950 Los Angeles, March 9 (AP)-- An expert on chemicals and explosives told reporters yesterday he had seen the wreckage of an ultra streamlined flying saucer on a Mexico City mountainside, and that top U.S. officials have viewed it. But there was no confirmation of the account, related by Ray L. Dimmick sales manger of of the Apache Powder Co., and the Air Force in Washington said it had heard nothing about it. Say Strip of Metal Dimmick later told newsmen he had seen only a strip of metal which he was told came from the space ship. The remainder of his information Dimmick said, came from two businessmen in Mexico City, one an American, the other a Chilean. Dimmick declined to name them, said he would divulge that information "if requested by the proper authorities." Part of the information he said, was that a man 23 inched tall, the pilot of the plane, died in the crash and that his body had been embalmed for scientific study. It was an exquisite piece of machinery, Dimmick told the first interviewers. He then described it in detail, saying it was 48 feet in diameter, built of a metal resembling aluminum, but much harder, and was powered by two motors. He was then taken to the scene of the crash by associates and that the wreckage was roped off. The crash occurred three months ago he said. Dimmick said later that the piece of metal he saw was actually eight feet long, 8 inches wide, and three-quarters of an inch thick. Others Sighted Reminded that the Air Force announced last December it was dropping it�s investigation of Flying Saucers because of preponderance of evidence that they do not exist, Dimmick said: "I�m big enough to take the consequences of what I said and stand my ground."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:26:04 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:19:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Rimmer >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:40:13 -0600 >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:06:20 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 08:24:35 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>>The Pelicans can have their Pub. I'm choosey who I drink with. >>>Why would anyone want to drink there anyway, the tables wobble >>>in a dreary setting, they water their badly made hooch, misbrew >>>their beer, and the loo is a freakin' mess... >>Ah, how little you know the home-life of the Greater British >>Pelican. It's favoured watering holes include glorious Victorian >>gin palaces with polished granite pillars, gilt-encrusted domes, >>stained-glass windows worthy of Chartres, and loos so >>resplendent with their marbled walls, polished brass fittings, >>mahogany doors and mosaic floors that architectural students and >>awestruck American tourists take guided tours around them to >>gasp at their majesty. >Now see, forgetting for a moment that the preceding is largely >descriptive of what is most sociopathic about civilization in >the aggregate, "there you go again..." right out of the gate. We >were using _metaphor_, Mr. Rimmer. Maybe that's a little beyond >those intellectually retarded by the badly distilled liquor >consumed in the realm of wobbly tables, (another metaphor just >so you'll know). Besides, we were talking about the depressed >environs of watering holes regarding a select and hubristic >_class_ of individuals, individuals not reflecting the "loos" >you, too wistfully I observe, describe. Oh, it was a _metaphor_? I thought maybe you were joking. I'm slipping up on my literary criticism and missing the sub-text. >>If there's one thing we know about, Mr Lehmberg, it's good pubs! >Oh, and _do_ try to get that period after my "Mr." when you >address me, won't you, Sir? I take pains with _all_ of yours. >First it's a "period" and then it's civility altogether. >Punctuation _is_ important and I suspect yours may be the hint >of a glove in my face - another metaphor, Sir. Nes't ce pas? I think the generally accepted usage, on this side of the pond at least, that there is no need for a period after the abbreviation "Mr". I don't have my Fowler to hand, but this is really Jerry Clark's field, perhaps he could advise. Incidentally, I apologise for the faux pas I perpetrated in the paragraph above, using "It's" for the possessive pronoun - a far more heinous crime than the one you accuse me of.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Peter Panned From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 15:07:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:05:50 -0500 Subject: Peter Panned Peter Panned by Larry W. Bryant Doubt not that, when they first heard about the Peter Jennings Productions' UFOdrama, most seasoned UFOlogists exhaled a sigh of "so what?". Some of them, like me, chose a hope-for-the-best approach; in my case, this included my dispatching a prebroadcast e-plea to ABC TV's "Nightline" that one or more segments of _that_ program be devoted to expanding upon Peter's would-be ground-breaking assessment of today's UFOworld (see text of my letter, below). Now that the video-Peter-gram has been delivered and digested, I have only to say that my plea has morphed into a pan. Place no bets, dear TV viewer, that anyone at "Nightline" will get around to providing a customized reply to my plea. And why should they? In their ballooning, self-satisfied hold on the public's short attention span, the ABC moguls needn't look any farther than such cookie-cutter productions as Jennings's for earning their paychecks. So long as they're willing to continue pandering to the Shallow Halls of Scientism as regards UFO reality - and so long as the public accepts that status quo - we can do little to open the eyes of those scientists beset by their own form of (intellectual) "sleep paralysis." If Jennings's languid Ufomercial has proved anything, it has proved, once again, that - in Amerika's corporate-driven, codified society - we Ufologists can expect little solace (or enlightenment) from mainstream media, vis-a-vis the UFO problem.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Ufologists On SETI Program? From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:08:09 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:09:44 -0500 Subject: Ufologists On SETI Program? Alot of talk about the Jennings' program. I won't go into everything I think about the program. A lot of it was mentioned in a post I made several weeks ago. Speculation that became my reality. Some thoughts that the show help inspire are as followed: I would love to see a seti show that has ufologists on, where the ufologists criticize SETI. Seems only fair. It's always the UFO shows, where the experts in UFOs are believers, while the seti people are scientist, or skeptics. Why are they not refered to as disbelievers? SETI scientist have loads of assumption within their own field. Loads of beliefs. It would be great to hear the seti scientist be called believers on a show about seti. It's funny. I have been ask throughout my life, if "I believe in UFOs?" I get disturbed by this. I tell people when it comes to profound matters, I use reasoning rather than faith. I guess being a reasoner isn't in-lingo, so I will be thought as a believer by people. Now, if I can only figure out what conclusions I have that they think are beliefs. Just having a little fun here. When people ask questions regarding beliefs, they usually seem to mean, "Are you convinced?" If you are a scientist that isn't convinced of something, it always must be because of crummy evidence, no? Never because of lack of research. Oh, no, no, no. If you are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Frustration - Velez From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:13:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:23:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Velez >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration >Hello fellow Listerions, >Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings >special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. >He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History >and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last >Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in >regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. >Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. >Over the weekend I was going to formulate my answers for his >journal but I had so much frustration that on Sunday I sent him >the email below: >----- >Hello Dick, >I want to thank you for asking me to be interviewed and post >answers to your questions regarding UFO investigation. A few >days ago I was willing to do so but over the last day or two I >have decided I am no longer interested. As I said to you over >the phone, I had come to the conclusion that the only way >UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the >government voluntarily decided to release all that it knows >regarding UFOs. >To me UFOlogy has come to a point where nothing really >significant will be revealed unless the government comes forward >or some undoubtable and spectacular event such as the landing of >a craft, a crash, or aliens speaking publicly takes place. >Despite the hard work of people with integrity in the UFO field >we have not crossed the significant barrier from claims and >evidence to proof. As I mentioned to you I suspect that the >government knows a great deal more than they will admit, keeps >it highly classified, and has its own reasons for witholding >that information. It may have valid reasons for secrecy that I >could only be aware of and perhaps would agree with if I were in >that position. > >In the past James McDonald made valiant efforts at getting the >US Congress and the UN to take this matter seriously. >Unfortunately that did not happen. I feel that in public UFOlogy >(sic) these days the lunatics have taken over the asylum. With >The Disclosure Project, Stephen Bassett, and Exopolitics, and >Art Bell having turned things rotten, attempts to get >information from our government have turned into a bad joke. >There is no question that people in top levels of government are >aware of the situation and aware that a great deal of Americans >want answers but they have not come forward. No congressional >hearings have been called for and interested officials have not >been able to get access to significant information and to bring >it to the public. That may never happen until those holding such >information decide it is the time for it to be disclosed. > >MUFON started out with good goals but never maintained the >integrity I was looking forward to when I got involved with them >ages ago. There is hard work being performed by many legitimate >researchers in the field but it does not come near to answering >the most important questions. Perhaps "UFOlogy (sic) is dead" as >you stated, is true. Things will continue to go round and round >and fill in some blanks but we are not really getting anywhere. > >I expressed to you that I still had an interest in those cases >in which there was interface between UFOs and our military. This >weekend I have spent a lot of time reexamining the 1967 >Malmstrom AFB missile case, the 1968 Minot AFB case, the 1975 >Northern tier cases, NORAD cases, the Fort Dix/McGuire AFB case, >the Iranian case, the Belgian flying triangle case, and the >Rendlesham case. If I were to not know anything about any other >UFO cases the above cases alone would convince me that UFOs are >real. Unfortunately in all those cases and their analyses there >is no real ground left to investigate them further. Going >forward seems to require access at levels we can not reach >through the FOIA. > >In the McGuire AFB case I read through all the information >posted on Frank Ridge's NICAP site. I appreciate all the work, >Len Stringfield, you, and others did to get information. Sgt. >Morse could not get others who had worked around him to come >forward and support his story. Even the State Police gave him >the bum's rush. I read through the mini conference you, your >brother, and Bruce Maccabee had with him and he certainly >sounded sincere. On the report of the incident that Morse >presented there were others named but without their social >security numbers or other identifiers it would be very difficult >to track them down 27 years after the incident. Even if they >were tracked down and supported his story where would that get >us toward proof? A couple of members of congress asked for >information from the Air Force and were told that documents >(including AFOSI) had been destroyed. I still think that beyond >the initial reports the records of the actual investigations and >what happened afterwards most likely do exist and are being >witheld. The same applies to all the military cases. >Dick, in view of all the above I no longer have any "juice" >(motivation, desire, interest) to write anything regarding how >to go about an investigation. It just seems to me a rote >exercise without meaningful purpose. It feels like something I >would have to make myself do versus something I want to do. In >many ways that is what I meant when I said I have really pulled >back in recent years. I haven't done a field investigation in >ages. I follow what goes on but I mostly lurk and only post on >Updates when something outrageous (like Salla) gets my >attention. I suppose I feel very discouraged that after decades >of Ufology (sic) it has not grabbed the golden ring. >The more I think of the Peter Jennings show the more I get >pissed off and think what a waste it was. Today I read Budd >Hopkins' post and it really illustrated what a hatchet job they >did on abductions. In many ways the show led nowhere. They >presented the Minot Air Force case and the police flying >triangle case which I am sure intrigued the average viewer but >ABC did no investigative work behind those reports and into the >government leading towards what information the government may >be witholding. They showed Michio Kaku but did not help >establish a method for further scientific investigation. They >left the viewer believing that some of this UFO stuff may be >true but did not establish any direction and methods for >establishing that truth. >Dick, I have no ego need to get into your publication and I am >sincere in my feelings I have expressed. I seem to have come to >the end of the road in terms of being active in the UFO field. >I forgot where the penpal site is for me to renew my >subscription. ----- >I will continue to lurk out here, following UFO UpDates and >other sources but I have also lost my spirit towards getting >these matters to be taken seriously by the public. Yep! What Josh (and Dick Hall said.) Word for word. BTW, you're not "paranoid" Dick. Agents of dis-information _are_ all around us. It's always the same names and faces too. 'NASA Spokes-puppy' James Oberg (as a dear friend of mine is fond of calling him,) being one of the more obvious (ala John Gotti) and well-known ones. But that's no 'secret' to anybody. If the Bugs are monitoring the Internet, let em read this: Ollie, Ollie Oxen Free! Come out, come out where ever you are! End this tortuous game of hide and seek already!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: Frustration - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:27:17 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:34:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - White >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration <snip> >... I had come to the conclusion that the only way >UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the >government voluntarily decided to release all that it knows >regarding UFOs. From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> To: ufoupdates.nul Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:27:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration <snip> >... I had come to the conclusion that the only way >UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the >government voluntarily decided to release all that it knows >regarding UFOs. This is puzzling: _Government_ employees step forward and tell stories about government information they had access to, which was classified. Yet, this apparent release of _government_ information is not seen as a step forward? As a non-ufologist but interested member of the public, I am grateful for what has been made public by whistleblowers, (and I fully understand that some of it may be bogus.) Whistleblower information can be used to 'twist arms', so to speak, or at least it has in other situations.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Peter Jennings' Recent Show From: Larry Bryant <overtci.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:48:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:45:25 -0500 Subject: Peter Jennings' Recent Show Sent to various researchers in ufology by Jim Klotz ----- What the hell is the matter with you people? I have never seen such bellyaching, whining, childish moaning about an overwhelmingly PRO-UFO show by PRO-UFO types in my life! CUFOS got tremendous amounts of air time with great presentations by Rodeghier, Jerry Clark, Swords, and footage of Hynek who was in effect given the last word against the AF's position. (If I was the AF I'd be angry about that!) And then you come along and whine and moan and bellyache that MUFON didn't get mentioned! So the hell what? Neither did CSICOP, the Condon Committee, Klass, Adamski, CSETI, Greer, or Bassett get mentioned by name either! Did ya stop to think of that? Or did you just bitch and gripe because this or that little pet peeve wasn't satisfied, or your favorite 100 hours of interviews didn't make it into the approximately 1 hour of interviews shown (Yeah people, an 86 minute show doesn't even mean 86 minutes of _interviews_ either, only about 1 hour, as there was on-air time taken with Peter Jennings, clips that were repeated for emphasis or point-counterpoint, time taken for almost totally _pro-UFO_ animations - only one single debunking animation was done, that of the moon and it was not at all convincing). Or do you seriously think that ABC should have given _zero_ air time to skeptics and debunkers? Instead the pro-UFO position got the majority of air-time and more importantly got the last word on every major topic except Roswell - can't ABC or Peter Jennings have a viewpoint? They don't like the way Roswell has been "promoted" and are clearly turned off by the hucksterism and stupid hoaxing, but you won't take that message to heart. The ABC show was _not_ a science show, nor a scientific research paper. It was a general public entertainment and information show designed to give the vast majority of people who know _nothing_ at all about Ufology some taste of what Ufology is about without overloading them with massive detail and complex controversy. The abduction phenomenon was handled carefully and abductees given the last word very convincingly denying the McNally "dream" theory. ABC could have put nutballs up there but they didn't, did ya think of that? The only time ABC took a clear stand was to deny Roswell, but it did no such thing on any other aspect of Ufology, and gave the pro-UFO camp the overwhelmingly last word on the subject, including the dramatic and unexpected surprise of Michio Kaku saying there could be something to this subject, we need to investigate, so therefore "Let this investigation begin!" Instead of griping and sour-graping you should all be adopting Kaku's motto "Let this investigation begin!" You have not even
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:02:09 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:48:29 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:39:31 -1000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:03:52 -0400 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>You said something about the Los Alamos Monitor being a house >>organ. Wrong. It is a newspaper in the town of Los Alamos. I >>have no doubt Bob told them he was a physicist at the lab. There >>are thousands of professional people there. The great majority >>are honest. Why would they check? >Thanks for the clarification. Why do you imply that Lazar lied >in the 1982 story about being a physicist? I am not implying. I am stating there has not been a shred of evidence that Lazar was a physicist >I think a fair minded >person would assume that he is telling the truth rather than >make the assumption you are making. Let's not forget that your >main case was that he lied in 1989 when he came out with the S4 >story. Where did that come from? My main case is that he has consistently lied about his background and his foreground. He isn't a scientist, he has not graduated from any colleges, he was not a professional at Los Alamos. The Meson facility attracts professors from all over the world.They can't bring along their own technicians. I never have said Bob was stupid. He is obvously a sharp conman. Just how long did he work at the lab? How many phone books was he in? >The evidence may be inconclusive for that, but that >doesn't mean he lied in 1982 about being a physicist. You are >making some incorrect assumptions here based on your >interpretation of the validity of the 1989 claims. Wrong again. I checked and double checked his background. He was lying through his teeth. >An inconclusive set of claims in 1989 does not mean he lied in 1982 >when he got what appears to be his first regular job and was It wasn't an inconclusive claim. He conclusively lied. >>W-2 forms are filled out every year by businesses. There is no >>reason to say Bob's is genuine. No tax form. When he went >>bankrupt for $300,000 he listed his occupation as self-employed >>film processor. Read the article by Mahood that you noted. He >>thought Lazar, after Mahood did a lot of checking, was a fraud >>as well and also notes that Bob was out near the mail box many >>times. >Yes, I did read Mahood's article and Lazar's background is >definitely unstable. It seems he was driven by many interests >and that got him into financial problems. Most of his sdebts were for film processing equipment. >Building rocket cars >isn't cheap, I assume. Financial difficulties doesn't in any way >detract from the substance of Lazar's claims concerning S4. What detracts are all his lies and the absence of anything to substantiate his claims about himself... and the presence of evidence.. for example, his naming Duxler, his prof at Pierce, as a physics prof at Cal Tech where Duxler never taught. I repeat how does a guy with advanced degrees at MIT and CIT wind up taking a physics course at Pierce Junior College? The financial difficulties again do not reflect a person who worked as a professional "Self employed film processor" he told the court. The debts reflect that. >As >for the W-2, it's evidence and was traced by the reseachers >associated with George Knapp to Naval Intelligence in Maryland. >The zip code on the W-2 refers to Naval Intelligence - how would >Lazar have known that? No, my conclusion is that the W-2 is >genuine and that Lazar was working on a waived SAP with Naval >Intelligence in 1988/89. And the evidence to support this totally off the wall claim? >Also when Knapp confirmed Lazar's employment at Los Alamos, he >said that some of the employees that remembered Lazar warned not >to talk about him and were afraid about the consequences of >doing so. Also, Los Alamos denied Lazar worked there up until >1994 and then finally admitted so. Why what there motivation in >doing this? All this is in the public domain and I still have >not found adequate responses to the evidence compiled at: >http://www.karinya.com/travel2.htm >>By the way there is no need for a person to have a Masters to be >>called a Physicist, and, of course Bob didn't have one or even a >>BS degree. In a sense he earned the latter. He wasn't a >>physicist. He has earned no degrees not even from Pierce. And >>please don't tell me that you can tell who is being honest and >>sincere. The right answer is that all conmen seem to be honest >>and sincere. and that nobody can be sure of that judgement. >I think we reach here the crux of the matter concerning Lazar. >You say he earned no degrees, not even a Bachelor's. So if we >follow the logic of your position further, then he got a job as >a technician in the Los Alamos Meson Facility in 1982 - a world >class facility, with only a High School diploma from 1976 where >he finished in the bottom third, and some credits from Pierce >Junior College to support his application. So that means that >between 1976 he has done just a few credits at Pierce, with no >degree to show for six years, and then gets what appears to be >plum position at a world class facility as a technician. I wouldn't call it a plum position and he has never supplied a resume accounting for his time.My boss on the fusion propulsion program at Aerojet General Nuclonics had a High School Diploma, 40 patents and an honorary PhD. He had lots of PhD's working for him. He published papers, but didn't lie about his background. Interesting question. Have you seen any evidence of a BS degree for Bob from anywhere? He was a handy technician... not many in the small town of Los Alamos who are available. He may well have repaired radiation detectors >That doesn't make sense. Anyone employing technicians to support the >scientists at Los Alamos would want to be sure that the people >they employ are up to it. The scenario you've painted doesn't >hold up. No one would have employed Lazar with the scenario >you've supplied. It's more plausible that he did get to complete >degrees, at the very least a bachelors, but more likely a >master's to support Lazar's claim of being a physicist. Michael, what are you smoking? Where is any evidence of any degree? You know diplomas, professors, classmates, resumes, listing in alumni groups?? >I am aware of the protocol in the use of degrees by >professionals to describe themselves and one simply doesn't call >oneself a Physicist with just a bachelors degree. The only >exemption may be someone who has a track record as an >inventor, science author for ten years or more. But Lazar was just >starting at Los Alamos so my assumption is that he was following >convention that one doesn't describe oneself as a physicist with >just a bachelors degree. Do you have examples where describing >oneself as physicist is a common practice for those only with a >bachelors degree? Michael, people like Bob lie all the time.. think Guy Kirkwood, Michael Wolf Kruvant, Milton W. Cooper.... I have called many a registrar's office at colleges and universities and after asking my primary question about a particular person, I ask "Do you get many calls about people claiming to be a graduate of your campus, who are not? ANSWER "All the time". There have been plenty of people who have been found out who claimed a certain degree to get a job and were later fired because they didn't have the degree. >As for being able to tell who is being honest and sincere. I >agree that one should rely more on gut feeling. Why? Who do you agree with about this? Gut feeling be damned. Why have trials with judges and juries with a prosecuting attorney and defnse attorney, if you can tell who is telling the truth based on your gut feeling as opposed to evidence? >In the case of >Lazar, I've just looked at the evidence he has supplied, the >investigations conducted by Knapp, corroborating witness >testimonies, and conclude he is telling the truth about his >experiences at S4. That's just a logical conclusion from what is >availabe. Your position that Lazar is a liar and a con man isn't >consistent with the evidence that is publically available. There is no publicly available evidence that he is telling the truth. If you say there is, please provide it.. should be very easy. Have him authorize his various campuses to release his transcripts.. >Finally, I do have to aplogise for an error in one of my early >posts to you. You asked if I still had my diplomas and I said >no. Well, I did a search and found them hidden away with my >transcripts. So I have to withdraw my anecdotal support for >Lazar's claim that he had lost his diplomas. Fortunately, I can >hang mine up on the wall again so I don't forget I have them. >Now I know the real reason why professionals put their diplomas >up on walls. Mine are up on the shelf where I put them when I dug them out to copy to send to Gene Huff so he would know what Lazar needed to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 The Hums From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:14:55 -0700 Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:51:39 -0500 Subject: The Hums Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. Source: Science Frontiers, No. 158, Mar-Apr, 2005, p. 3 http://www.science-frontiers.com Geophysics Hum Update General Observations Unexplained hums afflict a small proportion of populations in certain spots around the globe. Two pertinent, recent Science Frontiers items are: SF#88 (the Taos, New Mexico, hum) and SF#138 (the Kokomo, Indiana, hum). The general features of these elusive hums were summarized in the New York Times. The most common description of the hum is that it sounds like the low rumble of a distant diesel truck idling. Some people also feel a vibration, or don't hear any sound but just sense the vibration. Others report various maladies they associate with the hum, including headaches, diarrhea, nose-bleeds, dizziness, fatigue, and memory loss. (Ref. 1) Camano Island, Washington. A new hot spot has been added to the lengthy hum roster. On December 1, 2003, P. Timko was awakened at 1 A.M. by a bizarre low hum. Her description (and those of others on the Island) correspond eerily well with the general features noted above. Describing the sound is difficult, she said, it reminded her of a small plane approaching or a diesel truck idling but she couldn't pinpoint the source. Upon investigation, there was no plane or truck. "This was omnipresent," said Timko. "It was almost like something I was not only hearing but feeling as well." The hum was in every room of the house, coming up through her bed. The noise returned many other nights. Walking outside, it seemed to emanate from the ground. Driving to the island's shore, she could feel the sound coming from the water. (Ref. 2) A scientific review and potential explanation. D. Deming, College of Geosciences, University of Oklahoma, has published a 15-page investigation of the worldwide hums. He concludes that the hum is not acoustical at all but probably electromagnetic in origin; that is, it is electrophonic sound. It seems that some people can sense strong electromagnetic waves as sound. Deming writes in his abstract: Several hypotheses are considered and discussed as possible sources of the Hum. These include cellular telephone transmissions, LORAN, HAARP, and the TACAMO aircraft operated by the U.S. Navy for the purpose of submarine communications. (Ref. 3) (1. Sink, Mindy; "here and There, Mysterious Hum Bedevils Unlucky Few," New York Times, December 2, 2003. Cr. D. Phelps. 2. Morris, Scott; "Camano Hum Has Some on Edge," Everett Herald, October 22, 2004. Cr. L.M. Nash. 3. Deming, David; "The Hum: An Anomalous Sound Heard Around the World," Journal of Scientific Exploration, 18:571, 2004) Comment. Electrophonic sound is also used to explain why a few people can sometimes hear high-altitude meteors and active auroras. These phenomena also generate powerful electromagnetic waves.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 3 Michael Salla & Me From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:56:25 -0500 Subject: Michael Salla & Me Listerions et al: At the risk of a flood of angry e-mails... There has been a great deal of debate on UFO UpDates lately about Exo-politics (the supposed study of how humanity interacts with alien races), and one of its biggest proponents, Dr. Michael Salla. I've been one of the most vocal critics of his approach (or, as he would put it, methodology) when dealing with the testimony of alleged 'whistleblowers', who, for those who might not be aware, are, for the most part, people who claim to have worked in some capacity for the government and were made privy to the truth about the UFO cover-up. Lately Dr. Salla has been touting Bob Lazar as a reliable "witness". In an effort to be fair, I figured the least I could do was take a look at Dr. Salla's website: http://www.exopolitics.org/ and read through his various papers on the subject of exo- polictics. Who knows, I thought? Perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. I should have known better. As it turns out, Dr. Salla is even less discriminating in his vetting of "whistleblowers" than I had thought possible, given his support for Bob Lazar. In a paper with the grandiose title The Emergence of 'Track Two' Galactic Diplomacy with Extraterrestrial Races "The Role of Private Citizens & Groups in Establishing Communications & Agreements with Extraterrestrial Races, Dr. Salla writes: "There are dozens of extraterrestrial races with a variety of motivations that are interacting with global humanity. These extraterrestrial motivations span the spectrum from 'benevolent' activities aimed at uplifting humanity towards a fuller expression of its collective potential, to manipulative activities designed to undermine human sovereignty. There is extensive evidence of government agencies in the United States and elsewhere having held meetings and having reached agreements with some extraterrestrial races. Those official diplomatic meetings have been highly classified and suggest that 'galactic diplomacy' at an official level has been secretly underway for at least 50 years without the knowledge of most citizens and elected representatives. A detailed examination of the fourteen most significant extraterrestrial races interacting with humanity reveals the role played by national security agencies in the US secretly reaching agreements with some extraterrestrial races while suppressing information about these agreements, and of the existence and activities of extraterrestrial races in general." [This paper can be accessed at www.galacticdiplomacy.com/GD-Art-1.htm] Wow. Now, when someone makes a claim like that, the first thing I do is look to see what his source is for the conclusions he has drawn. Dr. Salla's primary source? William Cooper. Wow, indeed. Now, if you took an opinion poll of everyone who knows something about the UFO phenomenon, in which you asked "who is the biggest loon in the history of ufology," I strongly suspect that the late Mr. Cooper - killed in a shoot-out with sheriff's deputies (after Cooper fired first, severely wounding a deputy) trying to serve an arrest warrant for aggravated assault charges in 2001 - would be at the top of the list. He certainly would get my vote. Bob Lazar and Philip Corso seem positively respectable when compared to Cooper. Want to find out what William Cooper was all about? Check out: http://www.hourofthetime.com/ Of course, Dr. Salla has an explanation for all the criticisms of Cooper, which can be found in his paper Eisenhower's 1954 Meeting with Extraterrestrials: The Fiftieth Anniversary of Contact. There he concludes that Cooper's "testimony" is "most likely" credible, and all of the bad stuff about Cooper (see below) can be explained away because "The controversial Cooper has been subjected to undoubtedly the longest and most intense military-intelligence efforts to discredit or intimidate any whistleblower revealing classified information." You can access this paper at: www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-8.htm So, what did the "controversial Cooper" himself have to say - because surely not even Dr. Salla believes that the government could put words into Cooper's mouth? All sorts of things, as it turns out. A good place to start looking is his speech to the 1989 MUFON Symposium, the full text of which can be found at: www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/maji007.html?20051 I encourage everyone to read Cooper's rantings carefully, although you may want to use the Internet and therefore avoid spending any money on his book Behold a Pale Horse. In the meantime, here are some of my (UFO-related) favourites. "Between January 1947 and December 1952 at least 16 crashed or downed alien craft, 65 alien bodies, and 1 live alien were recovered. An additional alien craft had exploded and nothing was recovered from that incident. Of these incidents, 13 occurred within the borders of the United States not including craft which disintegrated in the air. Of these 13, 1 was in Arizona, 11 were in New Mexico, and 1 was in Nevada. Three occurred in foreign countries. Of those 1 was in Norway, and the last 2 were in Mexico." For creatures that can travel the stars, it seems that the aliens were pretty lousy pilots. I can accept the possibility of a mishap or two (even aliens presumably are subject to Murphy's Law), but "at least 16?" For those who think there an alien spacecraft crashed near Aztec, New Mexico in 1948, Cooper goes one better: "An alien craft was found on February 13, 1948 on a mesa near Aztec, New Mexico. Another craft was located on March 25, 1948, in Hart Canyon near Aztec, New Mexico." Two crashes? Someone should alert Bill Steinman "it appears he missed one. Not only were alien bodies (17 of them) supposedly recovered from these two sites, but, according to Cooper: "of greater significance was the discovery of a large number of human body parts stored within both of these vehicles." Not even Silas Newton was brazen enough to try and include this little gem= in his con. Cooper continued. He described an effort by the US government and the Vatican to decipher a critical prophesy, which they did, and which supposedly revealed: "World War III would begin in the Middle Eats in 1995 with an invasion of Israel by a United Arab nation using conventional weapons which would culminate in a nuclear holocaust in the year 1999. Between 1999 and 2003 most of the life on this planet would suffer horribly and die as a result. The return of Christ would occur in the year 2011. When the aliens were confronted with this finding they confirmed that it was true:. They further explained that they were capable of time travel and the events would indeed come to pass." Hmm: it seems that I missed the holocaust, although I suppose I can still look forward to the imminent return of Christ. Or perhaps the aliens were just kidding. And so it goes. Now, some who desperately want confirmation for their own belief in crashed flying saucers and alien visitation (as opposed to evidence, which is what the rest of us are looking for), might latch on to this and defend Cooper, and through Cooper, Dr. Salla, who vouches for Cooper's credibility. They would no doubt cheer when Cooper concludes that the hated Phil Klass is an agent of the CIA. But what are these well-meaning, albeit na=C3=AFve, people to make of Cooper's assertion that Majestic-12 (which most of them, including Salla, at least with respect to the SOM1-01 document, also accept as real) is a government disinformation program? Or that Stan Friedman, the Father of Roswell, one of the most respected elder statesmen of ufology, is probably a government agent responsible for spreading disinformation in the form of the MJ-12 documents? As Cooper put it: "Stanton Friedman has told me and many others that years ago "he helped develop a nuclear reactor, to power and aircraft, that was the size of a basketball, was clean, turned out hydrogen, and worked like a dream." His words, not mine. The only fuel which could go into such an engine and produce hydrogen as a by- product is water and that is precisely what at least one type of alien craft runs on, nuclear energy and water. The only place in the universe at that time to get such technology was from the aliens. Is he really unwitting? I do not know. He was a member of the Moore, Shandera, and Friedman research team and it was they who implemented the MAJESTIC TWELVE contingency plan: The actions of Stanton Friedman and William Moore are highly suspect." So now Friedman is highly suspect, and probably an agent of the government (Bruce Maccabee was also singled out by Cooper, although he was less certain of Maccabee's involvement). Cooper went further five years later, in a paper called Majesty Twelve, which can be found at: www.hourofthetime.com/majestyt.htm Here he wrote: "Socialist change agents known to you as William Moore, Jaime Shandera, and Stanton T. Friedman presented the hoax known as Operation Majestic-12. These fake documents were printed in the socialist New York Times. It was an attempt to lead people away from the truth by presenting an artificial alien threat as a 'government cover-up' of extraterrestrial visitation. Most of the well-known uFOOLogists and so-called researchers are Illuminati, Marxist, CIA or KGB change agents operating in furtherance of propagandizing the American people. You wouldn't but a used car from any of these people: why are you' buying flying saucers'? Stanton Friedman ends every lecture with an appeal for world government which he justifies by asking, 'who speaks for planet Earth: Argentina?'" A picture of Stan Friedman follows, under which is the caption: "would you buy a flying saucer from this man?" Whether you accept that the MJ-12 documents are authentic or not, this is hogwash, hooey and bunk, all rolled into one. But what would one expect from someone who published the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion in Behold a Pale Horse, without critical comment (see http://www.answers.com/topic/the- protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion)? But there's more. Cooper also wrote in Majesty Twelve: "All so-called leaks are intentional misinformation projects designed to promote the alien threat scenario while allowing for complete deniability on the part of the government. The antics of... William Moore, Jaime Shandera, Stanton T. Friedman, Bruce Maccabee (CIA / ONI)... Whitley Streiber, Bud [sic] Hopkins (CIA), John Lear (CIA), Linda Moulton-Howe... Colonel Philip Corso (CIA, a monumental liar now deceased)... and many other people are projects of this type. Some (very few) of these people are unwitting accomplices in the charade and truly believe in the extraterrestrial threat. Most of those named, and others not named, are active, and with full knowledge, agents of illuminism / socialism. The most well known are active Fellow Travelers, communist agents of the KGB, the Central Intelligence Agency, or one of the many psychological warfare agencies founded by the Rhodes Round Table Group (the Group), the Royal Institute of International Affairs, and the Council on Foreign Relations." The really hilarious part (at some point you either have to laugh, or cry "I choose the former) is that Dr. Salla cites both John Lear and Philip Corso as credible sources in the same paper in which he cites William Cooper as a credible source, the same William Cooper who maintained that Corso was a "monumental liar" and that Lear was "CIA". If there is a bigger jumble of contradictory statements and wilful blindness in ufology, I haven't seen it yet. And yet Dr. Salla weaves it all into his story, never minding, as John Lydon might have said, the "bollocks." By endorsing Cooper as a credible witness, Salla is endorsing statements such as these. He is encouraging people to accept Cooper as a sincere witness who was the victim of a devious and extensive campaign by the government to discredit him. In truth, Cooper was a deeply troubled man whose own writings, and paranoia, discredited him and ultimately destroyed him. There is no merit in Cooper's claims (don't take my word for it "read them yourselves). As Salla's conclusions are based, in significant part, on those claims, there can be no merit in them either. Here's a final question for those in ufology who would still give Dr. Salla's views and theories any consideration. He wrote "the creation of controversy, uncertainty and confusion is the modus-operandi of military-intelligence agencies in maintaining secrecy of the extraterrestrial presence." (www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-8.htm). The question is : Isn't that exactly what Dr. Salla is doing by continuing to promote frauds like Bob Lazar, Philip Corso, and especially William Cooper? Ufology needs to ask itself "why is Dr. Salla still given the benefit of the doubt? The serious study of the UFO phenomenon needs his kind of "methodology" =80=93and the conclusions to which the blind acceptance of the word of men like William Cooper leads - like it needs a hole in the head. To those who might say I'm being rude, or confrontational, or hubristic, I would ask - is our desire to be polite, and in the process to accord every point of view, no matter how ridiculous, an equal degree of importance and weight, so great that we will not "or cannot "stand up when we see something so obviously wrong? As the old saying goes, with "friends" like these, who needs enemies? For future reference, I will be keeping track of exo-politics in general at my blog: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com For now, I'm going back to the study of ufology, as opposed to ufoology. Finally, to Dick and Josh, I can only say - "don't give up!"
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Budd Hopkins UFO Seminar - 04-02-05 From: The Intruders Foundation <Ifinfo1.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 01:26:41 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:07:08 -0500 Subject: Budd Hopkins UFO Seminar - 04-02-05 Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Announcement Saturday, April 2, 2005 UFOs & Abductions -- Then And Now: Budd Hopkins & Ted Bloecher Dialogue On Saturday, April 2, the first IF seminar of 2005 will present a dialogue between Budd Hopkins and veteran researcher Ted Bloecher on the early years of investigation into UFO occupant reports, the unfolding study of the abduction phenomenon, and how these earlier experiences differ from the information we know today. TED BLOECHER's interest in the subject of UFOs began in 1947, the very first year of the modern UFO wave, when, as a teenager, he became fascinated by newspaper and radio reports of "flying saucers." Within a few years he became a charter member and investigator in one of the earliest and most important UFO groups, Civilian Saucer Intelligence, or C.S.I. He eventually began a long and successful career in the musical theater, and as he traveled to dozens of cities in shows like "My Fair Lady," "Oliver" and "Half A Sixpence," he visited area libraries and began to collect articles on 1947 UFO sightings from the local newspapers. His painstaking work resulted in an extremely important and unique survey of UFO reports from that crucial year, and was published by the author in 1967. Bloecher's friendships included Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Betty Hill, Dr. James McDonald, Richard Hall, Isabel Davis, Donald Keyhoe and virtually all of the major researchers of those seminal years. As early as 1956 Bloecher had become intrigued by the growing number of UFO occupant reports, and, along with researcher David Webb, began work on HUMCAT, a collection of early humanoid sightings. Hopkins friendship with Ted Bloecher began in the late fall of 1975, when he contacted Ted for help in the investigation of the recent George O'Barski UFO landing and humanoid case in North Hudson Park, NJ. The investigations these two men conducted eventually led to a few abduction cases, including the very important but little-known Kent, CN incident of 1973, which ultimately was shown to have involved some twelve witnesses. The IF seminar will offer an informal dialogue between Bloecher and Hopkins about their productive colleagueship, and will feature a discussion of a number of early landmark cases, as well as Bloecher's fascinating personal reminiscences of the personalities and pivotal moments in the history of UFO research. Both researchers will also comment on ABC=E2=80=99s recent airing of Peter Jennings Special Report concerning the subject. For anyone interested in the UFO phenomenon and the early years of its unfolding, this is an event not to be missed. And as usual, a generous period of time will be set aside for audience questions. REGISTRATION & INFORMATION The seminar will be held on April 2nd at the new meeting rooms of A.R.E., located on the SECOND FLOOR at 241 W. 30th Street (between Seventh and Eighth Avenues), New York, NY. The price for the seminar is $30 for non-members and $20 for members of IF, seniors and students. Reservations must be made by telephone at 212-645-5278, and will be filled on a first come, first served basis. Payment must be made in advance to secure the reservation. Make checks payable to the Intruders Foundation, P.O. Box 30233, New York, NY 10011. Book early! Only 60 reservations will be accepted. On-street parking is generally available in the neighborhood. The seminar will begins at 7:30 PM and end at 10:00 PM. Doors open at 7:00 PM. There will be a one half-hour intermission, during which light complimentary refreshments will be served. A book table will offer books, videotapes and other material for sale to those interested. For additional information, call IF at 212-645-5278. Hope to see you there! ---------- The Intruders Foundation Seminar Series is presented in the interests of open-minded scientific learning and the free exchange of research, ideas and theories. IF makes no specific claims or endorsements regarding any materials, views, or subject matter presented by our guests. ---------- Want to know more about Budd Hopkins and his nonprofit scientific research organization, as well as past and future IF events? Please visit our web site=E2=80=A6 Intruders Foundation Web Site: www.intrudersfoundation.org
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Huge UFO Seen Near Mt. Beacon Goes Unreported From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:27:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:27:07 -0500 Subject: Huge UFO Seen Near Mt. Beacon Goes Unreported Source: ProFind Pages http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/03/02/MN797.htm 03--2-05 Huge UFO Seen Near Mt. Beacon Goes Unreported Huge UFO seen near Mt. Beacon goes unreported!It's surprising how many UFO sightings never seem to get reported and our following report is a good example. Even though this UFO was huge (as large as a football field) and witnessed by around 50 people or more. There is no official recording of the sighting! If anyone was near Mount Beacon NY in June 1987 and recall seeing anything unusual (around 9.30 pm), we would love to hear from you. The following information was provided by a person who did see it and maybe this will jog people's memories? In June 1987 I saw a UFO the size of a football field, just hovering below Mt Beacon, in NY. It was amazing. I was driving by when I saw all these people walking towards this fence. This was at 9:30 pm coming home from my daughter's junior graduation. I was driving along Depuyster Avenue near the old St. Joachim's Cemetary and the Carmelite Monastery (the old rail cars are about 1/2 mile away). I stopped my car and my children saw it and remember it to this day. I looked to see what everyone else were looking at, people were coming from all over the neghborhood and when I saw this I got scared. The craft was just hovering below the mountain and it did not make any noise at all. You hear those stories about abductions and I was afraid, so I decided to drive away in the hope of seeing it at a safer distance, but was unable to. There was never anything mentioned in the papers or the news. I was so surprised, considering how many people had been watching it, that nothing was ever mentioned. There had to be over 50 people standing there watching. It was huge, there could of been a colony living in there! When I saw it, the first thing I thought of was how many beings could live in there forever. Never in my life have I ever seen anything as big. It was oval shaped, had like windows all around the outside edge in the center, with amber lights running around the bottom. It had to have at least 12 floors in that thing (I felt it was 12 stories high because at the time I lived in an apt. complex and I thought how easy 6 of these building would fit into this craft). It was nothing like anything I have ever seen on earth before. The best way I could describe the craft would be for you to imagine a coffee cup on top of a plate and a coffee cup on the bottom of a plate. The plate had 3 floors of windows and it looked like a floor above and below each row of possible windows, which would be 5 floors right there. Each coffee cup side would be at least another 3-4 floors. Below the floor on the bottom side had amber lights revolving around the whole
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Mr. Mack Goes To The UFO Convention From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:31:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:31:32 -0500 Subject: Mr. Mack Goes To The UFO Convention Source: philipcoppens.com http://www.philipcoppens.com/mack.html 02-11-05 Mr. Mack Goes To The UFO Convention Harvard Professor John Mack was what many people believed the phenomenon had always been lacking: a big-time professor who spoke up for the reality of the phenomenon. Nevertheless, his message was more complex=85 and ultimately was a reiteration of what Jung had always argued the phenomenon was about. Philip Coppens If Bud Hopkins is Sigmund Freud, John Mack must be Carl Jung. This conclusion I wrote in 1994, for an American journal solely dedicated to the UFO abduction phenomenon, at a time when Mack=92s star began to rise in the UFO research community. Freud largely tried to explain the entire human psychology as based on sexuality. Hopkins approached the entire abduction phenomenon as the physical encounter with an extra-terrestrial life-source, involved in a cross-species breeding project. Jung was unwilling to reduce humanity to a purely sexual issue=85 and so Mack could not accept that UFO abductions were just that=85 it felt larger, and different. Throughout most of its existence, the UFO phenomenon as a whole was seriously lacking a high profile scientist willing to acknowledge the scientific credibility of UFO research. Of course, the absence of such a person might indicate the state of the research. For the subject of "alien abductions", John Mack was that god send. A Harvard professor, leader in his field, even Pulitzer Prize winner, with no skeletons in his closet; could anyone ask for more? Mack, as mentioned, felt that the UFO phenomenon tested the boundaries of reality. It was neither totally physical nor totally mental =96 it crossed both dimensions; the UFO was almost like an inter-dimensional vehicle. The physical aspects were that people had been observed to be missing, returning with cuts, ulcers, lesions, etc. But that was not all: it expanded "to experiences which are more psychological, spiritual, involve the extension of consciousness." It was in this cross-over that Mack identified the core problem of the phenomenon: "The difficulty for our society and for our mentality is, we have a kind of either/or mentality. It's either, literally physical; or it's in the spiritual other realm, the unseen realm. What we seem to have no place for =96 or we have lost the place for =96 are phenomena that can begin in the unseen realm, and cross over and manifest and show up in our literal physical world." Still, Mack did not condemn science. If anything, he felt they were on the right track. If anything, most scientists could not keep up with science itself. "The new paradigm emerging from the current discoveries of laboratory science and consciousness research is in some ways embarrassingly old and familiar. This model embraces truths known to virtually all past cultures and most contemporary societies, however much the latter may be influenced by materialism and dualism in their pursuit of modernization, political power, and market advantage. How we in the West could have succeeded in forgetting this knowledge is one of the great untold stories of our time." With this remark, Mack quite literally stepped in the footsteps of Jung. It was not this identification as a cross-over phenomenon that made Mack famous. The central question of the phenomenon was whether the abductees were inventing their encounters or were accurately reporting events =96 real events. He argued that in his analysis, the abductees were reporting on real threat: they had not invented these experiences. Mack published on his findings and quickly found himself the centre of a controversy that reached into the pages of TIME and other major publications. His university opened an investigation into whether or not Mack had acted inappropriately. Harvard Medical School appointed a special faculty committee to review Dr. Mack's clinical care and clinical investigation of his subjects. Though long drawn, with each month, Mack received more support. There were questions from the academic community (including Harvard Professor of Law Alan Dershowitz) regarding the validity of Harvard's investigation of a tenured professor. After a 15-month process, Harvard issued a statement stating that the Dean had "reaffirmed Dr. Mack's academic freedom to study what he wishes and to state his opinions without impediment," concluding "Dr. Mack remains a member in good standing of the Harvard Faculty of Medicine." What had hit Mack the most was that it was stated that he had lost his objectivity. "It's often said that I'm a believer and sort of have gone and lost my objectivity. I really object to that. Because this is not about believing anything. I didn't believe anything when I started, I don't really believe anything now. I'm come to where I've come to clinically. In other words, I worked with people over hundred 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." Once his battles with the scientific world were settled, Mack continued in mapping the other dimensional aspects of this phenomenon. He felt it stretched Mankind, whereby we were forced not merely look at the everyday physical reality, but the possibility of other, unseen realities, "from which our consciousness, our, if you will, learning processes over the past several hundred years have closed us off". In this respect, Mack followed Jacques Vallee=92s observation that the phenomenon was old =96 and hence more likely other dimensional, rather than extra-terrestrial. What has gone largely unnoticed, is that Mack also broadened the scope of the phenomenon. Hopkins had centred most of his research on American examples =96 some might even argue New York. As a result, some researchers were wondering why this was happening in the United States =96 and apparently nowhere else. John Mack with Budd Hopkins In 1995, Mack visited the Netherlands, where he spent a few days talking to Hilda Musch, who at the time was working with Dutch UFO abductees. Mack had also studied the phenomenon as it manifested in indigenous people, the Native Americans, who had legends of the star people. "We've looked at this in South Africa, particularly in interviewing in depth a leading South African sangoma, or medicine man, who calls these beings =91mandingdas=92." In South Africa, he worked with Credo Mutwa, though he also went to Brazil, to meet abductees there. "I received a letter about abduction experiences from a person in Malaysia today. In other words, this is =96 as far as we can tell =96 a worldwide phenomenon. This is not restricted, as some people have thought, to Western or particularly American culture." These views were the culmination of a rich life. Mack interned at Massachusetts General Hospital and did his residency at Massachusetts Mental Health Center. Joining the Harvard Medical School faculty in 1964, he became professor of psychiatry in 1972. He was married to Sally (Stahl) Mack; with whom he had three sons, giving him two grandchildren. They divorced in 1995. In 1983, he founded the Center for Psychology and Social Change, together with Robert Jay Lifton. Lifton was one of Mack=92s long- time associates. Both were psychiatrists and authors. They worked together in the antinuclear movement and in the application of psychological approaches to the study of history. His early work was sponsored by Laurance Rockefeller, the middle brother of the five prominent and philanthropic grandsons of John D. Rockefeller. Laurance did not want the political career that his brother Nelson achieved, resulting in a vice-presidency under President Ford in the 1970s. Laurance concentrated on conservation, recreation, ecological concerns and medical research, particularly the treatment of cancer. Rockefeller gave the Center for Psychology and Social Change a $194,000 grant in the 1993-1994 period. Mack used the money to start PEER, the Program for Exceptional Experience Research. Mack wrote two books on the phenomenon =96 11 books in total. Abduction was his debut, appearing in 1994, which landed him in trouble. It was the result of a four year long research into the abduction phenomenon. With Passport to the Cosmos, Mack stated that he tried "to move the conversation out of the argument of whether UFOs and abductions are real or not. I have to confess to you that I believe that is boring at this point. It is definitely real, and if you want to deconstruct what =91real=92 means we can do that. Whether it is materially real or not, or comes from some other place and shows up materially=97I love those ontologically sophisticated discussions=97but this is not the main thing. The main thing, for me, has become =91what does this mean for us?=92 that people of sound mind, hundreds of thousands if not millions of people from all over the world, not just in the Western countries, but on other continents and among indigenous people, are having what seem like authentic, incontrovertible encounters with some sort of beings that apparently enter into our physical world and communicate to us about ourselves, and seem in some way to be connecting with us." He concluded that "the experiences that are written about in the book make it clear that the encounter phenomenon opens people to an awareness of Self, with a capital S, that goes way beyond any kind of ethno-national identification, to a much larger sense of being a child of the Divine, or a child of Spirit, a child of the Cosmos. And so it is in a sense a passage experience from a nationalistic identity to a collective identity, to a larger global identity." And hence, the abduction became an encounter=85 Once again, Jung was merely an inch away. Jung had written that the UFO phenomenon was real; its occupants were archetypes, who would be here to lead Mankind into a New Age. Mack largely came to the same conclusion: "I think that the most important point here is that something that opens us to a larger sense of self, of identification with others and with a more cosmic level of being, will open us to a sense of the divine and a reverence for life, for nature. That kind of shift of consciousness is the only thing, I think, which could possibly arrest the downward spiral of destruction that is happening here." Mack was already at retirement age when he published Abduction. Nevertheless, his dark painted hair was a visual sign that inside, he seemed to possess eternal youth. If UFOs were propelled with an unknown fuel source, then it seems that same fuel type drove Mack. When I met him for the first time in August 1995, he was still in his battles with Harvard University. He was notorious =96 haunted. Some stated that it showed=85 he acted differently, not as nice as his usual self. Nevertheless, he remained amazingly nice; later that year, I met Mack again and was able to spend some days with him and Karen. With his Harvard battle behind him, Mack was now relaxed and wonderfully nice... "John Edward Mack" was merely a few days from his 75th birthday when he died on September 27, 2004. After a lecture in Oxford, he returned to North London, where he was staying. There, he was struck by a vehicle being driven by an intoxicated driver, pronounced dead on the scene by London police. Rupert Sheldrake stated that "Mack had recently become very interested in evidence for survival and communications from those who had passed over, one big stimulus being the passing of Elizabeth Targ. He wondered why it had taken him so long to take up research in this field. In our conversation, he told me of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Penrose: The Answer's Not 42 From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:35:40 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:35:40 -0500 Subject: Penrose: The Answer's Not 42 Source: Wired News http://tinyurl.com/5zx9b Penrose: The Answer's Not 42 By Mark Anderson 02:00 AM Mar. 02, 2005 PT In 1998, Stephen Hawking laid 50-50 odds that the holy grail of physics, the elusive "theory of everything," was less than 20 years away. Around the same time, Hawking's renowned peer, collaborator and sometime-disputant, Roger Penrose of Oxford University, set out to write a book detailing just how distant the odds actually are of unifying all the laws of physics. "We are nowhere close to an accurate, purely physical theory of everything," Penrose told Nature earlier this year. Indeed, Penrose's newly published 1,099-page treatise - The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe - expends little ink ruminating over what is not known. Rather, The Road to Reality is as rigorous and exhaustive a map to the "theory of nearly everything" as a reader could hope to find today. Penrose makes a unique tour guide, overhauling components of big-bang cosmology and quantum mechanics as some tinkerers might take out and reinstall their car's transmission. And Penrose's tendency to pepper the discussion with mathematical equations and terminology (he spends nearly 400 pages on calculus, number theory and advanced geometry before decamping into the physical universe) will undoubtedly limit the book's readership to those not easily intimidated by section titles such as "frequency splitting on the Riemann sphere" or "Hamiltonian dynamics and symplectic geometry." Yet, according to professor Seth Lloyd of MIT, those willing to invest the energy to work through this mathematical Finnegans Wake will be rewarded for their efforts. The Road to Reality, Lloyd says, "shows (Penrose's) brilliant and unique grasp of mathematics as it applies to the physical world. That is evidenced in the first part. The second part of the book shows his courageousness in going on to propose fundamental physical effects even in the absence of an explicit theory, which he thinks intuitively to be true. So he's very bold as well as original and insightful." Those fundamental physical effects that Penrose proposes in Road, some of which were first covered in his 1989 best-selling book, The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds and the Laws of Physics, are as controversial as they are bold. For instance, despite the stampede of physicists today seeking to unify all physical theories under the aegis of string theory, Penrose thinks his colleagues are on a wild goose chase. In 2002, Penrose spoke at Stephen Hawking's 60th birthday celebration. Penrose argued that the underlying assumption of string theory - that space-time consists of anywhere from 10 to 26 dimensions - is simply wrongheaded and unmotivated by either intuition or evidence. (Penrose devotes much of the last four chapters of his book to this same argument and to an alternative model he sets up in string theory's absence, using a mathematical formalism Penrose invented called "twistors.") One colleague, Penrose said, responded during the conference's lunch break with the observation, "You're completely right, of course ... but totally misguided." Such has been the nature of the brickbats Penrose has faced. His genius is unquestioned. No individual save Albert Einstein has contributed more to relativity theory. But Penrose's sometimes- iconoclastic notions can cause colleagues to close their eyes and ears. At the top of the list of his unpopular departures from convention is Penrose's theory of quantum mechanical "state reduction." Standard quantum theory holds that submicroscopic particles exist in a nearly continual state of blur: An electron is not so much here or there but rather a little bit here and a little bit there. The longer an electron, or an ensemble of particles, is allowed to evolve in isolation from the rest of the universe, the more distended and blurry the quantum state of the particle(s) become. Only the act of an observation - or, alternately, the noisy and jostling environment surrounding it - - forces the quantum state into a precise location and energy level. But what exactly constitutes an "observation"? Is it just an arbitrary threshold separating the classical macroscopic world from the submicroscopic quantum regime? Does a conscious mind actually need to observe a system physically to cause its quantum state to collapse? In part because of the precise agreement between quantum theory's predictions and experimental evidence, many physicists are content to leave well enough alone: Quantum mechanics works - it's beautiful in its own way, and our expectations, not the theory's inner workings, are what need to be modified. Penrose, however, has proposed that the missing link between macroscopic and submicroscopic is gravity. Aggregations of particles exist in their blurry quantum mechanical states until so many particles are both here and there that space-time itself - which is warped by the presence of matter and therefore is warped in multiple simultaneous ways by matter that is both here and there - ultimately can no longer support so much indeterminacy. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle wins every time. The problem with this theory - which Penrose first proposed in The Emperor's New Mind and revisits in Chapter 30 of The Road to Reality - is that observational evidence is still wanting. Penrose proposes an experiment that would put his model of quantum state reduction to the test. A team led by Dirk Bouwmeester of the University of California at Santa Barbara is now working on Penrose's proposed experiment. However, the results are still years away. "Penrose's place in history is secure," Lloyd said. "But I would add the caveat, in this case, that I think he's bold and wrong." One of Penrose's collaborators, Stuart Hameroff of the University of Arizona, has applied Penrose's unconventional quantum models to develop a theory of the conscious mind rooted in hypothesized quantum mechanical forces inside the neuron. "Roger is not just spinning yarn," Hameroff said. "He's doing this work from a knowledge base that is unsurpassed. Then he uses his intuition and imagination and thinks big..... My first
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Jerry Washington Passes From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:39:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:39:05 -0500 Subject: Jerry Washington Passes From: Anne Macfie Jarrett Washington Dies On March 1 A former State Director of the Kentucky MUFON chapter, Jarrett Washington, has passed away in his hometown of Louisville. Originally from Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Jerry was the son of an Atomic Energy Commission administrator and grew up among the families of Atomic City s scientists and bureaucrats. The extraordinary musical talent he demonstrated as a preschooler led to a precocious life of training and competition as a child prodigy pianist. During his teen years, sightings of unidentified flying objects plying the restricted airspace over the city s nuclear installations became practically commonplace to Jerry and his friends. A close encounter that involved passing in a car beneath a hovering disc as large as a tractor-trailer truck, left him with a lasting certainty of the reality of the UFO phenomenon, which he was not afraid to wave in the face of anyone who dismissed such accounts as misperceptions or illusions. Jerry eventually rebelled against the rigorously structured world of classical music and migrated to California, where he played keyboards in electric bands, rubbing shoulders and trading licks with some famous figures of the acid rock era. He partnered with and accompanied a young Pam Tillis trying her wings as a jazz singer, and eventually ended up in Nashville, hanging out at daddy Mel s mansion, among country music s elite. Jerry and Pam s collaboration, "I Could Be Loving You," was recorded by Dan Seals. In the 1979, Jerry joined his brothers, who had made their home in Louisville. By then jaded to the popular music scene and weary of life on the road, he settled down to help bring up his baby nephew and pursue a new career in writing. In the mid-90 s he joined MUFON, shortly after the death of State Director Burt Monroe, and assumed leadership of the Kentucky chapter, serving for three years. From co-editing the chapter s monthly newsletter, The Bluegrass Bulletin, with Assistant State Director Annie MacFie a friendship arose, which developed into a writing partnership. The two resigned their MUFON offices to devote their creative energy to screenwriting. Working by email, between 1997 and 2004, they completed ten filmscripts, receiving their first option in 2003. Suffering from chronic back pain, Jerry spent much of the last decade confined to bed, yet he kept up an active life of telephone and Internet communication. He continued to follow the UFO news and had many friends in the investigator community. At the age of 52, his health suddenly deteriorated. After several days in intensive care at Norton Hospital, he succumbed to heart failure in the early evening of March 1.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:49:36 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:41:34 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:53:54 -0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:17:10 EST >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs ><snip> Hello Martin, <snip> >It seems to me that the situation has two components that >merit two different responses. There is the scientific issue >and there is what we might call the "systems audit" issue. >The former, in a cartoon version of itself anyway, assigns a >one-dimensional value to the status of a problem, a rating on >the axis of truth- untruth. But the audit process is a matter >of determing and minimising risk, and risk is two- >dimensional, the product of an assessable _loss_ and a >_probability. Michael is approaching the issue with an >auditor's brief. >For example, a company audit might reveal an information >security issue that has trivial data-protection implications >and a very high probability of occurrence. On the other hand, >there might be a situation where failure of controls on data >access could lead to very large financial or legal >consequences, but the probability of failure is very small. >The systems auditor's job is to consider the product of the >loss and its probability to calculate the risk, then >prioritise the various risks and the measures needed to >circumvent them. >Analogously, the existence of whistleblower testimony >represents a risk which is a product of the probability of >its truth and the potential cost of failing to react to it. >Even if the probability of its truth is very small, if the >potential costs of failing to react are very large then the >audit risk can be significant. Now obviously this is >fraught with subjective judgements. Nevertheless the audit >approach is very widely subscribed too - in the form of hard >cash - by businesses and other organisations that live or die >by the bottom line. >The resolution, it seems to me, is that a sound organisation >requires both types of activity. That the "productive" >engineers and the creative theorists will despise that >parasitic alien lifeform known as the systems auditor, who >periodically comes around and seems to insist everyone do >things his/her way, is just a fact of life. The auditor goes >away, and everyone else gets on with their business as though >he/she were of no account. Which is as it should be, as they >have a wholly different understanding of the nature of risk >and different jobs to do. Yet this is a sensible division of >labour that just might help prevent the company that writes >the cheques going into receivership. A fascinating analogy and a good over view. Of course, I agree with you and you appear to be making the same point that I was. The difficulty with the "scientific issue" as you referred to it above is that because it is one dimensional, there is the danger that it may miss something of import in a subject that is anomalous in nature. And yet, to those who are inclined in that direction, the difficulty with the "systems audit" is that it is too woolly, has too many looses ends and of course, isn't concise enough. It's all very well though identifying the issues but we need to delve further than that. Why do some people choose to become auditors while others become creatives/productives in the first place? Therein lies the answer to the conflict, and we know those answers. Principlally character/environmental influences and other developmental issues. So if someone inherently gravitates towards one side of the fence and spends a considerable part of their life within that milieu, prodding them with a stick to encourage them to jump to the other side is next to pointless. Of real interest are those from either side who willingly climb on top of the fence and sit there looking at and considering both sides. It would appear so far that there aren't many willing to do that. On the other hand, vive la difference. Why should we all be the same? There was an amusing, possibly unintended jibe in your comment about how the audit approach is used by businesses and other organisations that live or die by the bottom line. They after all operate and thrive in the real world which, maybe, is what you were saying is where we should be as well. We too have a bottom line and as we've been in the red for more than 50 years, perhaps soon, we ought to try and get into profit. Just a little. And in your resolution (above) where the auditor periodically strides round insisting on things being done his way, are you suggesting that we are already in that situation and that all the debate and fuss between Dr. Salla and others is just the employees moaning and grinding their teeth until he eventually leaves the room, or are you suggesting that we need to aim for that condition wherebye, although there is strong verbal disagreement, at least we're all working in the same building and possibly even in the same office? >Another illustration is apt to the whole UFO evidence issue, >and concerns the meaning of scepticism. The seminal Greek >sceptic philosopher Pyrho (I may have spelt that wrong) was >put in a spot when his aged philosophy teacher fell in a >ditch. Pyrho stood and thought, and thought some more, and >eventually decided that all arguments in favour of pulling >the old man out were strictly inconclusive, so he did nothing >and went on his way. Sensible? I don't think so. The correct > conclusion was not that no action was justifiable, but rather > that no commitment to a belief was justifiable. Pyhro >couldn't prove conclusively ahead of time that rescuing his >mentor was "a good thing"; only the act of following through > on the strength of that conjecture could demonstrate whether > it was or not. >This is a reasonable position for ufology in general. There is >no definitive, tangible proof of exotic phenomena, but >everyone here understands that a pessimistic strategy >dictated by its past absence will never disclose such proof >in future. We are all (unless we are direct percepients) >doing some kind of risk-benefit analysis based on a degree of >intuition. If we accept that the probability of >extraterrestrial visitation (or some analogue) is at all non-> zero, then an audit-based approach to assessing risk with >regard to whistleblower testimony must be valid. It just is >not value-free scientific curiosity. It's a wholly different >activity, and as long as the difference is understood - by >Michael as well as by everyone else - there need be no >conflict. The trouble starts when the auditors start trying >to dictate scientific strategies. Well said. As I mentioned in my reply to Paul, I don't think Michael is trying to force anything upon us. I would react negatively also if I felt that was the case. There is no danger of anyone here blurring the differential. Should we be concerned if that happens elsewhere?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: Frustration - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:29:54 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:44:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Lehmberg >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration >Hello fellow Listerions, >Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings >special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. >He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History >and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last >Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in >regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. >Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. <snip> Dude, You remember what it was like. If 'lead' gets shot down, the rest of the flight is talking fire, and the lift has to be made, regardless... you don't arbitrarily autorotate to what you can only hope will be neutral ground, or bug out on your own. Forgetting you piss 'Trail' off, it makes it too hard for the gun platoon to provide the cover that they're there for. Send Medivac back for 'lead', and drive on. We'll forget for a moment that only one ship in the righteous lift has to make it to the LZ... we'll forget also that there's a diverse AC in every seat with their own theory on aircraft employment and aerodynamics... the point is that we _are_ taking fire, indicating a real concentration of an opposing force (a critical point!), and that _now_ is the time to focus on making the LZ, clearing the ship, and then getting back to the club for beers and dirty songs. Now is _not_ the time to further fragment and start criticizing everybody else's flying... Roll the throttle back on, suck it up to 50 lbs... red line that puppy, hoss -- and return to the formation. You gots critical _cargo_, dude! We're defeated when we believe we're defeated, one! And two, when the pelicanist 'Opposition' is sniping at you all the way from the self-styled (if illogical) young Turks of Triple "R" Group to Jennings' larded ABC news, you've got to be doing something _right_. ...Pull 55 pounds, write it up when you get back to the PZ. The lift is necessary, and beer warming, the club awaits. Warm brew's for Pelicanists, and last one to the barn's a klasskurtzian. Lead will just beat us to the club.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Strange Lagoon Entity Reported In Argentina From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 10:00:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:46:33 -0500 Subject: Strange Lagoon Entity Reported In Argentina INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 3, 2005 Source: CIUFOSLAPAMPA Date: 03.02.05 Argentina: Strange Lagoon Entity Reported Two women walking around the edge of the "Don Tomas" Lagoon in the western side of Santa Rosa, La Pampa (*) reported seeing a strange creature on March 2, 2005. Upon being interviewed the witnesses - described as respected, eminently credible individuals - explained that they had seen "...an aquatic animal resembling a reptile, not an ophidian, measuring approximately a meter and a half long and of considerable size" for a matter of minutes. This sensational event occured during early morning hours at one of the lagoon's reaches, specifically located on its northern shore, by the "Republica de los Ni=F1os" complex. The circumstance becomes even stranger when the sector in question, of smaller size, represents only a fraction of the lagoon, more aptly described as a marshland and a bird sanctuary. The news was echoed by the local media and the witnesses requested that their identities be kept strictly confidential. (*) Santa Rosa is famous for its UFO related events and the still-unexplained draining of a number of swimming and wading pools in the summer of 2002.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 A Reminder Of Why Some Of Us Are Here From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:08:46 +0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:48:38 -0500 Subject: A Reminder Of Why Some Of Us Are Here Some of you will find this compelling... and no doubt... others will roll their eyes (cue: violins). I produced this so that a document existed of the testimony of a number of former military and government witnesses which was in a format that was mobile enough to be forwarded by people to their friends. It is 1.5mb for 5 minutes duration. Please enjoy - otherwise, sorry to waste your bandwidth. http://members.iinet.net.au/~wlh/dp/DP%20Trailer%20sl.wmv
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:02:13 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:50:32 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:53:54 -0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:56:06 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>You say that "UFO research needs to move on." >>>That is a siren call that, if followed as you propose, will >>>probably finish ufology as a place for serious research. >>>So here's my siren call... >>I've been unimpressed with the arguments levied against Dr. >>Salla and am reminded of a horse race with every runner wearing >>blinkers so that he can see nowhere else other than straight >>ahead of him. This scope of thinking is so focused that it's >>bordering on being myopic. <snip> >This is a reasonable position for ufology in general. There is >no definitive, tangible proof of exotic phenomena, but everyone >here understands that a pessimistic strategy dictated by its >past absence will never disclose such proof in future. We are >all (unless we are direct percepients) doing some kind of risk- >benefit analysis based on a degree of intuition. If we accept >that the probability of extraterrestrial visitation (or some >analogue) is at all non-zero, then an audit-based approach to >assessing risk with regard to whistleblower testimony must be >valid. It just is not value-free scientific curiosity. It's a >wholly different activity, and as long as the difference is >understood - by Michael as well as by everyone else - there need >be no conflict. The trouble starts when the auditors start t>rying to dictate scientific strategies. As I have pointed out before on this list, I hove no problem with exopolitics... or any similar area of investigation (e.g. exobiology of aliens, etc)... as long as it is understoond to be an acadmic excercise based on certain assumptions. For example, IF I assume the information about aliens as provided by contactee X is valid, _then_ the exopolitical consquences are these..... (etc.)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:26:22 -1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 10:53:38 -0500 Subject: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams Aloha List members, I am very concerned by a message I just received from James Gilliland concerning the lack of coverage of Mt Adams, Washington, UFO sightings. James and ECETI (www.eceti.org) have an impressive database of sightings from a range of witnesses yet he claims these are not included in the National UFO Reporting Center database. As I'm sure members are aware, James is a strong supporter of the ETH and has had numerous witnesses confirm the sightings there. He has an impressive online collection of videos and photos supporting the UFO sightings. He also claims that the UFOs respond to communications from observers which tends to support the ETH. James is concerned that this may be part of an ongoing campaign to coverup the extensive sightings at Mt Adams, and more disturbingly discredit his broader claims concerning the ETH. If James is correct, this is certainly a cause for major concern over the objectivity of cases included in the National UFO Reporting Center database. Since this forum prides itself on hard evidence, I am expressing my concern at what may be occuring here in what is clearly some excellent hard evidence that may be subject to some exclusion process from a prominent UFO database. In peace Michael Salla www.exopolitics.org ----- From: "ecetiwebmaster" <ecetiwebmaster.nul> To: <eceti.nul> Subject: [ECETI News] More UFOs over Trout Lake Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 2:58 PM It seems many people are catching pictures of UFOs in Trout Lake, Washington. There are people on the other side of Mt Adams which are having the same experiences we are having. The evidence is overwhelming yet why does the UFO Reporting center with Peter Davenport say there is no activity in the area. The elk abduction happened on the back side of Mt Adams. He reported the experience with 14 eyewitnesses yet moved it over to Raineer. Kenneth Arnold lost sight of the UFOs when they decended on the western slopes of Mt Adams. Dr J Allen Hynek researched Mt Adams, Greg Long, David Ackers, Bill Voguel, Forest Rangers and Fire Tower Operators, Tribal Police and literally thousands of people have seen UFOs in the area. It is one of the most documented UFO hotspots in the area. According to Peter Davenport there are no UFOs, there never have been and we are seeing nothing other than meteors and satellites. Peter after confronted by many conference coordinators and talk show hosts refuses to change his story without one shred of evidence to back up his assumptions. He has publicly made slanderous statements concerning the character of anyone involved with the ongoing UFO activity near Mt Adams. With an overwhelming amount of evidence proving the contary Peter continues to hold fast on a disinformation campaign trying to disuade anyone from doing their own investigation and trying to block the information from the public. Top physicists and UFO researchers have visited the Gilliland Ranch and have personally seen the ships and have gone on record. Astrophysicists, Nuclear Physicists, Biophysicists, Air Force design engineers, traffic control people and others with degrees far surpassing Peters education. We are recieving many complaints from people who have had legitamate sightings that were ridiculed when trying to give a report. One has to ask the obvious question. What happened to the National UFO Reporting Center? How can they claim to be legitamate when their files are corrupt and they ridicule people trying to report legitimate sightings? How can they claim to be a reporting center when they do not report, an investigator when they do not investigate? In fact how can they be taken seriously at all with such a long history of being at least unprofessional, at most part of the disinformation. It is time for a new reporting center. One that does not change reports, move sightings, block information from getting out to the public and ridicule fragil people excited about their first experience, not to mention the host of others who know Trout Lake is one of the main UFO hotspots in the world.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? - Nickerson From: Randall Nickerson <randall7.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:37:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:01:10 -0500 Subject: Re: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? - Nickerson >From: Royce J. Myers III <ufowatchdog.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:15:02 -0800 >Subject: ABC Special: Who Was Interviewed? >If you were interviewed for the ABC special, could you please >drop me a line with a short account of your interview whether >you were in the final product or not. Hi Royce, I was interviewed for 2 hours for the Peter Jennings show. They did use my interview in the abduction section. I thought they treated me with respect compared to past experiences but was very upset that they did not include John Mack's interview or David Jacobs' and went down the same road of the hypnosis, sleep paralysis thing. I did not have hypnosis to recover what happened but was made to look like I did. I was also made to look like I was somehow very close to Budd, almost in some guru kind of way - that is how I took it anyway. In the interview they purposefully ask me How I felt about Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack. Looking back I find it very interesting the questions they asked and what the final product turned out to be. I was glad they included me saying that we need more questions asked. That is the truth. When I filled out my release form I also included that they could not use this interview in a derogatory way. Learned over time..... I have learned not to expect much from main stream media particularly. I feel this is an opportunity though, to see what the media does and why and also how. There is much information
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: Jennings' Scary Special - Freeman From: Kelly Freeman [Mr] <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:39:29 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:02:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Scary Special - Freeman >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:05:59 EST >Subject: Jennings' Special Scary <snip> >This so-called 'News Special' is growing scarier every day. We >the public know for a fact what's going on and aren't snowed by >the second half of that special. They didn't pull the wool over >our eyes as they had intended. In fact they've brought us all >closer together with more fervor than ever. Greg, EBK and List, For those of you who continue to make the worst out of Peter Jennings' special on UFOs, perhaps you should consider what it would be like if the special didn't air at all. At least now, we know where we stand and should take the opportunity to build on the positive moments of the show, and take steps to point out the negatives to those responsible. I, for one, plan to follow up my e-mail to ABC news with a letter reiterating the points I had made, namely to take another look at Roswell and the alien ab- duction phenomenon. Enough of all this bitching and moaning. Remember Operation Right To Know? It's too bad that the organizers of that group didn't realize that they should have been active for the "long haul". Instead, they disbanded (as far as I know), with unrealistic short term expectations. I believe something similar should be again be organized by leaders in the field of Ufology, with an emphasis on educating the media, etc. and without self-defeating expectations that their efforts will succeed in the short term, or that those tar- geted for "re- education" will necessarily accept their views the first time such views are submitted. The point is that we should remain steadfast in our efforts. This is an opportunity for us, not a defeat in any way. Not too long ago, Mr. Velez and Mr. Hall mentioned an effort underway involving CUFOS, MUFON and the Fund For UFO Research. Just exactly what did that involve and what is the status of it now? Whatever it was, I hope it wasn't abandoned out of disgust or whatever. Greg, if anything is scary, it's not the special on UFOs but the prospect that pillars of Ufology, such as Mr. Hall, threaten to get out of it because of the content of the program. Yes, I know Mr. Hall has spent a lifetime trying to uncover the truth, but I cannot accept such a stance as he has taken. As a witness to UFOs and an experiencer of the paranormal, I don't have the luxury of making a decision such as Mr. Hall has made. I, along with perhaps God knows how many others, have to live with what has happened to us, and at least for me, have_to_have those answers. Perhaps you, the leaders of Ufology, haven't realized that simple truth or refuse to fathom its implications. If there is anything that angers me more than the special itself, it is some of the responses to the program made in this forum. Wake up. I'll jump down off of this damn soap box now.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Ufology In Cuba From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 12:36:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:11:53 -0500 Subject: Ufology In Cuba INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 3, 2005 [We seldom receive information from the island nation of Cuba on matters of ufology or the paranormal. For this reason we have chosen to feature this article by an unknown author - identifying himself only by his e-mail address - in INEXPLICATA. Although the thoughts presented in the article are of skeptical nature, the document represents an interesting perspective on ufology from within a "closed society] Ufology In Cuba By neflenin.nul Regarding the highs and lows of Cuban ufology. A striking document on the current conditions of this discipline on the Caribbean island of Cuba and the misfortunes experienced by those who devote themselves to the subject of UFOs. There is little propaganda on Cuban ufology in comparison with what goes on in the rest of the world and in the neighboring countries bathed by the waters of the Caribbean, such as Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic or Mexico. Ufolatry is scarce in Cuba. The first reports on this pseudoscience appeared in the 1950's through American magazines such as "Life", "Readers Digest", comic books and American motion pictures. The Cuban magazine "Bohemia" and the national press echoed these reports. The UFO myth has represented a prodigious source for artistic imagination: hundreds of comics, novels and motion pictures, and in Cuba there was even a cha-cha-cha dance number called "Los marcianos llegaron ya" (the Martians are already here). After the triumph of the 1959 Revolution, the government forbade the entry of all manner of popular capitalist literature. Only reading materials from Communist bloc countries were allowed. Newspaper and magazine publishing houses and presses were de- privatized and fell under the Government's absolute control. Censure was developed against anything issuing out of the USA and the capitalist European countries. Only UNESCO's magazine was allowed in from this part of the world, and then only to very few and specific subscribers. "Carta de Espa=F1a" was allowed to reach some Spaniards who remained on the island. For this reason, pro-UFO propaganda seldom made it into the country through foreign magazines and newspapers, as well as books and short-wave radio broadcasts, etc. We were flooded with magazines from the USSR, the GDR (German Democratic Republic), Poland, Hungary, China, etc. where commercial propaganda was completely replaced by political-ideological propaganda, whether Marxist- Leninist or Marxist-Maoist. Ufologists speak in terms of several UFO flaps, with the fourth one being placed in 1962. And it involves us, since it took place during the October Missile Crisis, when the world stood on the verge of a terrible nuclear war. Lights in the sky were seen in the Atlantic, as well as on the sea and under its surface. Without a doubt, [this was due to] the manoeuvres of US and NATO aircraft, ships and submarines. In the 1960s, Oscar Hurtado, a Cuban author classified as a science fiction writer, published articles and gave presentations in which he strongly supported "the unquestionable" existence of UFOs. He was the most intense and passionate advocate of the existence of this subject in our country. An example of this can be found in his article published in the "Revolucion" newspaper on July 9, 1965, bearing the title Algo sobre platillos voladores ("Something about flying saucers"). The author accused those who did not believe in UFOs of being medieval-minded and ignorant, yet he never produced a scientific analysis of the phenomenon. He never sought evidence; he only promoted and fed the myth. Hurtado espoused the ideas of Soviet pseudo-scientific speculators M.N. Agrest and A. Kazantsev. A sample of this can be found in the prologue to Ray Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles, published in Cuba in 1965 by Ediciones Huracan (a publisher that lived up to its name, since the lousy binding caused the pages of the book to fly off as though swept away by a hurricane). In Bohemia, historically the most widely-read magazine in the country, the "Panorama de la Ciencia" section featured a two- part article in its December 7 and 14 1973 issues, respectively, exposing the subject without a scientific analysis of same and indicating the existence of two groups of scientists: those who believe and those who do not, and that the CIA was engaged in a disinformation campaign against UFOs in order to eliminate them. The author states that the subject is highly controversial, is worthy of investigation, and that avoiding the methods hitherto employed would be greatly advisable. Despite the appearance of impartiality, dividing the article into two faction - believers and non-believers - the author does not apply the true method to ascertain the truth of any phenomenon, which is to say, determine if there is scientific evidence for it, rather than the existence of pro-and-con factions. Science does not function based on a simple discussion between opponents, nor does it determine the truth based on a majority vote. In this case, it would have to ask if even a single shred of scientific proof exists, and is it verifiable. Science is based on testing or verification. The article in question highlights that in April 1967, American physicist James McDonald of the Arizona Atmospheric Physics Institute told the American Newspaper Publishers Association that the CIA had demanded, since 1966, that UFOs be discredited in order to diminish public interest in this groundless issue. Bear in minds that in Cuba the "Yankees" are blamed on a daily basis for blocking the development of natural traditional medicine and Bioenergetics (the Cuban terms for alternative medicine) by means of its pharmaceutical multinationals. Since all Cubans are indoctrinated with a fierce anti-Yankee hostility, the CIA is pointed out in the article as responsible for concealing all matters related to UFOs. Anything that speaks poorly about the "Yankees" is welcome (in Cuba, rain or the absence thereof is pinned on the Yankees). The Bohemia article also mentions the expulsion of two UFO supporters from the Condon Committee, among them Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who established the first ufology course in the world at Northwestern University. The Bohemia article also mentions that Edward U. Condon published a book titled A Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, stating that there is no proof for the existence of UFOs. This article supports the alleged existence of UFOs. The URSS provided us with information favorable to the pseudosciences, such as three-curve biorhythms, parapsychology, radiesthesia, etc. and UFOs. M.M. Agrest added that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was the consequence of a nuclear explosion, that the angles and the ascension of Enoch were astronauts, that the Iron Pillar of Delhi in India was made by aliens, along with the giant stone terrace of Baalbek in Lebanon. He went as far as to say that aliens had left traces and materials of their visit on the far side of the Moon. All of this appeared in Literaturnaya Gazeta, Moscow, 1959 and February 1960. Another soviet, Alexander Kazantsev, former director of the Rocket Nozzle Studies Institute, had stated years earlier that the Tunguska event of June 30, 1908 was the result of an atomic- engined spacecraft colliding in Siberia, and that the Japanese "dogu" statues, over 4,500 years old, were representations of space aliens. Since the 1960's (more so in the '60s and '70s), Cuba has occasionally witnessed on cloudless nights some lights that have been interpreted by some as being UFOs, when they are in fact launchings of spacecraft from Cape Canaveral, Florida, and the luminous gases of the separations of rocket stages. The Cuban press frame it as a phenomenon known as a sundog or relate it to UFOs, or else leave it unexplained. The news media have never told the public that the cause of the lights could be American rockets. This truth is kept from the population so that Cubans won't feel a loss of status, particularly in a country that was developing its military arsenal and was becoming the second military power in the Americas. There existed a missile launch test pathway or "corridor" with an eastward arc trajectory that passed between the north of Cuba and the Bahamas and followed the seas over Puerto Rico toward Ascension Island (see National Geographic, Oct. 1959). UFOs have been discussed in several sessions at the United Nations. It is said that in the 30th session of the UN in 1975, Eric Gairy, prime minister of Grenada, posed the need to construct a UFO landing strip in his country-a UFOport-since sightings and landings were frequent in his island (did Gairy really say this?). Perhaps he said so to secure an airport and improve Grenada's economy. Time passed by and it was the Cubans who wound up building an airport in Grenada. In the 1980s, the now-defunct USSR created a UFO study center attached to the Academy of Sciences. Subsequently the Ufological Commission and the UFO Center (much like years before in the USA) were created in Moscow, directed by the Soviet scientist Azhazhi. For many years, Soviet military intelligence has devoted itself to investigating the UFO phenomenon in secret for the very same reasons as the Pentagon. In the popular science magazine Juventud Tecnica (Technical Youth) dated May 1985, in the articels Universo Engimas Cognosibles (Knowable Enigmas of the Universe) and Extraterrestrial Phenomena dated May-June 1986, the Cuban people were informed for the first time ever of the scientific perspective of the UFO phenomenon. But contrary to what it published about UFOs, this publication has propagandised pyramidology, alternative medicine, the Yeti and other myths and pseudoscience. In its December 20, 1989 issue, the Juventud Rebelde article =BFNos vigilan los extraterrestres? (Are Aliens Watching Us?) exposes and publicizes, without any scientific analysis, the ideas of French physicist Jean Pierre Petit, who supports the existence of UFOS and is a pseudoscientific speculator. The article by J.P. Petit is a watered-down and improved version of the Tunguska event. Our country echoed the Danikenistic pseudoscientific movement through the works of author Daina Chaviano, titled =BFExistieron los gigantes en la antiguedad? (Did giants exist in antiquity?) in Somos Jovenes magazine (Jan. 1988) and in Los mundos que amo (The Worlds That I Love), wrongly classified as science fiction by some Cuban critics. Her work "Did Giants Exist in Antiquity?" is a plagiarized-summarized version of the writings of Hans Hoerbiger. On September 23, 1988, the film La nave de los dioses (Chariots of the Gods)(Germany, 1970) was screened on Cuban television's Cine Vivo program. Incredibly, the panel of experts proved that it had no knowledge whatsoever about the pseudoscientific or anti-scientific genre. Nor did any Cuban film critic or scientist unmask it, and the population took it in as though it had been a scientific documentary. The November 18, 1988 issue of Bohemia (p.56) features an article titled =BFExtraterrestres? - Its author supports the myth of the statues of Easter Island and lucubrates about one of the native stone pictographs found in the cave of Punta del Este, Youth Island, under the influence of the recently screened Chariots of the Gods? He also infers a UFO sighting off the Cuban coast from the writings of Alexander Von Humboldt. As always, scientific arguments are unknown or evaded to wallow in pseudo-scientific impressionism. The February 11, 1989 issue of Granma, the official gazette of the Communist Party, features the article Las piramides de Egipto =BFTransferencia tecnologica de extraterrestres remotos? (The Egyptian Pyramids - Technological Transfer by Distant Aliens?) which is practically a copy-summary of the article Plastic Megaliths by Douglas Starr in the February 1983 issue of OMNI. The Granma writer does a highly superficial summary and does not mention scientific fact, since it has been solidly confirmed that the blocks of the Egyptian pyramids were not molded, but cut or carved. There is no scientific-archaeological evidence that supports A.J. Davidovits. Articles like this appear in commercial publications and never in scientific ones; I sent them a critique on the article and never received a reply. In the book Vivir en el espacio (Living in Space) by Cuban author P. Gutierrez, 1989, there is a chapter favorable to UFOs without any criticism whatsoever or scientific exposition of the subject, only a journalistic approach lacking rigorous analysis. The Voronezh UFO incident in the USSR received much exposure in Cuba. A TASS news agency dispatch dated October 9, 1989 stated that an alien spaceship had landed on September 27 in Voronezh, some 500 km.from Moscow, before numerous witnesses. Three beings measuring 3 - 4 meters in height had descended from the craft; they had three eyes and very small heads. It was claimed that the landing site had been located by means of radiesthesia or biolocation, and that the fact had been confirmed by Soviet "scientists" and Genrikh Silanov, director of the Voronezh Geophysical Laboratory, claimed that two reddish stones of a kind not found on Earth were discovered at the site. But the press ignored what came afterward, since it wasn't nearly as sensational. Little was published about it and no mention of it was made in Cuba. The "Soviet scientists" who validated the case were in fact members of a group promoting the paranormal and named "The Amateur Voronezh Section for the Study of Anomalous Phenomena". Nor were there dozens of witnesses: only three children were identified, and the more interviews they gave, the more sensational their tales became. On the other hand, Genrikh Silanov stated that the rocks were made of hematite, a form of iron oxide very common in the USSR. He further added: "Don't believe everything that TASS says. We never contributed information to what they published." [...] As a response to this phenomenon, I managed to get provincial newspaper Ahora to publish several articles of mine against pseudoscience, among them two against ufology: OVNI sobre la ciudad (UFO Over the City) on November 19, 1989, which shows a photo of a UFO over our city, a deliberately hoaxed photo to show how easily one can deceive, plus an extensive article unmasking ufology, Von Daniken and similar. At the time I hadn't made contact with CSICOP, nor did I know anything about skeptics. Cuba had hitherto not spawned any hysterical UFO stories, as had occurred elsewhere; nor do sensationalist news items appear frequently. However, with the collapse of the Communist bloc in our country, the economic crisis worsened - a crisis dubbed Periodo Especial (the Special period) by the government. Several UFO reports appeared in 1994, five of them between October 15 and 26, which received great coverage in the press and TV. It is important to note that certain ideological or thought crises take place during times of political and economic uncertainty: the pseudosciences increase their diffusion by the masses, a state of easy credulity is created among persons of low culture and especially those lacking scientific knowledge. Astute politicians take advantage of the situation to distract the people amidst the crisis. But scientific thinking remains unchanged. As in the USA, when the pseudoscienes were rife during its Vietnam Syndrome (sic), Cuba faced an increase in pseudosciences and myths during the decline and fall of the Soviet Empire. The opening of international tourism in late '98 and '99 allowed the entry of more materials regarding this and other pseudosciences. The Pasaje a lo Desconocido (Ticket to the Unknown) television show, which presents some documentaries from the Discovery and Learning Channels, features a section in which presenter Reinaldo Taladrid interviews an expert on the subject. Rigorous materials are often exposed and experts and scientists are invited, but at times, a mediocre, pseudo-scientific documentary is presented and a ufologist is invited. On November 3, 1999 a pro-UFO documentary was aired and Taladrid invited a ufologist and atlantologist to the debate - a former physics instructor named Enrique P=E9rez. No scientist was invited to unmask this pseudoscience. The journalist in charge of the program knows me very well on account of the harsh criticism I have levelled against his show, in the same way that the editors of Bohemia and some Cuban newspapers have come to know me as a result of pseudoscience promoted by this media. These critiques are never published. For many decades our bookstores have not sold books like Don Quixote. Since the 1980s, the great scarcity of paper and ink commenced at the presses. The works of exobiologists such as Sagan have never been published; only a Soviet book by I.S. Shklovski, from 1977, Universe, Life and Intellect, has been sold. It mentions Sagan first as a believer and then as a skeptic on matters of ET contact. The Cosmos series was presented only once on TV using very low quality copies. There are no books against the pseudosciences in our libraries. In spite of the fact that to some "experts" we are squarely in the middle or next to the Bermuda Triangle, we have neither anecdotes nor news accounts about disappearances. Cuban ships, yachts and boats vanish not through alien abduction, but through clandestine flight from the northern coast, taking advantage of the powerful Gulf Stream. From every five Cubans who flee, three drown or wind up in the bellies of sharks. Bear in mind that since 1959, no Cuban may visit an airport or seaport and buy a ticket to visit or tour the USA or any other country in the world. If a flying saucer landed in our country, it is very likely that the government would try to convince ETs that this is the best country in the world. They would be taken to our beaches and historic-political centers and then indoctrinated with the works of Marx, Engels and Lenin. Meanwhile, if the people get a chance, they would ask the ETs for something to eat or to wear, perhaps even swapping goods. At the same time, thousands of Cubans would try to get into the spaceship to leave the country for any other place in the universe. [NOTE: This article originally appeared in Revista Anomal=EDa, Spain (No.1, Vol.2, 2002)] Translation (c) 2005. Scott Corrales, Institute of Hispanic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Reflections On Today's Ufology From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:56:44 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:20:17 -0500 Subject: Reflections On Today's Ufology I have been reading the pros and cons of Peter Jennings' documentary and here are my reflections on today's ufology. The Facts: First, the lack of progress in ufology is the absence of a universally accepted definition of what exactly the phenomenon is. How can we present a phenomenon when we seem unable to agree on its definition? Second, ufologists are divided into different classes according to their motivations and approaches: 1) the merchants: They are mainly interested in money. 2) the researchers: They are real investigators with a bona fide and honest desire in the phenomenon. 3) the adventurers: They are interested in the opportunity it creates to obtain fame, power and glory. 4) the hobbyists: They have vivid interest in the UFO problem which brings excitement to their boring lives. 5) the faithful: They are in possession of the 'truth'. They are true believers and ufology has become their religion. 6) the secret college: They are serious researchers who consider the problem has sufficient interest and importance to be investigated, but they need to protect their careers preventing them fom active participation. 7) the skeptic: Their philosophy is simple; there is no such thing as UFOs. They are the only well organized under CSICOP. Third, In 1982, during a MUFON Symposium in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Dr. Hynek and myself proposed, in a separate meeting room with some heads of UFO organizations and well known ufologists, the creation of a 'World UFO Association'. Its goal was to unite all ufologists and organizations with some basic rules and regulations. Coral Lorenzen of APRO and some ufologists present opposed the idea, killing the project. We missed the opportunity to unite all and the result is; today nobody follows any rules or regulations, there are none. We missed the ship that could save us and at present we are like the "Cubans balseros" in the middle of the ufologist�s ocean with no land at site. THE IMPLICATIONS The development of ufology has been seriously handicapped by the ufologist�s lack of unity and common goals plus the systematic disregard of the scientific method. Ufology, at present, is no more than a proto-science which could emerge into a true science or into a pseudo-science. Do not blame Peter Jenning�s documentary for some misinformation or the lack of information. Start blaming yourself for where we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: Frustration - Freeman From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 14:03:59 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:22:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Freeman >From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >Subject: Frustration <snip> >Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. Couldn't disagree with you two more. I think it would be more accurate to say, by all the indications thus far, that Ufology is at a crossroads. What direction it should take is an issue that should be addressed. Mr. Hall, do you think it is wise to abandon "the cause" and let the charlatans, kooks and dis- information agents take over? Wouldn't you agree they need to be exposed and appropriate action taken to silence them, or at least, make it known they are what they are? <snip> >I want to thank you for asking me to be interviewed and post >answers to your questions regarding UFO investigation. A few >days ago I was willing to do so but over the last day or two I >have decided I am no longer interested. As I said to you over >the phone, I had come to the conclusion that the only way >UFOlogy (sic) could meaningfully advance would be if the >government voluntarily decided to release all that it knows >regarding UFOs. >To me UFOlogy has come to a point where nothing really >significant will be revealed unless the government comes forward >or some undoubtable and spectacular event such as the landing of >a craft, a crash, or aliens speaking publicly takes place. >Despite the hard work of people with integrity in the UFO field >we have not crossed the significant barrier from claims and >evidence to proof. As I mentioned to you I suspect that the >government knows a great deal more than they will admit, keeps >it highly classified, and has its own reasons for witholding >that information. It may have valid reasons for secrecy that I >could only be aware of and perhaps would agree with if I were in >that position. Very defeatist and unrealistic attitude, IMO. The government won't voluntarily release anything that isn't in_its best interest. What's more important is the_truth behind the phenomenon itself. There's no guarantee it even knows that truth. It could be at the "mercy of the messenger" just like the rest of us. In that context, it could very well be more disturbing to find out what they don't know. Even then, we would know that_much. Those behind the cover-up, after reading some of the posts in this forum, would probably be delighted to see that their plan is still working and even better than they expected. They don't deserve that satisfaction, IMO. Lest anybody miscontrues this last statement, I'm only speculating on the possibility.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 The Phoenix Lights Documentary From: Dr. Lynne Kitei <drlynne.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 12:34:14 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:25:19 -0500 Subject: The Phoenix Lights Documentary Thought you might be interested in attending our Exclusive World Premier of The Phoenix Lights Documentary on Sunday, March 13 at the Harkins Shea 14 Theater [see below]. Also attached is the Premier Poster and Press release. Please take a peek at the two minute movie trailer on www.thephoenixlights.net. Would love to have you join us at the Premier and appreciate any assistance in getting the word out. It should be an exciting and groundbreaking event for all. Hope to see you there! Dr. Lynne ----- The Phoenix Lights Documentary will hold its World Premiere on March 13, 2005 the 8th anniversary of the historic Arizona unexplained mass sighting at Harkins Shea 14 Movie Theater, 7354 E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85260 [Scottsdale Road and Shea Blvd.] This groundbreaking Documentary, based on the bestselling book, "The Phoenix Lights...A Skeptic's Discovery that We Are Not Alone", stars Arizona's own eyewitnesses, military, former Phoenix Vice Mayor, University based scientists and experts in the field. It is produced by local physician and author, Lynne D. Kitei, M.D. in collaboration with Steve Lantz Productions. Tentative times for the feature length screenings are : 1 p.m., 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Sunday, March 13. For further information and advanced tickets [after March 9] contact Harkins Shea 14 Theater at (480) 948-6555 or http://www.harkinstheatres.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:56:40 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:27:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 18:59:40 EST >Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:24:54 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:11:42 EST >>>Subject: Re: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >>>>From: Larry W. Bryant <overtci.nul> >>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:47:44 -0500 >>>>Subject: Jim Marrs On UFOs: Seeing Is Believing >Stan: >Lord knows I don't want to get into a tussle with you at the >same time as I've got Michael Salla to deal with, but a couple >of points follow...:) ><snip> >>Karl's past CIA history may or may not be relevant, but that was >>not the focus of my 2003 MUFON paper, Critiquing The Roswell >>Critics. >Never said it was. >Back to the original point - Karl's past is not relevant, >period, unless someone can demonstrate that it is. It is only >mentioned because it will presumably convince some people that >he's still working for "them" against "us". In my view, saying >"may or may not be relevant" is no better than saying "it is". Of course his past is relevant in terms of deciding character, competence, My translation is that we don't know whether it is relevant or not. It has been noted that he was once part of a UFO hoax. His attacks on Blanchard, Kromshroeder, Pappy Henderson raise legitimate concerns as to his agenda. I mentioned my paper because I think there are better reasons for suggesting he is biased than his past association with the CIA. Tthough the CIA has lied about UFOs a great deal. ><snip> >>I never worked for the US Government except in December, 1952, >>when I worked for the US Post office in Linden, New Jersey, for >>2 weeks at Xmas while a sophomore at Rutgers U. in New >>Brunswick, New Jersey. My professional employment in the USA was >>always for various industrial concerns on Government sponsored >>contracts... not for the government itself. >This is hair-splitting (although perhaps I should have been more >precise with my language in the original post). By working under >security, as you did, on government-sponsored projects, you were >working for the government, if not quite "for" the government. >>From Top Secret/Majic: >"After the University of Chicago awarded me a masters degree in >physics in 1956, I got a job at General Electric Aircraft >Nuclear Propulsion (ANP) department in Evendale, just north of >Cincinnati, Ohio. As the name of the department indicates, we >were working on nuclear-powered high performance jet aircraft, >and so our research was classified Secret Restricted Data. The >program was jointly sponsored by the Atomic Energy Commission >and the Air Force... The government provided facilities, >fissionable materials, and a budget of more than $100 million a >year." The distinction between working for private industry and working for the government is not trivial.Who signed my paycheck? Who determined my bonuses, my vacations, my other benefits? Not the government. Who approved attendance at professional meetings, business trips etc? Not the government. Government employees didn't get discounts on GE or GM contracts as I did. William Cooper falsely accused me of working for the government. I did not. My industrial bosses called the shots as to my activities. For example Westinghouse approved my travelling to Los Alamos on an expense account to present a lecture "Flying Saucers ARE Real" to the Local Section of the American Nuclear Society. Could I have done that as a government employee? >>I have also on many occasions noted that many people referred to >>as witnesses, especially in the Roswell case, were not >>witnesses. They were persons spoken to who knew nothing. >>Sometimes they could provide info on where witnesses might be, >>but they had neither seen nor heard anything themselves. >Never said you did. I was agreeing with you... surprise, surprise. >Loyally yours, >Paul Kimball Sensitively yours,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 Re: Ufological Mess - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:30:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Randle Given what I have read here recently, and given the Peter Jennings Special, it seems to me that Ufology, as we call it, is in a mess. We agree on almost nothing, we get caught up in personal fights that don't advance the cause, and we spend half our time defending ourselves from assaults by our friends and foes. Worse still, we never seem to learn our lessons. We make the same mistakes over and over and then blame the government for being too clever for us. Take the recent debate between Michael Salla and Paul Kimball. While I find it refreshing because it hasn't descended into name calling, it does demonstrate part of the problem. Here, I fall on the side of Kimball. His opinions and information more closely follows my line of thinking about Lazar and other matters than does that of Salla. Let's look at this. At one point Salla uses the SOM 1-01 as proof that Lazar might be an authentic witness (Yes, I know proof is too strong a word here, but it makes a point.) Kimball suggests that using MJ-12 documents to bolster a point makes the argument weak since there is controversy around the authenticity of MJ-12 generally and the SOM 1-01 specifically. Salla points out that Robert Woods believes the document to be authentic=E2=80=A6 but doesn't mention that the man who received it, Don Berliner, believes it to be a hoax. In fact, a careful review of the SOM 1-01 by several prominent UFO researchers including Mark Rodeghier, and a review by former military men who worked with classified documents, also believe it to be a hoax. The anachronisms also suggest hoax. Reasonable people, I believe, can differ on their opinions about this. The one question that has not been satisfactorily answered is provenance. Just where did this document originate? We can ask the same, important question of the original MJ-12 documents. We know that Bill Moore "retyped" the Aquarius Telex because, according to him, the original was such a poor copy that he needed to do that for clarity. The problem is that we don't have an original to compare with the retyped version so we have a document that is without provenance and that even Moore now suggests is a hoax. Few researchers accept the Aquarius Telex as authentic. When we move to the Eisenhower Briefing document and the Truman memo that accompanies it we are left with the same problem. There is no provenance. Worse still is that Stan Friedman submitted those documents to a questioned document expert, Peter Tytell, who, after review, said that they were not authentic. He bases this in part on Truman's signature, which he believes proves that document a fraud. It is placed improperly, it is an exact match for another signature and it shows signs of having been altered. (Robert and Ryan Wood's claims not withstanding. They have not answered these questions). I have said that I believe the Eisenhower Briefing document a fake based on Hillenkoetter's rank. Those outside the military do not believe this to be a good reason for dismissing the document. This is one of those arguments that has a number of answers, all of which might be right. (What this means is that Hillenkoetter is identified on the document as an admiral when he was, in fact, a rear admiral. It relates to the number of stars worn on the collar. To military people, talking to other military people, these sorts of things are very important and if Hillenkoetter did write the Eisenhower Briefing, I find it hard to believe that he would have gotten his rank wrong. Those who have never served in the military are content to ignore this violation of military protocol.) To me it is important but to others it is not. To be honest here, they might have a good point. There are other reasons to argue the point such as the misspellings and the lack of any mention of the Plains of San Agustin as reasons to believe the document a fraud (if you accept the Plains crash as authentic. Isn't it interesting that there are some who accept both the Plains crash and the Eisenhower Briefing?) But most important here is a tale told to me by Stan=E2=80=A6 Bill Moore had told him in the early 1980's that he, Moore, had run up against a brick wall and was thinking about creating a document to see what would shake free. At the same time Moore was working on a novel about a secret government investigation (along with two others, Pratt and Dody) which is the first incarnation of MJ-12. Later, the first of the documents arrived at the home of one of Moore's friends. This alone should raise all sorts of questions=E2=80=A6 Here, again, I can see where reasonable people might disagree with a point. The arguments suggesting fraud, to me, outweigh those arguing authenticity. But I believe those suggesting the documents are real are sincere in their beliefs. I just think they are wrong, just as they believe I'm wrong. This is the same sort of argument we find in the so-called whistle- blowers' testimony. Many of us suggest that these people have not been carefully vetted so that we end up with people telling wild tales to all who will listen. In response, we hear that there isn't time or resources to investigate all the claims properly. Their testimony is offered because it is believed and they seem to be sincere. But is that really enough? And, if one of the whistle-blowers is found to be a fake, doesn't that really diminish, if not destroy, the testimony of others? If I can point to several of these people and suggest they are making it up, and present evidence that their claims are not true, doesn't that really hurt the whole cause? Isn't defense of those frauds damaging to all? Salla mentioned Robert Dean and Cliff Stone as well as Bob Lazar. Here I side with Stan on Lazar. Too many questions about his background and too many holes in it. And I do not understand how claiming to be a physicist translates into proof of a Master's Degree. As another aside, I interviewed a man for an article in the newspaper. He told me that he was an engineer. Later, he asked if this article would appear in his hometown and I said it would. At that point he changed from an engineer to an engineering technician. I had no reason to doubt his original claim and have no reason to doubt his amended claim. The point is that such a claim, printed in the newspaper doesn't make it true. How many times have we seen people lose their jobs over claims, such as these, that could not be substantiated, yet here, with Lazar, we make up excuses for him. For those who believe that Cliff Stone has any credibility, please read the article he wrote for UFO magazine (American version, Vol. 13, No. 6 1998) in which he made so many ridiculous claims about his Vietnam service that it's difficult to believe anything he says now. Even with that out there, and with his service records available suggesting he has been less than truthful, we still hear of him as one of the whistle- blowers. Which sort of leads to "dueling" witnesses. Stan and I disagreed over the importance of the tales told by Gerald Anderson and Frank Kaufmann. I believed Anderson, at first, but then found so many holes in what he said and the evidence he offered that it was clear to me that Anderson was lying. He faked a telephone bill to make me look bad, his diary was in disagreement with that of Ruth Barnett (for which we did have provenance), and he made claims about his background that were found to be untrue. He changed his story, moved the crash site around the Plains, and could offer nothing in the way of corroboration that was independent. Stan, I think, still believes some of Anderson's nonsense. On the other hand, Stan did not believe Frank Kaufmann, while I did. We finally learned that Kaufmann was no more reliable than Anderson and while Kaufmann didn't admit to lying, in so many words, it is obvious that he was. So, the united front we could have maintained was divided by individuals who knew nothing other than how to spin a good tale. We should have been more careful in our review of the testimonies, but we all got caught up in what Karl Pflock labeled as a will to believe. We ignored red flags and argued for the authenticity of our witness and against that of the other. In the end, we both were wrong and neither witness was of value=E2=80=A6 (as an aside, since people have now started debating the definition of witness, shouldn't both of these names be removed from a list of "witnesses"?) The point here is that we should be searching for common ground. Instead we argue over the reliability of witnesses we know have lied to us. Worst still, we have found a number of researchers who lied about themselves and their colleagues but still invite them to speak and listen to what they have to say. How many lies do these people get before we realize that they have not been honest with us and that continued support of them hurts our overall credibility. So maybe we can search for some common ground here. Maybe we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 The Death Of Ufology From: Norio Hayakawa <Groom51S4.nul> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 18:32:49 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:34:26 -0500 Subject: The Death Of Ufology The Death Of Ufology by Norio Hayakawa I hear from some UFO-believing circles that with the dismal effect of the much anticipated but overwhelmingly disappointing Peter Jennings's recent UFO Special, that Ufology seems to be going nowhere or worse yet, is even dead. Jennings' Special apparently did not even achieve its goal of attaining high ratings. As expected, the insignificant TV Special disclosed nothing new. It was the same old rehashing of things we have seen and heard time and time again in most UFO TV Specials in the past. We cannot blame Jennings for this less than mediocre presentation. The bottom line is that shallow topics deserves shallow presentations. And this is exactly what the viewers got. It is rather simply an indication that the general public has never been interested and never will be interested in the topic of UFOs until it becomes a topic of serious mainstream interest. Characters such as Art Bell and others seem to continue to maintain their role and legacy as part of the fringe and not mainstream. Their only value for TV producers seems to be in the entertaining aspect of such programs. Thus TV UFO Specials continue to wrap itself with a laughter curtain and there are many who end up playing such a role wittingly or unwittingly. Moreover, we must face the reality that the mainstream will never seriously embrace Ufology as a valid discipline. TV UFO Specials have never succeeded and will never ever succeed in elevating UFOs to a legitimate level or a topic of serious concern. To me, ufology has been dead from the beginning, simply because Ufology is a forced attempt to create a discipline out of an ambiguous subject matter that has never had any logical, scientific, unified definition and thus has always been categorized as fringe or pseudo science. If anything at all, it should be categorized as part of religious studies since it is based on a belief system. Ufology remains in the domain of beliefs. The only reality as we understand it to be is the reality that a segment of the population believes (or have believed) that they have witnessed what they perceive (or have perceieved) to be UFOs. It is therefore a matter of belief and conviction and therefore cannot be scrutinized or approached with empirical methodology. The reality that some people believe that they have witnessed what they perceive to be a UFO has little to do with blanket statements such as UFOs are real or UFOs exist. We can only accept the fact that people have claimed and believe that they have witnessed what they perceive to be UFOs. We are simply left with this fact. And it stops here. The possiblity that we are not alone in the universe should have little (or even nothing) to do with whether UFOs exist or not. If the objective is to find a physical solution to the UFO phenomenon the bottom line is that we have yet to come up with any concrete, physical, irrefutable, solid evidence that UFOs are physical, intelligently maneuvered non-human spacecraft from outside of this earth with or without its occupants. Alleged visual evidences such as alleged photos or alleged video footages are not sufficient. First person accounts such as I was abducted by a grey alien, ad nauseam, are definitely out of the question. Everything else is irrevelant and continues to remain so in the domain of pure speculation.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 4 PRG/X-Conference 2005 Press Release - 03-03-05 From: Stephen Bassett <ParadigmRG.nul> Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:44:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:39:09 -0500 Subject: PRG/X-Conference 2005 Press Release - 03-03-05 PRG Paradigm Research Group X-Conference 2005 Press Release - March 3, 2005 Washington, DC - PRG is pleased and honored that Catholic theologian, Monsignor Corrado Balducci, will come to the United States for the first time since 1968 and give the Keynote Address at X-Conference 2005, April 22-24, 2005, Hilton Washington, DC North/Gaithersburg. Monsignor Balducci, now retired, is the highest ranking Catholic official to publicly speak to the question of an extraterrestrial presence engaging the human race. His views arise from his personal research and do not represent an official position of the Holy See. Nevertheless, they have drawn much interest and debate worldwide. This will mark the first time Monsignor Balducci has spoken of these matters in the United States. Corrado Balducci, still robust and active at 82, has had an extraordinary career. He is a Curia member and served the Holy See as a diplomat and member of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. He is an expert on demonology and parapsychology and was for several years the exorcist of the diocese of Rome, the Pope�s diocese. He has written several books, including the bestseller "Il Diavolo" (the Devil). In 2001 he published a paper, UFOlogy and Theological Clarifications, which consolidated his views. He is a frequent guest on the Italian State TV, where he began making personal public statements on extraterrestrial-related phenomena in 1995. He has presented to numerous conferences in Europe, but never in the U.S. - until now. The intersection of the world's great religions with extraterrestrial-related phenomena and the disclosure process is of enormous exopolitical consequence. PRG has invited several religious scholars to explore this nexus. Approximately 28 lecturers and panelists will present over the weekend on a range of topics. The X-Conference is a unique event which focuses on the political, governmental and social implications of extraterrestrial-related phenomena. It is produced by PRG as part of the ongoing activist movement seeking to end a government imposed truth embargo regarding extraterrestrial- related phenomena. Contact: Stephen Bassett Executive Director 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 > Mar > Mar 4 Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:43:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:43:52 -0500 Subject: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting Source: The Alaska Highway News - Fort St. John - The Yukon http://tinyurl.com/6nrz9 03-03-05 Local Claims UFO Sighting By Sarah Young Alaska Highway News Whether it's actually a speck of cottonwood fluff, a small bug darting around in the sun or an alien ship come to inspect life in Fort St. John, one local man is certain that for now, he has pictures of an unidentified flying object. Mark Mann has been taking video footage of the sky for a couple of years now and has come up with some remarkable images by pointing his camera to a brightly lit area of the sky, where the sun has just tucked behind a building to leave a backlit area just to the side of it. "There's hundreds of these things, they're just everywhere," said Mann of the rounded objects he's seen flitting across his video screen. When he slows down the tape frame by frame, Mann can spot the "spinning turnips" that seem to radiate light. Mann has sent the footage to a UFO group in New York that estimated the object's speed across the sky at up to 18,000 miles per hour and at a size of 15-25 feet in diameter. "These things are highly polished and moving very fast," he said. "I don't know exactly what they are, but they're solid and silent. "The definition of UFO is an unidentified object...I can't begin to imagine where they're from, but they're not ours. I've seen too many different shapes and different sizes, and too many people have been seeing them in different places." Mann has also been in touch with Brian Vike, a UFO enthusiast who collects reports of sightings. Vike, who lives in Houston, B.C., is a member of several national and international astronomical societies and appears regularly on radio programs in the Okanagan, Alberta and the U.S. Vike has seen Mann's nighttime footage and originally thought it could be a bright star. But when the object disappeared after two days, he wasn't so sure. "It stands out in the sky like a sore thumb... if it was a star it should have showed up again after two days." Vike said many sky observers have used a technique similar to Mann's for daytime shots that reveal "little blobs flying around" that could be anything from cottonwood fluff to dandelions or, quite possibly, UFOs. Environment Canada spokesman Bill Miller said they used to receive several UFO reports from the Peace region that were attributed to the lights of a weather balloon at night. But as for Mann's sightings, Miller didn't want to hazard a guess. "Some could be bugs," Vike offered. "With the sun behind the building if something comes between the camera and the sun it will look very bright. In Mark's footage it looked like a giant hamburger, so I don't know what it is." Graham Conway heads up a group called UFO B.C. And while he figures the bug explanation is reasonable, he doesn't quite buy it. "Depending on the time of year, say when it's colder in the fall or winter, the insect theory doesn't stand up." Vike has heard reports of sightings in the North Peace region from the 1970s but said there seems to be a lull right now, likely because people are afraid of the ridicule from friends and family. Mann's had his share of naysayers, but is adamant about what he's seen. "I've had friends who say no way, but seeing is believing. There's nothing I can do to convince people until they see it for themselves." Vike can't say for sure what's in Mann's photos, but he's not
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Flu Stricken From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 10:02:50 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 10:02:50 -0500
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Extraterrestrials And The Occult Connection From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:04:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:04:15 -0500 Subject: Extraterrestrials And The Occult Connection Source: The-Book-Of-Thoth.Com http://tinyurl.com/4wohu 03-03-05 =09 Extraterrestrials and the Occult Connection UFOs & Aliens By Isis This is the first in a series of exclusive articles by The-Book- of-Thoth.com in which we look at the UFO and extraterrestrial phenomena from a slightly different perspective. We hope you enjoy it. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. The purpose of this article is to examine the suggestion that the current wave of UFO activity that began in 1947 with Kenneth Arnolds sighting over the Cascade Mountains was deliberately caused by a series of magickal workings carried out by occultists. Over fifty years later, the UFO wave is still being actively encouraged by certain secret societies intent on using extraterrestrial knowledge to steer the course of human evolution. The Amalantrah Workings The name Aleister Crowley is synonymous with secret societies and occult workings. Revered in occult circles as the master of occult matters his name still evokes vehement horror in the minds of some, who regard him as the anti Christ personified. A master self-publicist and antiestablishmentarian, he adopted the magical number 666 as his own and positively embraced 'The Beast' label the largely ignorant British press gave him in response to this. What has a Hermetic magician and high ranking member of several secret societies (The Freemasons, Golden Dawn, Order of the Silver Star, Thelma and O.T.O) have to do with extra terrestrials you may ask. The answer lies in the rather interesting drawing shown above that Crowley made in 1918. It shows an alien intelligence that he came into contact with during a series of invocations called the Amalantrah workings that he carried out in New York over a three month period in 1918. Crowley was in the practice of sketching the beings that he encountered during his evocations to add to the detailed written records that he kept of all his magickal workings. The Amalantrah working was part of what Crowley termed 'The Great Work'; the intentional cultivation of spiritual growth. According to Crowley part of the great work involved "the establishment of contact with non-human intelligences" - in other word, beings that were not of this world =96 or what we would term extraterrestrials. The purpose of the Amalantrah invocations, by Crowley's own admission was to open an interdimensional portal that would allow him access to beings from other dimensions. One of the beings that came through this portal, the one Crowley sketched was named Lam. Lam it should be noted is regarded by occultists as a generic entity rather than an individual being. The drawing seems to bear a startling resemblance to the popular conception of a Grey. The picture of Lam itself can certainly be considered genuine as it has a verifiable history. Crowley actually included the portrait of Lam in his 'Dead Souls exhibition' held in Greenwich Village, New York, in 1919. It was also used as an illustration to H.P Blavatsky's book 'The Voice of the Silence' around the same time. Beneath the picture Blavatsky wrote: "Lam is the Tibetan word for Way or Path, and LAMA is He who Goeth, the specific title of the Gods of Egypt, the Treader of the Path, in Buddhistic phraseology." When the Amalantrah working were complete Crowley ensured that the portal he had used to grant Lam access to our world was sealed. The original drawing of Lam was given to Kenneth Grant (left), one of Crowley's brightest students and eventual successor as head of O.T.O in 1945. Grants interest in CETI (Contact with Extraterrestrial Intelligence) phenomena is long-standing and his position as head of O.T.O has enabled him to pursue and develop this interest amongst he membership of his organisation. In 1955 Grant announced the discovery of a trans-plutonian planet called Isis. It was at this time that he established an order called the New Isis Lodge OTO for the purpose (amongt others) of contacting higher intelligences. The story goes that in the late 1980s, Grant allegedly received 'messages' that led to him conclude that Crowley's portrait of Lam could be used to provide a focus point for the extraterrestrial energy that had originally invoked in 1918. Why it took Grant so long to realise this is unclear as using such objects as a point of focus is not uncommon in occult circles. Possibly it was the scale of the activity that Grant realised needed to be increased to allow the potential of Lam was to be fully realised. To promote and regulate use of the portrait amongst his societies members Grant wrote a text called the 'Lam Statement. The purpose of the Lam statement was "regularise the mode of rapport and construct a magical formula for establishing communication with Lam." This coincided with Grants creation of a second subdivision of the O.T.O - 'The Cult of Lam'. The invocation of Lam or the beings we know as Greys was thus officially endorsed by O.T.O. Despite the fact that Crowley had been meticulous in his sealing of the portal I 1918 when occultists invoke Lam, Lam enters through the portal that he created. How is this possible? To answer that question we have to examine the activities of two other well known occultists. The Babalon Workings Two of Crowley's unofficial 'students' during his final years were L Ron Hubbard who later founded the Scientology movement and the charismatic Jack Parsons (left) who founded the Jet Propulsion Laboratories. The pair of them studied Crowley's work at length especially in relation to the interdimensional portal that Crowley had created using his extensive occult knowledge. Crowley was concerned at what he saw as the pair's recklessness when dealing with higher energies. Having spent a lifetime mastering his interaction with supernatural forces he considered them over confident and inexperienced and told them as much, finally ceasing all communication with them. Neither man would not be deterred and Hubbard and Parsons proceeded to work with the dormant portal that Crowley had left almost 30 years earlier. Thus in 1946 they began what is known in occult circles as the Babalon workings. The intention was to use 'sex magick' to create a 'child' in the spiritual realms. They would then 'call down' the spiritual baby and direct it into the womb of a female volunteer (thought to be Marjorie Cameron who Parsons later married) where it would manifest as 'human' after the usuall nine month period of gestation. When born, this child would incarnate the forces of Babalon - the Scarlet woman of Revelations which in occult circles symbolises the dawning of the Age of Horus, the new age. The Babalon working not only reopened the portal, it also increased its intensity and made it highly unstable. The Babalon workings were well documented and many say seem to highlight Parsons and Hubbards inability to close the portal that they had reopened and which seemed to have slipped from their control. It's interesting to consider the time frame between Hubbard & Parsons reopening the interdimensional portal or what we could easily term a stargate and the wave of extraterrestrial activity and UFO sightings that began with the Kenneth Arnolds sighting of nine 'flying silver discs' over the cascade Mountains in June 1947 and not long after the Roswell incident were it is alleged that aliens quite possibly greys and had crashed in a flying saucer. UFO activity has been steady since then. It could well be (although we can't say for sure) that these extraterrestrial visitors are accessing the planet through this reopened and highly unstable portal. An interesting point is that both the Amalantrah workings and the Babalon workings were conducted in America which seems to be the place that attracts the most interest from the Greys suggesting that the site of the workings themselves provide a focus point or a marker of some description for the Greys. The Cult of Lam The Cult of Lam still continues to encourage its members to invoke Lam. Kenneth Grant has been quoted as saying "Lam is a Great Old One whose archetype is recognizable in accounts of UFO occupants." The Lam (or Greys) continue to be invoked by the cult of Lam and encouraged to interact with humanity in order to further the spiritual and conscious development of mankind. On the subject of invoking Lam, Grant is quoted as saying "To gaze into the eyes of this entity is to invite potent contact. One feels an immediate sensation of lightness, of weightlessness, and then a sensation of falling... of being sucked into a vortex...." This sounds very similar to witness testimony provided by contactees who have encountered Greys. Grant has also been quoted as making the following statements=85 - Lam is known to be a link between the star systems of Sirius and Andromeda - Lam is the gateway to the Void. Its number, 71, is that of "NoThing", an apparition - Lam is the occult energy beaming the vibrations of Maat and may proceed from that future aeon - Lam, as a Great Old One, whose archetype is recognizable in accounts of UFO occupants - "...therein am I as a babe in an egg" AL.II.49 - Lam has been invoked to fulfil the work set afoot by Aiwass; as a reflex of Aiwass - Lam as the transmitter to AL of the vibrations of LA via MA, the key to the Aeon of Maat - Crowley considered Lam to be the soul of a dead lama of L=EAng, between China and Tibet - note: Crowley gave to Grant his original drawing of Lam in 1945 Conclusion The Stargate or stellar rift between time and space, created by Crowley's Amalantrah Working, created a portal through which Lam and other extra-cosmic influences can enter the known universe. Although Crowley himself was careful to seal this portal on the completion of the working, subsequent magical operations have served to reopen the portal and leave it in a state whereby extraterrestrial beings can use it to access our world. Whether or not this is actually true, it is clear that many in occult circles do believe that this to be the case and that the being known as Lam is in fact a Grey. It is the intention of a certain occultists to encourage the Greys interaction with mankind, anticipating that they hold the key to the spiritual evolution
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Indie Filmmakers Detained At Area 51 From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:06:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:06:58 -0500 Subject: Indie Filmmakers Detained At Area 51 Source: eMediaWire.Com http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/3/emw214149.htm 03-03-05 Indie Filmmakers Detained At Area 51 Two filmmakers, researching for their movie about extra terrestrials, were detained over the weekend by government agents outside the infamous government facility known as Area 51. (PRWEB) March 3, 2005 -- Independent filmmakers Ford Austin and Jed Rowen were driving near the infamous government base known as Area 51 on saturday night when their car was surrounded by several government employees in uniform. When asked what they were doing at the facility, the two filmmakers claimed to have been researching extra terrestrials and the secret government program that is rumored to be operating at the site. The agents took the two filmmakers into custody until late monday afternoon when they were allowed to leave the base. Austin stated, "We weren't trespassing. We were staying deliberately away from the perimeter fence. It was terrifying! I mean, they put guns to our heads, took our cameras, and threw us into a cage. This definitely means that our film is hitting a little close to the bone". Ford Austin claims that he and his producing partner, Jed Rowen, were attempting to return to an area known as S-4. "We have been to S-4 once and witnessed the secret 'frankenstein' experiments being conducted there first hand and decided to put it into our film, "Austin said. Their latest film "Cerebral Print: The Secret Files" focuses on the covert experiments being conducted by the United States government. "These guys are trying to keep extra terrestrials a mythological phenomenon," say Austin and Rowen, "but we already have footage of an actual autopsy on an alien where these doctors pull out his brain and dissect it in real time", Austin continued, "It's only a matter of time till our film breaks the mythology wide open!" Witnesses say that the filmmakers were driven to the edge of Groom Lake, approximately 90 miles from Las Vegas, and then ordered to leave the area immediately. Austin, "They told us not to release our film, so we said 'Screw that, we're going to the papers'." Area 51 became famous in the late 50's when locals witnessed a U.F.O. crash to the ground. Initial reports and photographs from the government verified that a "manned" alien saucer crashed to the ground with 4 allien creatures onboard, but those comments were quickly amended to claim that the crash was merely a weather balloon. Ever since, Area 51 has been seized upon by conspiracy theorists, documentary filmmakers, ane toursists alike. Since the weekend, Austin claims he and Rowen have had their home phones tapped and bank accounts frozen. "Oh yeah. There are unmarked cars parked outside my house right now", Austin exclaimed, "What did I get myself into?" Ford Austin's movie, "Cerebral Print: The Secret Files", focuses on a secret government facility, it's experiments on extra terrestrials, and the government agents who work there. It is scheduled to premiere at the 2005 Bare Bones International Film
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: Lazar Redux - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:46:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:08:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Lazar Redux - Kaeser >From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:16:24 -0600 >Subject: Lazar Redux [was: UFO Whistleblowers...] <snip> >Michael, "brothel-physicist-brothel", but I see these career >options advertised in "physics today" all the time!, >right next to obituaries. >Get serious! There are many good reasons to question Bob Lazar's claims, but I think it's a bit self-serving to continually point to his involvement with a "brothel". I guess it's more important that we spend time defining (and in turn criticising) the charactor of people, rather than deal with the claims they are making. Some very good scientists have had the worst habits in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 A Jennings Sequel? From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:21:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:23:24 -0500 Subject: A Jennings Sequel? I just talked with the General Manager at WPTA-TV in Fort Wayne, Indiana, the ABC affiliate here, for which we consult, and he confirms our conjecture that because the Jennings UFO Special got such good ratings (number two in the Nielsens against two powerhouse reality shows: Survivor and The Apprentice) that there might be a follow-up. Moreover, because of the controversy and feedback the producers got about the airing, Jennings' production company might find it in their hearts to take a second look. We sent a note to Mr. Jennings, with whom we've communicated personally over the years, and will apprise UpDates if there's
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:47:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:25:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Pelicanist - Lehmberg >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:26:04 +0000 >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: Pelicanist >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:40:13 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Pelicanist <snip> >>Oh, and _do_ try to get that period after my "Mr." when you >>address me, won't you, Sir? I take pains with _all_ of yours. >>First it's a "period" and then it's civility altogether. >>Punctuation _is_ important and I suspect yours may be the hint >>of a glove in my face - another metaphor, Sir. Nes't ce pas? >I think the generally accepted usage, on this side of the pond >at least, that there is no need for a period after the >abbreviation "Mr". I don't have my Fowler to hand, but this is >really Jerry Clark's field, perhaps he could advise. Ah - you should keep us better informed on our side of the pond, Mr. Rimmer. My understanding of your Queen's English indicates the use of same after an abbreviation. Engaging and otherwise deflecting Mr. Clark on the issue would only be a usual dissembling distraction on your part, so I can hardly recommend engaging him in the discussion on it. >Incidentally, I apologise for the faux pas I perpetrated in the >paragraph above, using "It's" for the possessive pronoun - a far >more heinous crime than the one you accuse me of. Again, you have the cart before the horse, Sir. Using "it's" as a possessive pronoun is a harmless error made by the best of writers in the heat of an E-mail moment. "To" over "too," is another favorite. It would not have _occurred_ to me to trifle you with its notice. Had you noticed a similar error of mine I would have excoriated you for even remotely bringing it up. The purloined period was a different matter, altogether, and much more 'heinous', so to speak. In as much as I had thought that I had adequately understood the use of punctuation in the state of the art that is our English language I had assumed (always dangerous) that the missing period might have meant something along the lines of that described... you can _imagine_ my relief at finding this is not so. That said, and allowing for this new clarity we share on the issue regarding my appreciation for the missing period, it remains that I expect you to use one when you address me lest I continue to be insulted. I will, of course, continue to insert one for you. And thanks. <g>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: UFO Rip-Off - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:21:04 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:27:28 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Rip-Off - Boone I'm not one for twisting the knife or I-told-you-so's. But this time I will. Still smarting and licking wounds from that hack job Jennings did on Ufology? Don't say I didn't warn you, but yeah I forgot, when I did warn you I was 'paranoid'. I don't know why, after 40+ years of the press treating researchers, abductees, witnesses, whistleblowers like crap, you guys thought that this one time it would be any different. I'll bet many of you tossed Jennings and his cronies the kitchen sink of your best evidence pro and con only to find it not even addressed. I have to admit I too had big expectations but caught on after a few outpoints arose. It goes back to something that came up years ago when I was interviewing a few folks who knew the 'inside' as to why the press is outside of the UFO fare. Money. Plain and simple. From what they told me, the problem with UFOs is that too many common folk got the best stories and research that the big boys missed or let slip by. Especially Roswell. Doing the real on the ground research threw a big monkey wrench into the works of the industrialists who figured they'd get the glory but got caught unawares when regular folks, research pros, journalists didn't hesistate to dig where the digging was good. Now they can't capitalize on it because the copyrights, trademarks are sewed up amongst a myriad of people and can't be owned unless they're run into bankruptcy. ( Run a Ufology person into bankruptcy? Dash the thought!) Yep, money, not to forget glory! Do you have any idea what would happen if just one smidgen of disclosure came from the Feds? Guys like Friedman and Maccabee and Hopkins etc. would suddenly become 'Knights of the Day' and tons of money would flow their way. Can't have honest guys making tons of money! Why that would upset the balance of power on Earth! Nah, better to cut out the middle man and invalidate present day Ufologists so that the corporate guys can move in. Wouldn't surprise me if one fine day under the Homeland Security blanket if all abductees were forced under psychiatric control and all UFO research and researchers herded into non-disclosure relationships with the government. Stranger things have happened. But then again I'm 'paranoid'. Me, I'm going back to just having fun interviewing good folks and collecting raw data to kick upstairs to the researchers I know have the guts to fight back. Ha, Jennings' UFO Special was a victory. We've got _them_ right where we want them.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: Peter Jennings' Recent Show From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:28:11 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:29:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Jennings' Recent Show >From: Larry Bryant <overtci.nul> >To: errol.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:48:30 -0500 >Subject: Peter Jennings' Recent Show >Sent to various researchers in ufology by Jim Klotz >What the hell is the matter with you people? I have never seen >such bellyaching, whining, childish moaning about an >overwhelmingly PRO-UFO show by PRO-UFO types in my life! >CUFOS got tremendous amounts of air time with great >presentations by Rodeghier, Jerry Clark, Swords, and footage of >Hynek who was in effect given the last word against the AF's >position. (If I was the AF I'd be angry about that!) >And then you come along and whine and moan and bellyache that >MUFON didn't get mentioned! So the hell what? Neither did >CSICOP, the Condon Committee, Klass, Adamski, CSETI, Greer, or >Bassett get mentioned by name either! Did ya stop to think of >that? Or did you just bitch and gripe because this or that >little pet peeve wasn't satisfied, or your favorite 100 hours of >interviews didn't make it into the approximately 1 hour of >interviews shown (Yeah people, an 86 minute show doesn't even >mean 86 minutes of _interviews_ either, only about 1 hour, as >there was on-air time taken with Peter Jennings, clips that were >repeated for emphasis or point-counterpoint, time taken for >almost totally _pro-UFO_ animations - only one single debunking >animation was done, that of the moon and it was not at all >convincing). <snip> Larry,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: Michael Salla & Me - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:59:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:31:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me - Sandow >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST >Subject: Michael Salla & Me >Dr. Salla's primary source? >William Cooper. <snip> >So, what did the "controversial Cooper" himself have to say - > because surely not even Dr. Salla believes that the government >could put words into Cooper's mouth? >All sorts of things, as it turns out. I heard Cooper speak at Hollywood High School in Los Angeles in 1989. He was unforgettable. He said that aliens forced the United States to intervene on the communist side in the civil war that followed the Russian revolution. This is interesting for two reasons. First, the US actually intervened against the communists. Second, Cooper had earlier said that the aliens arrived on earth in 1947. The Russian revolution was in 1917. Cooper also said the aliens were responsible for gun control. Almost everybody in the audience cheered. I knew then that his real agenda - and the reason for much of his appeal - had
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Hopping Mad Over 'Hobbit' From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:56:03 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:36:57 -0500 Subject: Hopping Mad Over 'Hobbit' Source: The San Francisco Chronical http://tinyurl.com/6uyu8 03-04-05 Hopping Mad Over 'Hobbit' Scientists fight over fossil skull and bones of humanlike creature David Perlman Chronicle Science Editor Take a single fossil skull the size of a chimpanzee that might have held a highly advanced human brain, a trove of ancient humanlike bones and teeth, and an odd assortment of stone tools from an unknown age, and you add a major new mystery to the endless puzzle of human evolution. Now add a dose of intrigue to the mystery, as a team of angry anthropologists charges one of their colleagues with outrageously unethical behavior, including destroying evidence that might have helped to solve the arcane puzzle. All this surfaced Thursday, furthering the astonishment of scientists around the world that began in October when the anthropologists first reported they had discovered the remains of a bizarre creature barely 3 feet tall that seemed part modern human and part ancient ancestor - a creature they affectionately named "hobbit." The scientists claimed that the fossil skull and bones - and the stone tools found with them deep in a cave on the Indonesian island of Flores - represented an entirely new species of tiny human. Homo floresiensis, as they formally named their find, emerged in the evolutionary lineage on that island some 95,000 years ago and went extinct there some 12,000 years ago, the scientists said. On Thursday, an anthropologist who specializes in the human brain, Dean Falk of Florida State University, announced in the online journal Science Express that she and her colleagues at Washington University in St. Louis have created a "virtual endocast" of the hobbit's brain, showing structures that establish that the creature could think, make plans and initiate useful behavior. At the same time, one of the original discoverers, Michael Morwood of the University of New England in Australia, depicted the humanlike hobbit as a brave if tiny creature that hunted fierce pygmy elephants with spears, made fire in its family cave and fashioned stone drills and awls and axes. Morwood said the hobbit may have been descended from the hominid species Homo erectus, which evolved in Africa nearly 2 million years ago and moved into Asia and perhaps Europe before its line died out some 400,000 years ago. It was also Morwood who, during a telephone news conference Thursday from Jakarta, along with Falk in Florida, accused Indonesia's leading anthropologist with some of the worst crimes in the lexicon of science. "Unethical" and "illegal" were the terms Morwood used to describe the activities of Teuku Jacob of the Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, Java. According to Morwood, Jacob visited the Flores cave last fall, "borrowed" many of the bones and only began returning them this year - after sending some to scientists at the Max Planck Institute in Germany without permission. Jacob was not available for comment by telephone or e-mail after Morwood raised his charges, but has long disputed the Australian anthropologists' conclusions. He maintains publicly that "Flores Man," as he calls the creature, is merely a diminutive version of Homo sapiens and that the one skull found so far is merely an adult with a version of a congenitally misshapen head called microcephaly. Morwood insisted Thursday that Jacob and his colleagues have not only destroyed some of the bone specimens, but had even glued one broken bone together to hide the damage. "We are disgusted with some of the material that has now been returned," Morwood said. "It's appalling - severely and irreparably damaged. Some has been washed and dissolved in acetone to make it impossible to extract any DNA for analysis." Falk and her Washington University colleagues, whose work was supported by grants from the National Geographic Society, said she was able to reconstruct the outer portions of the hobbit's brain by using a CT scan - a type of X-ray imaging - made in Indonesia to create a model depicting the i nside of the creature's skull. It showed many of the creases, folds and bulges of the brain's cortex and other structures much the way a cast of a glove's interior would reflect the skin features of a hand that was once inside it, Falk said. Her "beautiful latex cast" reflected a "fantastic evolutionary voyage" for the hobbit, Falk said - a voyage that took it from its primitive ancestry to a virtually modern, sentient version of an early human being. The 18,000-year-old brain inside the skull most closely resembled the brain of Homo erectus, she said, but is far more advanced, and three segments of the frontal lobes of its cortex show it was capable of "sophisticated planned behavior." Falk said she compared the cast with the brains of two other earlier hominids, 10 ordinary humans, 10 gorillas, 18 chimpanzees, an adult female pygmy and the skull of a microcephalic human. The hobbit's brain was different from them all and was positively not microcephalic, she maintained. Morwood said that by now he and his team of Australian and Indonesian anthropologists have collected the lower jawbone of another member of the Flores clan and other bones from a third, together with scores of primitive tools the creatures must have fashioned. "Their teeth have primitive crowns and roots," Morwood said of the earlier Flores individuals, but their arms are strange indeed: "long enough to reach down to their knees," he said. The anthropologists plan to test some bone and hair samples for DNA, he said. Other scientists have challenged the Morwood team on virtually every count, but none so far in any peer-reviewed scientific journal. Some claim the tools are obviously much too modern; some say the single chimp-sized skull could well represent a tribe of "nanocephalic" midgets; some maintain the bones from so many different strata in the cave mean there must have been a long comingling of many different hominid species. The best summary of the hobbit's current status, however, may well come from Richard Klein, a Stanford anthropologist - an outstanding authority on human evolution and a specialist on the emergence of human cultures. Klein is unconvinced that Falk's "virtual endocast" revealed all that much about the mind and thinking ability of Homo floresiensis. A single skull, he said, simply can't tell scientists enough to form firm conclusions about it. "The only way to demonstrate that we're dealing with an evolutionary development rather than just an oddity," he said, "is to find at least one more skull. As it is, we have a bizarre set of finds in a bizarre set of circumstances, and we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: Michael Salla & Me - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 14:02:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:43:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me - Friedman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST >Subject: Michael Salla & Me >Listerions et al: >At the risk of a flood of angry e-mails... <snip> Couple more comments about Cooper. His quote about me talking about a reactor producing hydrogen is totally false. The ANP reactor was several feet in diameter, was cooled by air from a jet engine compressor before entering the turbine. The moderator material was zirconium hydride. No hydrogen was produced. I never said any such thing. Even the nuclear rocket engines I worked on which were cooled by liquid hydrogen were several feet long and several feet in diameter.. There was no alien technology involved at all. As another example, I dug out the names of several CINCPAC commanders, scrambled their order, and asked him which one he was a briefing officer for. He couldn't remember! Fat chance that he as a USAF hydraulics mechanic without any college background was a briefing officer. His claims about my being a CIA agent and or/disinformation specialist working for the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 5 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:01:13 -1000 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 12:48:50 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:02:09 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:39:31 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:03:52 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:26:03 -1000 >>>>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs ><snip> >>>You said something about the Los Alamos Monitor being a house >>>organ. Wrong. It is a newspaper in the town of Los Alamos. I >>>have no doubt Bob told them he was a physicist at the lab. There >>>are thousands of professional people there. The great majority >>>are honest. Why would they check? >>Thanks for the clarification. Why do you imply that Lazar lied >>in the 1982 story about being a physicist? >I am not implying. I am stating there has not been a shred of >evidence that Lazar was a physicist That's an assertion you've made in the past and continue to repeat despite the evidence that George Knapp and others have come up with corroborating different elements of Lazar's story including his employment at Los Alamos. There is evidence there even if it doesn't meet the critical standards you set. It's more correct to say that "there has not been a shred of evidence that Lazar was a physicist according to the criteria set by Stanton Friedman." Your criteria are inappropriate for the special conditions of Lazar's case which is what I have been saying all along. Lazar is not a physics experiment that can be objectively studied using finely honed instruments where all errors are methodically identified and removed. Lazar is a human being, he has human failures, he is prone to mistakes, yet somehow was caught up in a deep black project run by the US Navy and tried to tell the public. In the process he has been put under the microscope, vilified, subjected to an intense campaign to discredit him and even set up for criminal charges. While there may be some inconsistencies in his academic background and/or problems with corroborating parts of his story, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that there is evidence that he and others have offered to support his case about having worked at S4. By continuously focusing on the details of his past academic record, you are losing the big picture that there is very strong evidence he worked at S4. >>I think a fair minded >>person would assume that he is telling the truth rather than >>make the assumption you are making. Let's not forget that your >>main case was that he lied in 1989 when he came out with the S4 >>story. > >Where did that come from? My main case is that he has >consistently lied about his background and his foreground. He >isn't a scientist, he has not graduated from any colleges, he >was not a professional at Los Alamos. The Meson facility >attracts professors from all over the world.They can't bring >along their own technicians. I never have said Bob was stupid. >He is obvously a sharp conman. Just how long did he work at the >lab? How many phone books was he in? You have jumped to pretty strong conclusions about Lazar being a conman because some of his testimony didn't check out. There is much evidence to support Lazar's S4 testimony which I've covered before. His background doesn't negate this testimony it just throws a degree of awkwardness or uncertainty into it. I don't know how long he worked at the lab but according to Knapp's investigators some of those who worked with Lazar were warned about discussing him. So it's hard answering that question. >>The evidence may be inconclusive for that, but that >>doesn't mean he lied in 1982 about being a physicist. You are >>making some incorrect assumptions here based on your >>interpretation of the validity of the 1989 claims. >Wrong again. I checked and double checked his background. He was >lying through his teeth. I'll concede that there are things about Lazar's background that don't check out. You've arrived at a clear conclusion, while I say we can't conclude too much since there is so much evidence that is missing. Despite the murky nature of his background, he still did have a W-2 that was traced to Naval Intelligence in Maryland, that shows he was more than just a con man fooliing contractors at the Los Alamos Meson Facility. It's hard evidence supporting his claim that he worked at S4 - a known location for waived Special Access Programs run by the US Navy. That's an important clue! >>An inconclusive set of claims in 1989 does not mean he lied in 1982 >>when he got what appears to be his first regular job and was >It wasn't an inconclusive claim. He conclusively lied. Lied about what in particular? If a person is evasive on a certain question, that doesn't mean they are a liar and that everything they say needs to be thrown out. You might do that in a Physics experiment, but Lazar is a human being not a physics experiment. We need to sort out the wheat from the chaff to get to the truth. That's the role of political scientists, pyschologists, and social scientists. You aren't trained to sort out the wheat from the chaff. You have stepped beyond your discilpinary competence here and that's a dangerous place to be in. >>>W-2 forms are filled out every year by businesses. There is no >>>reason to say Bob's is genuine. No tax form. When he went >>>bankrupt for $300,000 he listed his occupation as self-employed >>>film processor. Read the article by Mahood that you noted. He >>>thought Lazar, after Mahood did a lot of checking, was a fraud >>>as well and also notes that Bob was out near the mail box many >>>times. > >>Yes, I did read Mahood's article and Lazar's background is >>definitely unstable. It seems he was driven by many interests >>and that got him into financial problems. >Most of his sdebts were for film processing equipment. Yes, I saw that, part of the puzzle about Lazar and I admit its tough to figure out where Los Alamos fits in between his jet cars and photo lab. It may have been a business he did on the side? >>Building rocket cars >>isn't cheap, I assume. Financial difficulties doesn't in any way >>detract from the substance of Lazar's claims concerning S4. >What detracts are all his lies and the absence of anything to >substantiate his claims about himself... and the presence of >evidence.. for example, his naming Duxler, his prof at Pierce, >as a physics prof at Cal Tech where Duxler never taught. I >repeat how does a guy with advanced degrees at MIT and CIT wind >up taking a physics course at Pierce Junior College? The >financial difficulties again do not reflect a person who worked >as a professional "Self employed film processor" he told the >court. The debts reflect that. Stan, to do advanced degrees at MIT and CIT one would need to have a bachelors degree. Pierce College was apparently where he ran into Duxler and did his Physics course. After Pierce he went on to do further studies and probably degrees as Lazar claims. >>As >>for the W-2, it's evidence and was traced by the reseachers >>associated with George Knapp to Naval Intelligence in Maryland. >>The zip code on the W-2 refers to Naval Intelligence - how would >>Lazar have known that? No, my conclusion is that the W-2 is >>genuine and that Lazar was working on a waived SAP with Naval >>Intelligence in 1988/89. >And the evidence to support this totally off the wall claim? The Knapp team confirmed with the US postal service that the zip code was for Naval Intelligence in Maryland. What's totally off the wall about a zip code being traced to a US Navy facility in Maryland? It's called investigative journalism! >>Also when Knapp confirmed Lazar's employment at Los Alamos, he >>said that some of the employees that remembered Lazar warned not >>to talk about him and were afraid about the consequences of >>doing so. Also, Los Alamos denied Lazar worked there up until >>1994 and then finally admitted so. Why what there motivation in >>doing this? All this is in the public domain and I still have >>not found adequate responses to the evidence compiled at: >>http://www.karinya.com/travel2.htm >>>By the way there is no need for a person to have a Masters to be >>>called a Physicist, and, of course Bob didn't have one or even a >>>BS degree. In a sense he earned the latter. He wasn't a >>>physicist. He has earned no degrees not even from Pierce. And >>>please don't tell me that you can tell who is being honest and >>>sincere. The right answer is that all conmen seem to be honest >>>and sincere. and that nobody can be sure of that judgement. >>I think we reach here the crux of the matter concerning Lazar. >>You say he earned no degrees, not even a Bachelor's. So if we >>follow the logic of your position further, then he got a job as >>a technician in the Los Alamos Meson Facility in 1982 - a world >>class facility, with only a High School diploma from 1976 where >>he finished in the bottom third, and some credits from Pierce >>Junior College to support his application. So that means that >>between 1976 he has done just a few credits at Pierce, with no >>degree to show for six years, and then gets what appears to be >>plum position at a world class facility as a technician. >I wouldn't call it a plum position and he has never supplied a >resume accounting for his time.My boss on the fusion propulsion >program at Aerojet General Nuclonics had a High School Diploma, >40 patents and an honorary PhD. He had lots of PhD's working for >him. He published papers, but didn't lie about his background. >Interesting question. Have you seen any evidence of a BS degree >for Bob from anywhere? Working at a world class facility as technical support staff is very good for the resume. I'd say it's a plum position for someone starting out. >He was a handy technician... not many in the small town of Los >Alamos who are available. He may well have repaired radiation >detectors > >>That doesn't make sense. Anyone employing technicians to support the >>scientists at Los Alamos would want to be sure that the people >>they employ are up to it. The scenario you've painted doesn't >>hold up. No one would have employed Lazar with the scenario >>you've supplied. It's more plausible that he did get to complete >>degrees, at the very least a bachelors, but more likely a >>master's to support Lazar's claim of being a physicist. > >Michael, what are you smoking? Where is any evidence of any >degree? You know diplomas, professors, classmates, resumes, >listing in alumni groups?? I've said, that's a big question mark about Lazar. I have made a case that he must have had some qualifications to have gotten a job at Los Alamos with a contractor or whoever. The 1982 story was clear that he was employed there as a physicist. In the absence of education records to back up his claims of Master's degrees, I can only conclude that he is being evasive and holding back some information to protect himself in some way. >>I am aware of the protocol in the use of degrees by >>professionals to describe themselves and one simply doesn't call >>oneself a Physicist with just a bachelors degree. The only >>exemption may be someone who has a track record as an >>inventor, science author for ten years or more. But Lazar was just >>starting at Los Alamos so my assumption is that he was following >>convention that one doesn't describe oneself as a physicist with >>just a bachelors degree. Do you have examples where describing >>oneself as physicist is a common practice for those only with a >>bachelors degree? >Michael, people like Bob lie all the time.. think Guy Kirkwood, >Michael Wolf Kruvant, Milton W. Cooper.... People say things to protect themselves. All these individuals you mention said the things they said partly to tell the truth, and to partly to protect themselves from the ramifications of their truth telling. It's easy to call someone a liar. It's harder to see what's going on behind the scenes that makes them behave in ways we deem to be evasive or inconsistent. There are powerful forces wanting to ensure that if the truth comes out, it does so in a way that is hidden around deceptions, inconsistencies, lack of credibility. That's my observation so far when it comes to deep black projects and whistleblowers. >I have called many a registrar's office at colleges and >universities and after asking my primary question about a >particular person, I ask "Do you get many calls about people >claiming to be a graduate of your campus, who are not? ANSWER >"All the time". >There have been plenty of people who have been found out who >claimed a certain degree to get a job and were later fired >because they didn't have the degree. >>As for being able to tell who is being honest and sincere. I >>agree that one should rely more on gut feeling. >Why? Who do you agree with about this? Gut feeling be damned. >Why have trials with judges and juries with a prosecuting >attorney and defnse attorney, if you can tell who is telling the >truth based on your gut feeling as opposed to evidence? Because the evidence in cases involving deep black projects with an ETV or EBE component is tampered with, removed, etc. This makes looking at whistleblower testimony a pretty messy business. It's not clear cut. We have to be flexible here since the evidence is so compromised. >>In the case of >>Lazar, I've just looked at the evidence he has supplied, the >>investigations conducted by Knapp, corroborating witness >>testimonies, and conclude he is telling the truth about his >>experiences at S4. That's just a logical conclusion from what is >>availabe. Your position that Lazar is a liar and a con man isn't >>consistent with the evidence that is publically available. >There is no publicly available evidence that he is telling the >truth. If you say there is, please provide it.. should be very >easy. Have him authorize his various campuses to release his >transcripts.. That's the point I've been making, whoever has the evidence to confirm or deny what Lazar is claiming is either holding it back or its been removed. Evidence tampering does happen in the case of whistleblowers and I believe it happened in the case of Lazar. >>Finally, I do have to aplogise for an error in one of my early >>posts to you. You asked if I still had my diplomas and I said >>no. Well, I did a search and found them hidden away with my >>transcripts. So I have to withdraw my anecdotal support for >>Lazar's claim that he had lost his diplomas. Fortunately, I can >>hang mine up on the wall again so I don't forget I have them. >>Now I know the real reason why professionals put their diplomas >>up on walls. >Mine are up on the shelf where I put them when I dug them out to >copy to send to Gene Huff so he would know what Lazar needed to >provide. He never did.Just as he hasn't provided his MS thesis >or the name of his advisor or the names of MIT profs or CIT >profs etc ad nauseum I'll hopefully finish up since I know this takes up both our time from other things. I know the Lazar case is messy with all kinds of inconsistencies, missing documents and shady activities. Yet that's the price we have to pay when examining whistleblowers alleging to have worked in black projects involving ETVs, EBEs. I know what you are saying is important, that there are inconsistences, gaps that raise red flags. However, what I'm saying is also true, there is strong evidence to support Lazar's claims of working at S4 - otherwise Knapp and others would never have pursued the case for so long. I think we need to recognise that examining whistleblower testimonies is not going to be a neat clear cut science along the lines of what Hynek envisaged for UFO research, but something much more messy and difficult, yet richly rewarding since we will move closer to knowing what's happening in the world of deep black projects and the ETH.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Michael Salla & Me - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 14:18:13 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 06:47:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me - Smith >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST >Subject: Michael Salla & Me A rich and well-penned (well-typed) expose'. >"Between January 1947 and December 1952 at least 16 crashed or >downed alien craft, 65 alien bodies, and 1 live alien were >recovered. An additional alien craft had exploded and nothing >was recovered from that incident. Of these incidents, 13 >occurred within the borders of the United States not including >craft which disintegrated in the air. Of these 13, 1 was in >Arizona, 11 were in New Mexico, and 1 was in Nevada. Three >occurred in foreign countries. Of those 1 was in Norway, and the >last 2 were in Mexico." >For creatures that can travel the stars, it seems that the >aliens were pretty lousy pilots. I can accept the possibility of >a mishap or two (even aliens presumably are subject to Murphy's >Law), but "at least 16?" To paraphrase some experts on the subject, "But we don't have the mileage records, sortie frequency, spacecraft quantity and basic technology data." Indeed. >To those who might say I'm being rude, or confrontational, or >hubristic, I would ask - is our desire to be polite, and in the >process to accord every point of view, no matter how ridiculous, >an equal degree of importance and weight, so great that we will >not "or cannot "stand up when we see something so obviously >wrong?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:00:50 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 06:51:07 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:02:09 -0400 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:39:31 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >Finally, I do have to aplogise for an error in one of my early >>posts to you. You asked if I still had my diplomas and I said >>no. Well, I did a search and found them hidden away with my >>transcripts. So I have to withdraw my anecdotal support for >>Lazar's claim that he had lost his diplomas. Fortunately, I can >>hang mine up on the wall again so I don't forget I have them. >>Now I know the real reason why professionals put their diplomas >>up on walls. >Mine are up on the shelf where I put them when I dug them out to >copy to send to Gene Huff so he would know what Lazar needed to >provide. He never did.Just as he hasn't provided his MS thesis >or the name of his advisor or the names of MIT profs or CIT >profs etc ad nauseum Hi Michael, and Stan, How long will this non-debate go on? Michael, here you have a pre-eminent UFO researcher reading and refuting your statements, and yet you continue to cling to Lazar's story. First, by regurgitating the numerous faulty accounts of his education and his employment. Then, when Stan provides several very clear "warning signs" that these accounts are indeed faulty, you switch to some kind of "gut feeling" non- argument. If your goal is to find sympathetic members among the ufological mainstream, you are doing a lousy job of it. You are attempting to use Bob Lazar as a shining example of your exopolitical methodology, and when challenged, your response is basically, "Well, I believe him, so there". And this exchange is supposed to attract more like Stan Friedman to your viewpoint? There is a simple truth in this ridiculous excuse for a debate. Robert Lazar could easily dispel ANY doubt about his history. He could provide real names and real dates, and real documentation. He could put in the record a timeline of what he did, when he did it, where he did it, and for whom it was done. Since Lazar is the one making the extraordinary claims, I should think it wouldn't surprise him that many would think him loony if he could not provide extraordinary support for their veracity. To date, Lazar has not provided a single shred of verifiable evidence that he worked at S-4, he has no recollection of his professors at MIT or Cal-Tech, he has no tangible evidence of the craft on which he claims to have worked. In other words, the only way to accept his story is if you are willing to overlook all the salient facts to the contrary, and just "believe". If this is in fact your position, and a thorough reading of this thread would lead any reasonable person to no other conclusion, than I submit that your "exopolitical methodology" is nothing but another term for "faith". The only way to attempt to keep ufology free of charlatans and profiteers, and signal-obscuring noise, is to hold those with truly extraordinary and especially govt. coverup accusations to a high standard...one which Lazar fails by his own words. If Bob Lazar has convinced you, then you obviously do not, and likely will not, understand what an impossible feat you are undertaking...to convince those long studied and with a vested interest who have dismissed Lazar for good reason. On diplomas...one can be excused for misplacing such things over the course of a lifetime. If however, you undertake to make grandiose claims about what the govt. is doing in secrecy, and then find that your official records are disappearing, wouldn't it make sense to gather what documentation you have, old contacts, papers, diplomas, transcripts, theses, professors, etc, etc., so as to make a case for the alleged "expungement"? Well, you would if you had such things. Otherwise, all you're left with is to say, "Well, they erased all my records, and now you know they can do that, too". My suspicion is that if Lazar had a truly revelatory story, it would be Lazar who was erased rather than his college transcripts. Especially since even one piece of paper...his degree, his yearbook, his graded thesis, etc., would actually prove the coverup. Your methodology, rather than an admonishment not to "toss out the baby with the bathwater", seems much more analogous to "don't toss anything out since the bathwater is just as important as the baby". Try again Michael, the Lazar show has left the building, and most of us were knowing that before the word expolitics was publicized. Look back over this thread, and answer me these questions... Would you, having read all the facts on Bob Lazar, hire him to work for you on a highly classified project? If you were invited to a hearing before the Senate Armed Forces Committee to provide your best whistleblower testimonies, would Lazar be among them? Once the GAO investigated Lazar's history, as many here have already done, do you not accept that his testimony would be deemed ludicrous on its face even before any consideration of his "expunged records"? If you answer yes to either or all of these questions, this List has learned all it needs to know about your "innovative" methodology.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Jennings On C2C? - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:38:38 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 06:53:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings On C2C? - Boone You know I had to ask. Turn about's fair play. Think Jennings would appear on C2C and let George or Art or Linda Moulton-Howe have a go at him? Think Jennings would have the cajones to do it? Should we start a letter writing campaign? He could be grilled by Stan Friedman and Royce Myers. It'd be a better fight than the first Ali vs. Frazier.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:18:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 06:55:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Maccabee >From: Aaron LeClair <saucer.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:08:09 -0500 >Subject: Ufologists On SETI Program? >Alot of talk about the Jennings' program. I won't go into >everything I think about the program. A lot of it was mentioned >in a post I made several weeks ago. Speculation that became my >reality. Some thoughts that the show help inspire are as >followed: <snip> >It's funny. I have been ask throughout my life, if "I believe in >UFOs?" I get disturbed by this. I tell people when it comes to >profound matters, I use reasoning rather than faith. I guess >being a reasoner isn't in-lingo, so I will be thought as a >believer by people. Now, if I can only figure out what >conclusions I have that they think are beliefs. I am often asked, "Do you believe in UFOs?" to which I reply, "If you hold a pencil over the table and let it go do you
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Michael Salla & Me - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:44:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:00:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me - Maccabee >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST >Subject: Michael Salla & Me >Listerions et al: >At the risk of a flood of angry e-mails... >There has been a great deal of debate on UFO UpDates lately >about Exo-politics (the supposed study of how humanity interacts >with alien races), and one of its biggest proponents, Dr. >Michael Salla. >I've been one of the most vocal critics of his approach (or, as >he would put it, methodology) when dealing with the testimony of >alleged 'whistleblowers', who, for those who might not be aware, >are, for the most part, people who claim to have worked in some >capacity for the government and were made privy to the truth >about the UFO cover-up. Lately Dr. Salla has been touting Bob >Lazar as a reliable "witness". >In an effort to be fair, I figured the least I could do was take >a look at Dr. Salla's website: >http://www.exopolitics.org/ >and read through his various papers on the subject of exo- >polictics. Who knows, I thought? Perhaps there is more to this >than meets the eye. >I should have known better. >As it turns out, Dr. Salla is even less discriminating in his >vetting of "whistleblowers" than I had thought possible, given >his support for Bob Lazar. >In a paper with the grandiose title The Emergence of 'Track >Two' Galactic Diplomacy with Extraterrestrial Races "The Role >of Private Citizens & Groups in Establishing Communications & >Agreements with Extraterrestrial Races, Dr. Salla writes: >"There are dozens of extraterrestrial races with a variety of >motivations that are interacting with global humanity. These >extraterrestrial motivations span the spectrum from 'benevolent' >activities aimed at uplifting humanity towards a fuller <snip> >Wow. >Now, when someone makes a claim like that, the first thing I do >is look to see what his source is for the conclusions he has >drawn. >Dr. Salla's primary source? >William Cooper. >Wow, indeed. <Gag> Thanks for pointing out the Salla-Cooper 'Connection'. I had one direct and some indirect interactions with Cooper whose UFO related stories escalated from a sighting he claims to have had on a submarine to briefing CINCPAC (Commander In Chief of the Pacific forces) on UFOs to memorising numerous top secret UFO documents that he subsequently stole but, unfortunately, were burned when his house burned down (of something like that... its been a long time!) I recall Cooper telling me how the documents provided by Bill Moore were all fakes. He knew because he had seen the originals. He didn't have copies but he had memorized them. He then proceeded to tell me what the true documents said. I was mildly... to underemphasize my reaction... _amused_ to note that what he was saying was exactly what was written in some of Moore's documents. <LOL>/<ROFLMAO> That was in late 1986 or early 87. Cooper went on to much bigger and better things afterward, temporarily linking up with John Lear (who eventually realized that Cooper was a nut case). I have said before and will say again, exopolitics as an academic excerise is fuine by me. But it should be presented in terms of (a) assuming something about the aliens and maing it clear that this is an assumption, not an "actual fact" and (b) analyzing the situation if the aliens are as assumed. IMHO no one really knows what the aliens or 'other intelligences' (OI) are doing, where they came from, how they
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Frustration - Hicks From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:44:40 +0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:04:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Hicks >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:18:06 -0500 >Subject: Re: Frustration >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >>Subject: Frustration >She came away with two points that she hadn't been aware of. >First of all, she came away from the show with the understanding >that the Government hasn't been forthcoming with information and >did all it could to de-emphasize what was being seen in the >skies. Secondly, she had not been aware of the "good" witnesses >to UFO events, such as policemen and military pilots. Steve, Good point and this is the reason why I decided to produce the attached brief video - that being it is of a size that allows it to be emailed and has content that should be compelling enough to the uninitiated to get them to open their minds. I hope that at least some of you feel the same way and forward this video on to your friends. It can be downloaded from: http://members.iinet.net.au/~wlh/dp/DP%20Trailer%20sl.wmv and is 1.5mb for 5 minutes duration.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: Peter Jennings' Recent Show - Chace From: David Chace <davidwchace.nul> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 02:02:08 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:08:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Peter Jennings' Recent Show - Chace >From: Larry Bryant <overtci.nul> >To: errol.nul >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:48:30 -0500 >Subject: Peter Jennings' Recent Show >Sent to various researchers in ufology by Jim Klotz >----- >What the hell is the matter with you people? I have never >seen such bellyaching, whining, childish moaning about an >overwhelmingly PRO-UFO show by PRO-UFO types in my >life! >CUFOS got tremendous amounts of air time with great >presentations by Rodeghier, Jerry Clark, Swords, and footage >of Hynek who was in effect given the last word against the >AF's position. (If I was the AF I'd be angry about that!) I have to agree with what Jim Klotz has written here. The vast majority of the show was pro-ufology. It was saying that there is an interesting mystery here worth investigating. They presented an animation of the Mansfield, Ohio UFO-helicopter encounter of 1973, and there was (rightly so) no mention of Klass' contrived and convoluted meteor theory. The program made no attempt to offer bogus explanations for UFO sightings, but rather, tried to give the witnesses a fair hearing, and to present animations approved by the witnesses. CUFOS was given a lot of airtime and Hynek was made to seem (rightly so) almost a heroic figure. Bluebook was exposed for the mere PR effort that it was. Overall, the show was a step forward in media coverage of the UFO phenomenon. >Or do you seriously think that ABC should have given _zero_ >air time to skeptics and debunkers? Instead the pro-UFO >position got the majority of air-time and more importantly got >the last word on every major topic except Roswell - can't >ABC or Peter Jennings have a viewpoint? They don't like the >way Roswell has been "promoted" and are clearly turned off >by the hucksterism and stupid hoaxing, but you won't take >that message to heart. I think it's fair for Jennings to have a viewpoint. One thing he has said is that the way the government has dealt with the UFO phenomenon has undermined a lot of people's trust in our government. On that point I think most of us are in agreement. I think that by dismissing Roswell as they did, Jennings and the producers of the program were attempting to give the government and the Air Force the benefit of the doubt. "Okay, you guys say it was project Mogul. We accept that." Doing this allows them to call for research into UFO sightings without taking a position that is adversarial toward the government. Unfortunately, the way they did it means that another heroic figure in ufology (in my opinion) Stanton Friedman was dismissed as a mere "Roswell promoter." That was unfortunate and Stan has every right to be upset about it, as do the rest of us. >The abduction phenomenon was handled carefully and >abductees given the last word very convincingly denying the >McNally "dream" theory. ABC could have put nutballs up >there but they didn't, did ya think of that? There were just enough excerpts from the abductee interviews to counter the idea that sleep paralysis and false memory explains the whole abduction phenomenon. Also, to his credit, Peter Jennings stated clearly at the start of the segment that psychologists like McNally do not think the abductees are crazy. On the other hand, I am disappointed that they suppressed all of the evidence for the physical reality of the phenomenon. They did not show Budd=92s photos of unusual marks on the bodies of abductees, did not mention implants that have been recovered or shown up on X-rays, multiple-participant cases with correlated accounts from the different participants, health effects, etc=85 In fact, they got through the whole program without mentioning a single ground trace case, as best I can recall. However, I think I understand why they suppressed all this evidence. Basically, I think they did not want to scare their audience, and also, they did not want to get into too much hot water with the skeptics. So they left their viewers an "out." "For those who are uncomfortable believing that aliens can abduct you, don't worry because there are psychological explanations for this phenomenon." Or, as Stanton Friedman says regarding UFO skeptics, "What the public doesn't know, we're not going to tell them." In this case Jennings and colleagues did not feel they had sufficient reason to tell their viewers about evidence for the physical reality of UFO abductions. It was only a two-hour program, after all, and they only had time for a single segment on the abduction phenomenon, so I can understand the decision to avoid the controversies surrounding the interpretation of UFO abductions as physically real events. Do I agree with the decision? Well, like Hopkins I tend to feel that the UFO abduction phenomenon is possibly the most important thing that has ever happened, so if I could have, I would have let Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs, John Mack, the abductees (and whoever else was interviewed) make the case for abductions as physically real events. However, there would have been consequences for Jennings if he had gone there, and there were time limitations, so again, I have to say that I understand why they may have decided to suppress this information. I also understand why Budd
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Historical Canadian Documents On-Line From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 12:29:51 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:10:05 -0500 Subject: Historical Canadian Documents On-Line During my Hennessey research, I appealed for contact details for Joe Daniels, see: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/may/m22-008.shtml well, Joe is back on-line. His site is mostly concerned with official Canadian UFO documentation, which you can read at: http://ufo-joe.tripod.com I have already been in touch with him and he has been very helpful.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 'Mystery In The Corn Fields' Presentation From: Paul Anderson - CCCRN News <cccrnnews.nul> Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 14:10:17 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:15:51 -0500 Subject: 'Mystery In The Corn Fields' Presentation CCCRN NEWS E-News from the Canadian Crop Circle Research Network March 5, 2005 http://www.cccrn.ca _____________________________ For those in the Vancouver, BC area... (apologies for late notice) 'MYSTERY IN THE CORN FIELDS' PRESENTATION 'Mystery in the Corn Fields' Barclay Manor, Vancouver, BC March 7, 2005 Presentation by CCCRN founder and director Paul Anderson, on the unusual formations in cattle corn fields of the local Fraser Valley region of British Columbia and elsewhere in the country, which have become more numerous in recent years (including 2004), up to 300 feet long and in plants up to 10 feet tall, with unique physical anomalies and scientific evidence rarely seen anywhere before (with some specific details to be published in the pending BLT Research Team / CCCRN report); the CCCRN teams and others have been doing excellent work in the investigation of these formations. Part of an on-going lecture series providing a synopsis of CCCRN's investigations of crop circle formations in the prairies and across the country, with exclusive information and reports. CCCRN gives regular presentations for the Monday Night Free Lectures at Barclay Manor, a beautiful heritage house in the heart of Vancouver's West End (part of the West End Community Centre). 1447 Barclay Street, Vancouver, BC 7:30 pm - 9:30 pm Admission: free (with $1.00 Community Centre single event membership) Please call 604.257.8333 to pre-register For further information: 604.731.8522 (CCCRN), 604.257.8338 (BM) _____________________________ 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 projects and events, sent free to your e-mail
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 Re: The Hums - Barker From: Darryl Barker <admin.nul> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 17:32:27 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:21:40 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hums - Barker >From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:14:55 -0700 >Subject: The Hums >Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. >Source: Science Frontiers, No. 158, Mar-Apr, 2005, p. 3 >http://www.science-frontiers.com >Geophysics >Hum Update >General Observations >Unexplained hums afflict a small proportion of populations in >certain spots around the globe. Two pertinent, recent Science >Frontiers items are: SF#88 (the Taos, New Mexico, hum) and >SF#138 (the Kokomo, Indiana, hum). <snip> This is my first post to UpDates, so please forgive my formatting errors. On the day before one of the recent U.S. Presidential debates held at Washington University (my employer) in St. Louis, Missouri, I experienced something I've never felt before. I was in a university building setting up video equipment for a visiting lecturer and abruptly, my eardrums started buzzing like something was shooting through my skull. It was the most intense vibration I've ever felt that had no apparent source of origin. It was not the typical high-frequency burst of sound often heard in the ear. This was a low, rumbling, wake-the-hell-up kind of sound. Outside my building were dozens of television crews and their microwave dish-laden production vehicles. The media was in full force thanks to the "debate". I attributed what I felt to a microwave burst, possibly from a nearby dish, swinging through the building. I have no idea of course, what really caused it. Anyone have any idea if a broadcast up-link dish could have done this? If not, the "hum" I felt is unexplained. By the way, I'll say greetings to everyone on this List. I've kept my opinion to my self on the stuff that was being said about the Jennings special. Now that things have cooled off, maybe I'll chip in my 2 cents worth at a later date. I helped the Jennings production team with the Illinois police sighting, and I can tell you from personal experience, it is an open case, a very open case.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 6 UFO Interview On UK Radio From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:39:13 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:28:00 -0500 Subject: UFO Interview On UK Radio I'll be a guest on James Whale's show on the Talk Sport radio station this Monday night, between around 11pm and 1am. I'll be discussing the latest news in ufology, taking questions from callers and giving listeners the chance to relate details of any UFO sightings they may have had. I'll be discussing Bryan Appleyard's new book, Aliens: Why They Are Here, and the inclusion of UFOs on the agenda at this year's Newcastle Science Festival - separate post to follow. Talk Sport broadcasts at 1089/1053am. You can listen online at the following URL: http://www.talksport.net/listen
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Upcoming UFO Hoax? From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:33:46 -0500 Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? I received this message via another mailing List. What to make of it, I am unsure. I forward it exactly as received. Geoff Richardson http://www.thewhyfiles.net ----- THE GREAT INTERNET UFO HOAX. http://img45.exs.cx/img45/1214/luemap9hb.jpg Description: On Saturday, March 19, Many people on the internet will hoax the world with the biggest mass UFO sighting in years. The craft will zoom around the United States and the world according to the diagram in the link. ALL TIMES ARE PM UNLESS NOTED NOTE TO ALL: YOU CANNOT GET IN TROUBLE FOR REPORTING THIS TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING. YOU HAVE MY 100% GURANTEE. ALSO ALL REPORTS CAN BE MADE ANONYMOUSLY What the **** do I report seeing? http://img58.exs.cx/img58/8521/ufodiagram8bh.jpg The above is a rough estimate of what you saw - a craft with 4 lights, 2 of which blinked several colors (42). IT IS BY NO MEANS A GUIDELINE. The cool thing about UFO sightings is, everyone who sees one has a different interpretation of it. Did the craft slow to almost a dead stop when it was only a mile away from you, only to zoom across the sky faster than any aircraft you've ever seen? Up to you. Anothing detail to add to your report is that you heard the craft making a "loooooooooooooooooo" sound as it zoomed away from you. How is this going to happen? Well, it's simple, really, but we need your help! The craft described above will make it's way around the United States and the world as shown in the diagram in the link. Simply report your sighting as happening at APPROXIMATELY (not exactly) the appropriate time, and that's it. Your report will sound more serious if you sound a little 'shaken up' by the whole incident. The best time to call is within a half hour of your sighting, but if you cannot call until the next day, call anyway, a late call is better than
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Newcastle Science Festival UFO Lecture - Pope From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:30:06 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:34:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Newcastle Science Festival UFO Lecture - Pope I'll be speaking next Saturday at the Newcastle Science Festival, which forms part of National Science Week: http://www.newcastlesciencefestival.co.uk/ http://www.newcastlesciencefestival.co.uk/eventdetail.asp?e=49 As I've commented previously, though science and ufology can be uneasy bedfellows, I believe the relationship is worth cultivating. Over the last year or so I've been active on this front, debating the subject at the Science Museum's new Dana Centre, lecturing at the Cheltenham Festival of Science and appearing on The Naked Scientists - a science-based internet radio show with close links to the University of Cambridge.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Jerry Washington Passes - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 12:55:00 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:37:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Jerry Washington Passes - Ledger UFO UpDates - Toronto wrote: >From: Anne Macfie >Jarrett Washington Dies On March 1 >A former State Director of the Kentucky MUFON chapter, Jarrett >Washington, has passed away in his hometown of Louisville. >Originally from Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Jerry was the son of an >Atomic Energy Commission administrator and grew up among the >families of Atomic City s scientists and bureaucrats. The >extraordinary musical talent he demonstrated as a preschooler >led to a precocious life of training and competition as a child >prodigy pianist. This saddens me. Jerry and I exchanged emails on more than a few occasions up until a year or so ago. I assume he was too occupied with his career and most likely his illness to continue his submissions to the List. I found Jerry grounded and sensible in this field. His own UFO experience was certainly anomalous and one you could get your teeth into. His encounter was up-close and personal. I wasn't aware of Jerry's struggle with severe back pain-a truly
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: The Death Of Ufology - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 11:08:07 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:39:39 -0500 Subject: Re: The Death Of Ufology - Clark >From: Norio Hayakawa <Groom51S4.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 18:32:49 EST >Subject: The Death Of Ufology >The Death Of Ufology >by Norio Hayakawa >I hear from some UFO-believing circles that with the dismal >effect of the much anticipated but overwhelmingly disappointing >Peter Jennings's recent UFO Special, that Ufology seems to be >going nowhere or worse yet, is even dead. This is silly on so many levels that it is not worth anybody's time and effort to refute. Outbursts like these amount to no more than debunkers' statements of faith. Touching in their ways - convictions this true and immune to actual evidence, logic, and good sense are noteworthy in this cynical age - but in all other ways useless and pointless. A true psychosocial ufology, in otherwords not pelicanism by another name, would examine why otherwise intelligent people persist in beliefs like these. As it is, this is no more than one more sorry moment in the long, curious history of the disbelief tradition. I'm snipping the rest. Anybody who missed it the first time and wants to read it can, of course, go to the archives. Of course, it may not be worth the trouble because we've all heard it again and again and again and again and again and again in the fashion of a broken record that annoyingly plays forever.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Frustration - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 13:11:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:44:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Ledger >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:29:54 -0600 >Subject: Re: Frustration >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >>Subject: Frustration >>Hello fellow Listerions, >>Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings >>special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. >>He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History >>and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last >>Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in >>regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. >>Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >>frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >>years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >>conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >>Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. ><snip> >You remember what it was like. If 'lead' gets shot down, the >rest of the flight is talking fire, and the lift has to be made, >regardless... you don't arbitrarily autorotate to what you can >only hope will be neutral ground, or bug out on your own. >Forgetting you piss 'Trail' off, it makes it too hard for the >gun platoon to provide the cover that they're there for. Send >Medivac back for 'lead', and drive on. <snip> >Lead will just beat us to the club. Right on, Al. Good analogy. The only important ones are the ones you walk away from. And with your head up. Come on, Josh, pull it out. Jim Klotz is right. We got the last word at least and from an
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: The Death Of Ufology - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 14:03:12 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:57:52 -0500 Subject: Re: The Death Of Ufology - Ledger >From: Norio Hayakawa <Groom51S4.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 18:32:49 EST >Subject: The Death Of Ufology >The Death Of Ufology >by Norio Hayakawa >I hear from some UFO-believing circles that with the dismal >effect of the much anticipated but overwhelmingly disappointing >Peter Jennings's recent UFO Special, that Ufology seems to be >going nowhere or worse yet, is even dead. <snip> You don't speak for me Norio, nor do you know anything about my beliefs. The nutball comments should have been preceeded by the following - right off the top of his website: "The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world, that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle....." That an upgrade from What's good for General Motors is good for America? "We support the continual existence and operations programs of vital military complexes, such as the operating location near Groom Lake, Nevada, America's premier military Research and Development Test Base." Good for you, but who the heck cares whether you support this or not? Stop whinning about it. Talk about doing a 180.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 18:29:42 +0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:01:06 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:01:13 -1000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:02:09 -0400 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >>>The evidence may be inconclusive for that, but that >>>doesn't mean he lied in 1982 about being a physicist. You are >>>making some incorrect assumptions here based on your >>>interpretation of the validity of the 1989 claims. >>Wrong again. I checked and double checked his background. He was >>lying through his teeth. >I'll concede that there are things about Lazar's background that >don't check out. You've arrived at a clear conclusion, while I >say we can't conclude too much since there is so much evidence >that is missing. Despite the murky nature of his background, he >still did have a W-2 that was traced to Naval Intelligence in >Maryland, that shows he was more than just a con man fooliing >contractors at the Los Alamos Meson Facility. It's hard evidence >supporting his claim that he worked at S4 - a known location for >waived Special Access Programs run by the US Navy. That's an >important clue! >Michael Salla I have heard this W-2 claim once too often now to remain silent. Lazar definitely is a liar and a fraud, and your continued defense of and apologies for him and several other clearly fraudulent manure spreaders in the UFO field tell me all I need to know about your total lack of critical standards. Of course, I am making the dubious assumption that your posts to this List are sincere and well-intended in the first place. I have lived in Washington, D.C., and nearby Maryland for close to 50 years. Gene Huff, Lazar's flack, when I requested it sent me a copy of this W-2 form. The zip code it contained was non- existent, then or ever. The Navy organization name printed on it was non-existent. I worked for many years for Congressional Information Services and was well-acquainted with Government agency names, locations, etc. The W-2 document was an obvious fake. How tiresome it is that people want to believe anything emanating from such liars and frauds. Therein lies one of the most serious problems in ufology; a total lack of critical
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Indie Filmmakers Detained at Area 51 - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 13:50:42 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:08:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Indie Filmmakers Detained at Area 51 - Kimball >Source: eMediaWire.Com >http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/3/emw214149.htm >03-03-05 >Indie Filmmakers Detained At Area 51 <snip> >Two filmmakers, researching for their movie about extra >terrestrials, were detained over the weekend by government >agents outside the infamous government facility known as Area >51. This whole story strikes me as nothing more than a publicity stunt by the filmmakers in advance of the release of their film. I only wish I had thought of it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe Argentina From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:21:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:19:47 -0500 Subject: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe Argentina INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 6, 2005 Source: http://www.infobae.com/notas/nota.php?Idx=170363&IdxSeccion=100439# Date: 03.04.05 A Mysterious Character Harasses Santa Fe Residents Local residents say it jumps from house to house, is dressed in black and has red eyes. After hundreds of complaints, police is looking for it. Listen to the Sheriff's story on Radio 10. Santa Fe is jumping. Residents of the southern area are frightened by the appearance of a strange entity they've dubbed "the rooftop madman" and who - according to their accounts - leaps from roof to roof engaging in acrobatics. Witness claim it stands two meters tall, is entirely clad in black and wears a balaclava; it sports a cape and its eyes shine red according to the information received by researchers. This character is able to cross the streets by leaping from one rooftop to the next, taking acrobatic leaps that can be of up to five meters high and ten meters long. "He looks like the cat man," say some locals. "His outline is barely visible, his figure. He never showed his face, but they say they've seen his eyes and that they have a reddish cast." In an interview with Radio 10, Sheriff Gabriel Legstra acknowledged that "there is a widespread psychosis. In recent days we have received hundred of reports at our radio command center." "On Tuesday I dispatched 18 units to assuage people's fears. But ultimately there is no other crime than tresspassing here. The character goes from one roof to the next, appears inside a house, has pressed his face against a window but hasn't attacked anyone." The psychosis is growing among residents of southern Santa Fe in spite of having never been attacked. Police confirm that in recent days calls have multiplied, reporting a man leaping from one rooftop to the next "like a madman". According to Diario La Capital, he first appeared in Barrio Centenario, only meters from the Colon Stadium, but they say he was seen closer to town, such as in El Arenal, San Lorenzo, Chalet and Santa Rosa de Lima. This is the area most affected by the 2003 floods. In any event, despite the intense combing of the area by dozens of officers, police were unable to find the character, but advised the public to remain calm, since there are reports within the force that some local residents directly tried to shoot the entity to death. Mystery grew when several witnesses said that "bullets won't do anything to it. Its eyes gleam red when it it mocks those who try to hunt it." A resident of El Arenal claimed having fired 17 times against it without bullets having the least effect, while the ghost did nothing but provoke it, howl like a beast or cry like a child, making dance steps on the rooftops over which it treads like a cat. "People are afraid of being attacked, beaten and robbed by this man. They fear he will break into their property and are defending themselves," say those in Regional Unit 1 who in turn describe the locals as "expectant and armed with knives and sticks." Most locals describe a being that appears to have sprung froma comic book: large in stature, who not only wanders the rooftops but also crosses the streets in a single bound and can climb smooth walls up to six meters high. "It's the Devil," say the bolder or more imaginative ones. Sheriff Legstra said that a woman told him that "the entity pointed at her with its finger and left her paralyzed." Another local woman said that last Monday, during an intense rain, the phantom managed to jam the car doors of a vehicle with 7 passengers aboard, who were armed and ready to hunt it down in spite of police warnings. Others decided to stand guard 24 hours by the doors to their homes, armed and vigilant. But it has not been possible to capture it up to now. Residents of the southern section interrutped traffic, claiming
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Puerto Rico's Route 303 Proclaimed ET Highway From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:21:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:23:44 -0500 Subject: Puerto Rico's Route 303 Proclaimed ET Highway INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 6, 2005 Source: Puerto RIco Research Group (PRRG) Date: March 5, 2005 PUERTO RICO: Route 303 Proclaimed "Extraterrestrial Highway" [Since UFO activity began in earnest in Southwestern Puerto Rico in 1987 with the debate of the alleged UFO base under Laguna Cartagena, Route 303 has played a significant role as a site for UFO sightings and alleged alien abductions. After many years of efforts, members of PRRG have managed to secure recognition for this two-lane highway as an "Extraterrestrial Highway". The following communiqu=E9 was received earlier today from Jos=E9 Mart=EDnez Echevarr=EDa of PRRG]: Greetings to all. We are pleased to announce the news that PR Route 303, running from Lajas to Cabo Rojo, has been proclaimed an Extraterrestrial Highway. This highway is known to many researchers in Puerto Rico for the number of accounts it has yielded, ranging from UFO sightings to alien encounters. It is a lonely road lacking any kind of electric lighting and the site where the notorious Lajas Aerostat (radar balloon) is located, allegedly to intercept the entry of narcotics into the island, although no public information or statement about the balloon's true purpose has ever been provided. The Mayor of the city of Lajas has been very concerned due to the fact that this military radar facility has never given him any information whatsoever regarding the capture or seizure of drugs in the area. This effort, initiated by the PUERTO RICAN RESEARCH GROUP, represents the start of a world-class distinction for a road that was famous for the nocturnal vigils that took place along it and which ended with the UFO camp-outs headed by Prof. Reinaldo Rios. The celebration will be held in Monte Indio, Sierra Bermeja, Route 303, Km 7 Hm 8 in the city of Lajas on Saturday, April 9, 2005 from 6:00 pm onward. Mayor Marcos Irizarry will be invited to present said official document, as he is the signer of the proclamation. There will be festivities and everyone is invited to attend. The highway shall be marked with the natural emblem symbolizing this achievement. WILLIE DURAND URBINA (DIRECTOR) REINALDO RIOS AYALA (PANELIST) JOSE MARTINEZ ECHEVARRIA (FIELD RESEARCHER) JUAN A LOPEZ AGOSTO (LOGISTICS CONSULTANT) WILFREDO VELEZ (ELECTRICAL ENGINEER) THOMAS BUERGO CAEZ (CHEMICAL ENGINEER) BENNY ROLDAN (PARANORMAL CONSULTANT) WHIGNBERTO CARDONA (FIELD RESEARCHER) CARMEN MARTINEZ (PARANORMAL CONSULTANT)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:21 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:28:13 -0500 Subject: Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:26:22 -1000 >Subject: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams >Aloha List members, >I am very concerned by a message I just received from James >Gilliland concerning the lack of coverage of Mt Adams, >Washington, UFO sightings. James and ECETI (www.eceti.org) have >an impressive database of sightings from a range of witnesses >yet he claims these are not included in the National UFO >Reporting Center database. As I'm sure members are aware, James >is a strong supporter of the ETH and has had numerous witnesses >confirm the sightings there. He has an impressive online >collection of videos and photos supporting the UFO sightings. He >also claims that the UFOs respond to communications from >observers which tends to support the ETH. James is concerned >that this may be part of an ongoing campaign to coverup the >extensive sightings at Mt Adams, and more disturbingly discredit >his broader claims concerning the ETH. <snip> >Top physicists and UFO researchers have visited the Gilliland >Ranch and have personally seen the ships and have gone on >record. Astrophysicists, Nuclear Physicists, Biophysicists, Air >Force design engineers, traffic control people and others with >degrees far surpassing Peters education. We are recieving many >complaints from people who have had legitamate sightings that >were ridiculed when trying to give a report. Could we have the names of the top physicists, UFO researchers, Astrophysicists, Nuclear Physicists, Biophysicists, Air Force Design Engineers, and "Traffic Control people" (whatever that means) and in particular those that have gone on the record? Hello Dr. Salla, Gilliland is not seeing UFOs. His web site completely explains what the things he shows are. Emissaries from the Star Brotherhood have to get here somehow. How you could confuse his "Sattva Sanctuary" beam ships, plasma ships, energy vortexes, orbs, Mary energy beams, and Mother ships for Unidentified objects is a mystery to me. Consider the fact that Gilliland communicates with these craft, and beings. Certainly if they are on speaking terms, they are not unidentified...but he actually identifies them at any rate. No UFOs there. And in case any of you out there might claim that his aforementioned craft are merely birds, lens flares, distant campers or clouds should stop worrying and love them, for they are surely "da bomb". Dr. Salla, the NUFORC is a place for people to report things they cannot identify. Mr. Gilliland has his sightings well quantified, identified, categorized, and probably makes a tidy sum convincing his "Sanctuary" visitors that these things are what he says they are. Sample call to NUFORC... NUFORC: Hello, NUFORC. Caller: Hi, I wanted to report an energy vortex. NUFORC: Uhh, ok. An energy vortex. Where are you located? Caller: The Sattva Sanctuary near Mt. Adams. We were channeling Melia from Orion and the vortex just opened up before us. NUFORC: Ok. What did this look like? Caller: Well, it looked like a big cloud over the mountain. NUFORC: I see. What led you to conclude that this was an energy vortex? Caller: James told us. NUFORC: What happened when the vortex appeared? Caller: We were filled with awe that Melia would confirm her presence, and we basked in the glow of her presence. NUFORC: Well, do you think it could have been a cloud? Caller: I don't think. I know what it was. It was Melia from Orion opening an energy vortex. NUFORC: May I ask why you are calling the National Unidentified Flying Object Reporting Center if you already know what it is that you saw? Caller: Well, the newspaper wont print the story, Art Bell said we were too "last week", Peter Jennings just laughed, and the other orb sites don't want the competition. Who else could we call? NUFORC: Yes, well. Your report is in our "HSART" file, and thank you for calling. (HSART...Handle Simply As Reverse Text) Do you see the point? Gilliland's site is full of photos of birds, lens and light anomalies that are easily duplicated, terminology that is designed to sucker people into spending money, and his entire enterprise appears to be less than honest in presentation and interpretation. Gilliland is not a researcher. He's a pundit, and a pseudo- minister of a non-church. Pollute any serious UFO database with this? Please. Point me to the Gilliland photo that convinces you, and I'll show you how it was done. ANY of them. The "Cylinder ship" image is my favorite. Not only does Gilliland confuse a bird for his cylinder ship, but he completely ignores the second "cylinder ship" in the lower right corner of the image. Probably because it doesn't look as cool. Dr. Salla, you need to step away from your keyboard, and stop surfing the web for proof of the ETH. You will not find it there. Take a camera and a vacation, and watch the skies. The phosphor dots are getting to you, methinks. Don't feel bad. It happens to many of us computer junkies. Myopic vision (shortsightedness), narrowed viewpoint (tunnelvision), and inability to discern fact from fiction (lack of focus) are typical ailments of those that spend too much time in from of the neo- "glass teat". Wean thyself. Take a walk. Or better yet...take a hike. Don't forget your camera.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 The UFO Evidence Volume II From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:33:57 -0500 Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II Dear Fellow Listers, I wanted to share my review of a book I just received last week. This book is incredible! This book has UFO sightings, for over 30 years all in one volume. I have not been able to put the book down for me it is the bible for Ufology. The UFO EVidence, Volume II A Thirty-Year Report, by Richard H. Hall is laid out so that the sightings are first listed chronology, then by the type of witness (i.e. Military, Police, Pilots)and the rest of the chapters are listed by types of special evidence (i.e. Radar, EM effects, animal reactions and more). In the index, there is also a section so that you can find a UFO sighting by geographic location. I first thought this was going to get confusing but instead it was actually much easier to research sightings using this type of setup. If I was to make a data base, it would be set up exactly as Dick Hall has done. This book should be in every Ufologist's home, it is an easy read as well as easy to cross reference each case! In addition to adding it to your home, we should all persuade our local libraries to carry it. Anyone that has an interest in the UFO field from the arm chair researcher, student, lay person or the serious scientist should read this. My cost for the book and shipping was under $60.00 - less than $2.00 for a year of sightings. This is a bargain and the best part, you have all the sightings and information for 30 years in one place and easy to find. Where to order: Scarecrow Press, Inc. 4720 Boston Way Lanham, Maryland 20706 1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 http://www.scarecrowpress.com/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Reflections On Today's Ufology - Owens From: Steve Owens <p944dc.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 16:07:54 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:37:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Reflections On Today's Ufology - Owens >From: Virgilio Sanchez-Ocejo <ufomiami.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:56:44 -0500 >Subject: Reflections On Today's Ufology >4) the hobbyists: They have vivid interest in the UFO problem >which brings excitement to their boring lives. I have a problem with this. UFO is a "hobby" to me, but I do not find my life boring or in need of excitement. Why are you using language that will be seen as insulting by most of us that buy the books and use the materials serious Ufologists produce? >7) the skeptic: Their philosophy is simple; there is no such >thing as UFOs. They are the only well organized under CSICOP. Again, why the insult? Why can't a person require some indication of reality before believing para normal or super natural assertions? This is not a religion to be taken on faith.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:56:35 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:41:52 -0500 Subject: Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:26:22 -1000 >Subject: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams <snip> >I am very concerned by a message I just received from James >Gilliland concerning the lack of coverage of Mt Adams, >Washington, UFO sightings. James and ECETI (www.eceti.org) have >an impressive database of sightings from a range of witnesses >yet he claims these are not included in the National UFO >Reporting Center database. As I'm sure members are aware, James >is a strong supporter of the ETH and has had numerous witnesses >confirm the sightings there. He has an impressive online >collection of videos and photos supporting the UFO sightings. He >also claims that the UFOs respond to communications from >observers which tends to support the ETH. James is concerned >that this may be part of an ongoing campaign to coverup the >extensive sightings at Mt Adams, and more disturbingly discredit >his broader claims concerning the ETH. >If James is correct, this is certainly a cause for major concern >over the objectivity of cases included in the National UFO >Reporting Center database. Since this forum prides itself on >hard evidence, I am expressing my concern at what may be >occuring here in what is clearly some excellent hard evidence >that may be subject to some exclusion process from a prominent >UFO database. There's a line... "part of an ongoing campaign to coverup... and discredit" "cause for major concern over the objectivity" "subject to some exclusion process" So now Peter Davenport and the NUFORC are part of the cover-up? The line for me comes when someone moves into this kind of territory. I'm no fan of censorship, and I know this is EBK's List, but I call upon Errol to ban Dr. Salla from the List until he has apologised for impugning, even by implication, the efforts and character of Peter Davenport and the NUFORC, which, lest Dr. Salla try to wriggle out of responsibility for what he wrote, is exactly what he did. This isn't about methodologies, or exo-politics, or whistleblowers. I don't agree with Dr. Salla on anything, it seems, but I respect his right to espouse his views, even as I try to counter them with mine. Let the chips fall where they will. But this? This isn't about any of that - it's about common decency, common sense, and the common good. If we don't call people to account for these kinds of accusations, where will it stop, and who will be next? Best regards,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: The Phoenix Lights Documentary - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:46:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:45:03 -0500 Subject: Re: The Phoenix Lights Documentary - Maccabee >From: Dr. Lynne Kitei <drlynne.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 12:34:14 -0700 >Subject: The Phoenix Lights Documentary >Thought you might be interested in attending our Exclusive World >Premier of The Phoenix Lights Documentary on Sunday, March 13 at >the Harkins Shea 14 Theater [see below]. Also attached is the >Premier Poster and Press release. Please take a peek at the two >minute movie trailer on www.thephoenixlights.net. >Would love to have you join us at the Premier and appreciate any >assistance in getting the word out. It should be an exciting and >groundbreaking event for all. >Hope to see you there! >Dr. Lynne ----- >The Phoenix Lights Documentary will hold its World Premiere on >March 13, 2005 the 8th anniversary of the historic Arizona >unexplained mass sighting at Harkins Shea 14 Movie Theater, 7354 >E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85260 [Scottsdale Road and Shea >Blvd.] >This groundbreaking Documentary, based on the bestselling book, >"The Phoenix Lights...A Skeptic's Discovery that We Are Not >Alone", stars Arizona's own eyewitnesses, military, former >Phoenix Vice Mayor, University based scientists and experts in >the field. >It is produced by local physician and author, Lynne D. Kitei, >M.D. in collaboration with Steve Lantz Productions. >Tentative times for the feature length screenings are : >1 p.m., 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Sunday, March 13. I have watched the trailer and it is clear that they are considering both the 8:30 triangle flyover and the 10 PM video lights as UFOs. Although only merited a brief mentioned in her book (in Chapter 9) the fact is that I spent about two dozen hours talking with her and as many email exchanges, plus two visits to her house in Phoenix and to the houses of the main 10 PM video witnesses. I also spent probably several hundred hours doing photo and geographical analysis to produce the paper I have posted at my web site on just the 10 PM lights. http://brumac.8k.com/phoenixlights1.html Of course, I sent the original version of that paper to her and to the other witnesses so they are aware of the results of my triangulation of the lights (over 60 miles away). She did have at least one definite UFO sighting on Feb 6, 1995. She writes about that in her book. However, she has not done it justice. My analysis of her photos led the two of us on a trail of photography-driven history of the sighting and we arrived at a conclusion about what really happened that night which is really amazing. However, she has been reluctant to talk about it so I have said nothing. Her book is quite interesting as an overview of the subject and the controversy over the March 13, 1997 and other "Phoenix Lights" sightings. However, from my point of view the most important fact about the 1997 sighting is that it caused her to: (a) go back and revisit the photos from the 1995 sighting
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Lazar Redux - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:51:35 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:46:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Lazar Redux - Friedman >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:46:16 -0500 >Subject: Re: Lazar Redux >>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:16:24 -0600 >>Subject: Lazar Redux [was: UFO Whistleblowers...] ><snip> >>Michael, "brothel-physicist-brothel", but I see these career >>options advertised in "physics today" all the time!, >>right next to obituaries. >>Get serious! >There are many good reasons to question Bob Lazar's claims, but >I think it's a bit self-serving to continually point to his >involvement with a "brothel". I guess it's more important that >we spend time defining (and in turn criticising) the charactor >of people, rather than deal with the claims they are making. >Some very good scientists have had the worst habits in the >world, and many are not the type of people that you'd want to >marry your daughter (should you have one). To me the important point about the brothel is the difficulty of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Ufological Mess - Randle From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 09:05:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Randle >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST >Subject: Ufological Mess >Given what I have read here recently, and given the Peter >Jennings Special, it seems to me that Ufology, as we call it, is >in a mess. We agree on almost nothing, we get caught up in >personal fights that don't advance the cause, and we spend half >our time defending ourselves from assaults by our friends and >foes. Worse still, we never seem to learn our lessons. We make >the same mistakes over and over and then blame the government >for being too clever for us. > >Take the recent debate between Michael Salla and Paul Kimball. >While I find it refreshing because it hasn't descended into name >calling, it does demonstrate part of the problem. Here, I fall >on the side of Kimball. His opinions and information more >closely follows my line of thinking about Lazar and other >matters than does that of Salla. >Let's look at this. At one point Salla uses the SOM 1-01 as >proof that Lazar might be an authentic witness (Yes, I know >proof is too strong a word here, but it makes a point.) Kimball >suggests that using MJ-12 documents to bolster a point makes the >argument weak since there is controversy around the authenticity >of MJ-12 generally and the SOM 1-01 specifically. >Salla points out that Robert Woods believes the document to be >authentic - but doesn't mention that the man who received it, >Don Berliner, believes it to be a hoax. In fact, a careful >review of the SOM 1-01 by several prominent UFO researchers >including Mark Rodeghier, and a review by former military men >who worked with classified documents, also believe it to be a >hoax. The anachronisms also suggest hoax. Reasonable people, I >believe, can differ on their opinions about this. The one >question that has not been satisfactorily answered is >provenance. Just where did this document originate? > >We can ask the same, important question of the original MJ-12 >documents. We know that Bill Moore "retyped" the Aquarius Telex >because, according to him, the original was such a poor copy >that he needed to do that for clarity. The problem is that we >don't have an original to compare with the retyped version so we >have a document that is without provenance and that even Moore >now suggests is a hoax. Few researchers accept the Aquarius >Telex as authentic. <snip> I agree with much of what Kevin has said above. With regard to MJ-12 documents, Peter Tytell and the ranks given in the EBE, I would refer interested Listers to my two detailed articles on my website at: http://www.stantonfriedman.com Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, Wisconsin. Perhaps I missed it, but has the identity of Deep Throat yet been
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Lazar Redux - Scheldroup From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:03:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 09:08:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Lazar Redux - Scheldroup >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:46:16 -0500 >Subject: Re: Lazar Redux >>From: John Scheldroup <jschel.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:16:24 -0600 >>Subject: Lazar Redux [was: UFO Whistleblowers...] ><snip> >>Michael, "brothel-physicist-brothel", but I see these career >>options advertised in "physics today" all the time!, >>right next to obituaries. >>Get serious! >There are many good reasons to question Bob Lazar's claims, but >I think it's a bit self-serving to continually point to his >involvement with a "brothel". I guess it's more important that >we spend time defining (and in turn criticising) the charactor >of people, rather than deal with the claims they are making. >Some very good scientists have had the worst habits in the >world, and many are not the type of people that you'd want to >marry your daughter (should you have one). <chuckle There is a Norwegian Lutheran living in the upper Midwest who was brought up with parents from the old school, still is wondering what kind of souvenirs he gives away at the ranch
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 7 Re: Ufological Mess - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 23:20:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 09:12:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Sandow >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST >Subject: Ufological Mess >Which sort of leads to "dueling" witnesses. Stan and I disagreed >over the importance of the tales told by Gerald Anderson and >Frank Kaufmann. I believed Anderson, at first, but then found so >many holes in what he said and the evidence he offered that it >was clear to me that Anderson was lying. He faked a telephone >bill to make me look bad, his diary was in disagreement with >that of Ruth Barnett (for which we did have provenance), and he >made claims about his background that were found to be untrue. >He changed his story, moved the crash site around the Plains, >and could offer nothing in the way of corroboration that was >independent. Stan, I think, still believes some of Anderson's >nonsense. >On the other hand, Stan did not believe Frank Kaufmann, while I >did. We finally learned that Kaufmann was no more reliable than >Anderson and while Kaufmann didn't admit to lying, in so many >words, it is obvious that he was. >So, the united front we could have maintained was divided by >individuals who knew nothing other than how to spin a good tale. >We should have been more careful in our review of the >testimonies, but we all got caught up in what Karl Pflock >labeled as a will to believe. We ignored red flags and argued >for the authenticity of our witness and against that of the >other. In the end, we both were wrong and neither witness was of >value=E2=80=A6 Here's something very rare on this List (and, I'm afraid, in life generally) - someone who's not afraid to admit a mistake. Bravo for Kevin, who's always been admirable in this way. I'm sure I'm also not alone when I say I'm glad he's back safely from Iraq.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: UFO Rip-Off - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 00:12:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:36:09 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Rip-Off - Maccabee >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:21:04 EST >Subject: UFO Rip-Off >I'm not one for twisting the knife or I-told-you-so's. >But this time I will. >Still smarting and licking wounds from that hack job Jennings >did on Ufology? >Don't say I didn't warn you, but yeah I forgot, when I did warn >you I was 'paranoid'. >I don't know why, after 40+ years of the press treating >researchers, abductees, witnesses, whistleblowers like crap, you >guys thought that this one time it would be any different. <snip> >I have to admit I too had big expectations but caught on after a >few outpoints arose. It goes back to something that came up >years ago when I was interviewing a few folks who knew the >'inside' as to why the press is outside of the UFO fare. >Money. >Plain and simple. From what they told me, the problem with UFOs >is that too many common folk got the best stories and research >that the big boys missed or let slip by. Especially Roswell. >Doing the real on the ground research threw a big monkey wrench >into the works of the industrialists who figured they'd get the >glory but got caught unawares when regular folks, research pros, >journalists didn't hesistate to dig where the digging was good. >Now they can't capitalize on it because the copyrights, >trademarks are sewed up amongst a myriad of people and can't be >owned unless they're run into bankruptcy. ( Run a Ufology person >into bankruptcy? Dash the thought!) >Yep, money, not to forget glory! >Do you have any idea what would happen if just one smidgen of >disclosure came from the Feds? Guys like Friedman and Maccabee >and Hopkins etc. would suddenly become 'Knights of the Day' and >tons of money would flow their way. Don't worry. Never happen. If the Fed's owned-up, even a little bit, the press would start running around like dogs treeing a cat. "Why weren't we told about this? Who knew what when where why how and why didn't you tell me first!" they would bellow. Money would flow to people who could do something with the information (assuming something can be done with it) like giant industrial organizations. The people who have been slogging it out in the ditches with the data would be shuffled to th back of the crowd and be soon forgotten. Who wouldn't be forgotten? The press would have a field day with all the nuts and wackos with the most bizarre stories (aliens ate my grandmother, the bodysnatchers work out of Vegas (where everything stays), my sister married a 9 foot praying-mantis-type, etc.) Weekly Word News would become the New York Times of Ufology.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Strip Mining On Mars? From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:40:01 -0500 Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? Hi List, I noticed this image at MSSS' MOC Gallery. It was dated January of this year... http://tinyurl.com/6sqvg And I found it strikingly similar to images I saw here: http://tinyurl.com/639eb and here: http://tinyurl.com/5ylxg I'm sure the scale is off, or the scene on Mars is easily explainable. But it sure took me by surprise on first glance.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: Michael Salla & Me - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 05:48:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:49:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me - Lehmberg >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 11:59:56 -0500 >Subject: Re: Michael Salla & Me >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:17:24 EST >>Subject: Michael Salla & Me >>Dr. Salla's primary source? >>William Cooper. ><snip> >>So, what did the "controversial Cooper" himself have to say - >>because surely not even Dr. Salla believes that the government >>could put words into Cooper's mouth? >>All sorts of things, as it turns out. >I heard Cooper speak at Hollywood High School in Los Angeles in >1989. He was unforgettable. >He said that aliens forced the United States to intervene on the >communist side in the civil war that followed the Russian >revolution. This is interesting for two reasons. First, the US >actually intervened against the communists. Second, Cooper had >earlier said that the aliens arrived on earth in 1947. The >Russian revolution was in 1917. >Cooper also said the aliens were responsible for gun control. >Almost everybody in the audience cheered. I knew then that his >real agenda - and the reason for much of his appeal - had >nothing to do with UFOs. He was a right-wing nut, as he later >showed beyond dispute. Once again I must rise up to shake a finger at a cultivated information void which allows a Cooper (or a Mortellaro) to gestate, otherwise occur, and then thrive in the first place. These are symptoms of a disease and not the disease itself. The disease is our culture of abused so abusive secrecy, predator government, faithless institution and non-accountable agency... compounded by the intelligent sociopath gravitating towards them.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:54:28 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:55:01 -0500 Subject: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs I hate to say I told you so..... Greg ----- Source: The Chicago Sun-Times http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/cst-nws-stein071.html 03-07-05 UFOs Are Only In Your Dreams -- Keep Them There by Neil Steinberg Sun-Times Columnist <nsteinberg.nul> Opening shot I couldn't bring myself to watch Peter Jennings' two-hour special on ABC recently what-iffing the existence of UFOs. Half the people in America believe in flying saucers, and there is a big enough mountain of "evidence" of extraterrestrial visitation that an army of TV journalists could happily mine it for years while going through the motions of weighing facts. The thing is, you don't need two hours to explain why UFOs are half hallucination, half fraud. I can do it in a single paragraph. Here goes: Two undisputed facts: The universe is very large, and time is very long. Though no one questions the possibility of flying objects at some point in some place in the galaxy, there is no convincing evidence of UFOs here and now. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof, but instead we are offered the same just-out-of-the-corner-of-your-eyesight nonsense that is the hallmark of all hoaxes, from perpetual motion to alchemy. We never hear of sightings from the army of astronomers monitoring the skies all over the world, do we? Instead we get pie plates on a string that become more obviously fake with each passing year, shored up with periodic mass hysterias. What most undermines the UFO case is precisely the endless number of sightings and claims served up to support it. They suggest UFOs of every possible description -- big, small, round, glowing, dark, cylindrical, square, fast, slow. Which means we are either a) constantly visited by a vast armada of celestial visitors of every known description who somehow never end up at
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:58:02 -0500 Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the unusual. UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue Book. With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official conclusions are. Fair is fair, and at least folks will have something official to chew on.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: Frustration - Goldstein From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 04:16:26 -1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:00:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Goldstein >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:29:54 -0600 >Subject: Re: Frustration >>From: Josh Goldstein <lovolution.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 02:34:53 -0800 >>Subject: Frustration >>Hello fellow Listerions, >>Now that Dick Hall has posted his view of the Peter Jennings >>special I have decided to post an email I sent him last Sunday. >>He had asked me to be interviewed in his Journal of UFO History >>and he had sent me a few questions to answer. I phoned him last >>Friday to discuss the questions and our first discussion was in >>regard to the Peter Jennings special the previous night. >>Dick told to me "Ufology is Dead" and we discussed our >>frustrations with where things have ended up after all these >>years. For a number of years he and I had a number of such >>conversations and were very much in agreement on these matters. >>Those matters seem to have come to a dead end. ><snip> >Dude, >You remember what it was like. If 'lead' gets shot down, the >rest of the flight is talking fire, and the lift has to be made, >regardless... you don't arbitrarily autorotate to what you can >only hope will be neutral ground, or bug out on your own. >Forgetting you piss 'Trail' off, it makes it too hard for the >gun platoon to provide the cover that they're there for. Send >Medivac back for 'lead', and drive on. >We'll forget for a moment that only one ship in the righteous >lift has to make it to the LZ... we'll forget also that there's >a diverse AC in every seat with their own theory on aircraft >employment and aerodynamics... the point is that we _are_ taking >fire, indicating a real concentration of an opposing force (a >critical point!), and that _now_ is the time to focus on making >the LZ, clearing the ship, and then getting back to the club for >beers and dirty songs. Now is _not_ the time to further fragment >and start criticizing everybody else's flying... >Roll the throttle back on, suck it up to 50 lbs... red line that >puppy, hoss -- and return to the formation. You gots critical >_cargo_, dude! >We're defeated when we believe we're defeated, one! And two, >when the pelicanist 'Opposition' is sniping at you all the way >from the self-styled (if illogical) young Turks of Triple "R" >Group to Jennings' larded ABC news, you've got to be doing >something _right_. >...Pull 55 pounds, write it up when you get back to the PZ. The >lift is necessary, and beer warming, the club awaits. Warm >brew's for Pelicanists, and last one to the barn's a >klasskurtzian. >Lead will just beat us to the club. Thanks Dude, Thanks for your words of encouragement. I waant to make it clear that in my frustration missive I was expressing my views and not attempting to speak for Dick Hall. My missive was entitled frustration and the Peter Jennings show was only a small part of what had been building up in me for quite a while. Thanks for your combat helicopter analogy. Ironically I spent a year in Vietnam in the lead helicopter of my platoon. We got shot down once but were able to land without injuries. The scary part was when we and our ship were hauled out hanging from a Chinook by one strap. Lets just say for now that my combat tour is over and instead of pulling a lot of torque and rejoining the formation I am on downtime. I am hanging out at the club with a cold beer, singing dirty songs, and keeping up with the news. Depending on the news
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: The Hums - Kritkausky From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:59:30 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:04:45 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hums - Kritkausky >From: Terry W. Colvin >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:14:55 -0700 >Subject: The Hums >A scientific review and potential explanation. D. Deming, >College of Geosciences, University of Oklahoma, has published a >15-page investigation of the worldwide hums. He concludes that >the hum is not acoustical at all but probably electromagnetic in >origin; that is, it is electrophonic sound. It seems that some >people can sense strong electromagnetic waves as sound. Deming >writes in his abstract: >Several hypotheses are considered and discussed as possible >sources of the Hum. These include cellular telephone >transmissions, LORAN, HAARP, and the TACAMO aircraft operated by >the U.S. Navy for the purpose of submarine communications. (Ref.3) Terry: Many thanks for passing this information on to the List, as it may prove to be of benefit to some research we are conducting on the outskirts of Phoenix. On January 26th, a sound very similar to the type discussed in your post was recorded at this location. However, in this case it may have been amplified in some manner, because it was widely heard and strange enough to prompt people to call the authorities or venture outside in search of a source. The initial analysis of the sound 's signature is fascinating. It has a certain "precision" in both cycle and content that differentiates it from other sources such as jet engines that can produce similar sounds. In addition, it would seem that portions of this sound lie at such a low frequency that it cannot be heard by humans. Examples and an initial analysis can be found here: http://www.worldblend.net/worldblendbu/AUDIOANOMALY.html It is interesting to note here that in November of 2001 an important and very rare recording of electrophonic sound was documented at this same site during the Leonids of that year. Case Info: http://www.worldblend.net/worldblendbu/METEOR.html Study web site: http://www.gefsproject.org/electrophones/ This may seem like quite a coincidence, as the odds of hearing an electrophonic sound from a meteor has been estimated to be "one in a million". However, I believe it to be anything but a coincidence, as it can actually be explained via an emerging theory that is evolving from the data, observations and research from the site. I believe there are places unique in both location and geological composition, such that they have high potentials for anomalous activity. The example above is of a natural anomaly whose occurrence was more than likely facilitated by the unique properties present there. In turn, these same properties might make such a location an ideal site in which to host an engineered anomaly. Specifically, the type mentioned in recent works by Eric Davis and Hal Puthoff. If so, these sites may prove to be of great value to Ufology in terms of it's quest for obtaining the elusive hard evidence to support claims of visitation by extraterrestrial intelligence. Such a location could be populated with multiple instruments set-up and calibrated with the sole purpose of proper scientific documentation. Evidence obtained in this more controlled manner with multiple data streams is the type in which the Scientific Community can more readily embrace.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: The Death Of Ufology - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:34:15 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:09:23 -0500 Subject: Re: The Death Of Ufology - Maccabee >From: Norio Hayakawa <Groom51S4.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 18:32:49 EST >Subject: The Death Of Ufology >The Death Of Ufology >by Norio Hayakawa >I hear from some UFO-believing circles that with the dismal >effect of the much anticipated but overwhelmingly disappointing >Peter Jennings's recent UFO Special, that Ufology seems to be >going nowhere or worse yet, is even dead. <snip> >To me, ufology has been dead from the beginning, simply because >Ufology is a forced attempt to create a discipline out of an >ambiguous subject matter that has never had any logical, >scientific, unified definition and thus has always been >categorized as fringe or pseudo science. <snip> >We can only accept the fact that people have claimed and believe >that they have witnessed what they perceive to be UFOs. We are >simply left with this fact. And it stops here. The possiblity >that we are not alone in the universe should have little (or >even nothing) to do with whether UFOs exist or not. Of course, SOME UFO sightings might actually be evidence of other intelligences coming here. >If the objective is to find a physical solution to the UFO >phenomenon the bottom line is that we have yet to come up with >any concrete, physical, irrefutable, solid evidence that UFOs >are physical, intelligently maneuvered non-human spacecraft from >outside of this earth with or without its occupants. Alleged >visual evidences such as alleged photos or alleged video >footages are not sufficient. First person accounts such as I was >abducted by a grey alien, ad nauseam, are definitely out of the >question. >Everything else is irrevelant and continues to remain so in the >domain of pure speculation. Testimony is not speculation. If Mr. Hayakawa chooses to ignore excellent testimony from credible witnesses that is fine for him. Let him go and do something else. For myself, the testimony, photos, films,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 8 Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:34:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:11:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting - Maccabee >Source: The Alaska Highway News - Fort St. John - The Yukon >http://tinyurl.com/6nrz9 >03-03-05 >Local Claims UFO Sighting >By Sarah Young >Alaska Highway News >Mark Mann has been taking video footage of the sky for a couple >of years now and has come up with some remarkable images by >pointing his camera to a brightly lit area of the sky, where the >sun has just tucked behind a building to leave a backlit area >just to the side of it. Uh, oh. A setup for "UFOs" galore! >"There's hundreds of these things, they're just everywhere," >said Mann of the rounded objects he's seen flitting across his >video screen. When he slows down the tape frame by frame, Mann >can spot the "spinning turnips" that seem to radiate light. >Mann has sent the footage to a UFO group in New York that >estimated the object's speed across the sky at up to 18,000 >miles per hour and at a size of 15-25 feet in diameter. >"These things are highly polished and moving very fast," he >said. "I don't know exactly what they are, but they're solid and >silent. Highly polished? Light reflected from objects that are _almost_ in line with the sun cause bright reflections (technically a result of "forward gloss"... the reflectivity of forward scattered light; in this case light rays from the sun are scattered or reflected into a direction only slightly different from the original direction of the light rays). Consider this: grazing angle reflection of sunlight from black valvet is quite bright. Tiny objects zipping around in the atmosphere, or large dust
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 9 Re: Ufological Mess - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:24:10 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:04:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Bourdais >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST >Subject: Ufological Mess <snip> >So maybe we can search for some common ground here. Maybe we >should stop attempting the defend the indefensible and concede >that sometimes we make mistakes. Kevin, Stan and all, Yes, it looks like the thing to do now. About Roswell, I would like to see an agreement between you and Stan, and all major researchers, at least on the supposition that there was an impact site near Roswell, closer than the debris field on the Foster ranch. You agreed in December 2002 that, in spite of the fall of Kaufmann and Ragsdale, there remained enough credible witnesses to support that. Stan, would you agree on that ? I wrote, on December 21: "In my post to Kevin (Dec.17) I asked what other witnesses we still have about a site closer than the Foster ranch. I mentioned: - Lewis Ricket and his 45 minutes trip with Cavitt - Frankie Rowe (I hope not to be killed for that) - Chester Barton (IUR of summer 2001), again 45 minutes drive "I suppose we can add: -William Woody, who wrote in his affidavit (Pflock's book p 291) that when his father drove on the US 285, they found soldiers stationed as soon as 19 miles up north - another witness found by Tom Carey and Donald Schmitt, called "Tex" (see Filer's File 12, 2000, and CNI News of April 1, 2000). Tom Carey said to CNI that, although the scene seemed to match the scenario given by Frank Kaufmann, the terrain seemed to indicate another location, farther north toward Corona. He described a "teardrop shaped craft", like Kaufmann. "Regarding the testimony of Rickett, I checked how Karl Pflock treated him in his second book. He wrote repeatedly that Rickett had been to the Foster ranch ! (see pages 27, 35, 99, etc.) And, of course, Pflock pointed out that, according to Rickett, there was only a little amount of debris. A convenient detail for the Mogul theory. On the other hand Rickett is found unreliable when he describes a very strong piece that he could not bend : not good for Mogul. "What was the place where Cavitt took him to an urgent visit? Was it just for a little amount of debris? Or was it the impact site of the craft? According to Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt in their second book (p 141), Rickett, although the craft was already removed when they arrived, he heard about it's shape : "long, thin, with a "batlike" wing on it". "All this suggests that there was an impact site close to Roswell, but we don't know exactly where it was." Kevin, you answered the same day: "Yes, it certainly does and we now have, what, half a dozen candidates for that location. We can eliminate the Corn site, I suppose, and Boy Scout Mountain, but we still have quite a few of them." Well, I ask everybody now - could not we agree at lest on this,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 9 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 10 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 20:13:25 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:08:30 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 10 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 10 March 9, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ REAL-LIFE "NIGHTCRAWLER" TERRIFIES CITY IN ARGENTINA A weird acrobatic intruder, with abilities similar to the hero Nightcrawler of the comic book X-Men, is terrifying the population of Santa Fe, a large city in northern Argentina. "Local residents say it jumps from house to house, is dressed in black and has red eyes. After hundreds of complaints, (Argentinian) police are looking for it." "Santa Fe," capital of the province of the same name, a large city located 400 kilometers (250 miles) northwest of Buenos Aires, "is jumping. Residents of the southern area are frightened by the appearance of a strange entity they've labeled el Loco Tejado (Spanish for Rooftop Madman--J.T.) and who, according to the accounts, leaps from roof to roof, engaging in acrobatics." Like Springheeled Jack of Victorian London or Hanuman, the Monkey Monster who terrorized New Delhi four years ago, the entity has been seen performing impossible feats--scaling sheer walls like Spider-Man or leaping from one darkened rooftop to another like Daredevil. (For more on Hanuman, see UFO Roundup, volume 6, number 21 for May 24, 2001, "India cites Hanuman for two murders," page 1, and "Hanuman goes on a rampage in India's Trans-Yumana," page 2.) "Witnesses claim it stands 2 meters (6 feet, 6 inches) tall, is entirely clad in black and wears a balaclava (a ski cap that shows only the eyes--J.T.). It sports a cape and its eyes shine red. This character in black likes to cross streets by leaping from one rooftop to the next, taking athletic leaps that can be up to 5 meters (16 feet) high and 10 meters (33 feet) long." "'He looks like the cat man,' locals say, 'His outline is barely visible. He never showed his face. But they say they've seen his eyes, and they have a reddish cast.'" "Sheriff Gabriel Legstra acknowledged that 'this is an undisguised psychosis. In recent days, we have received hundreds of reports at our radio command center. On Tuesday, (March 1, 2005) I dispatched 18 units (police cruisers--J.T.) to assuage people's fears. But ultimately, there is no other crime but trespassing here. This character goes from one roof to the next, appears outside a house and presses his face against a window but hasn't attacked anyone." According to the Argentinian newspaper La Capital, "he first appeared in (the) Barrio Centenario (district), only meters from the Colon Stadium, but they say he was seen much closer to town, such as in the barrios El Arenal, San Lorenzo, Chalet and Santa Rosa de Lima. This is the area most affected by the 2003 flood." "Mystery grew when witnesses said that 'bullets won't do anything to it. Its eyes gleam red to warn off those who try to hurt it.'" "A resident of El Arenal claimed having fired 17 times against it without the bullets having the least effect. The ghost did nothing but prowl about, howl like a beast or cry like a child, making dance steps on the rooftop over which it travels like a cat." "'People are afraid of being attacked, beaten and robbed by the man. They fear he will break into their property and are defending themselves,' say those in Regional Unit 1, who in turn describes the locals as 'expectant and armed with knives and sticks.'" "Most locals describe a being that appears to have sprung from a comic book: large in statue who not only crosses rooftops but also crosses the streets in a single bound and even climbed sheer walls up to 6 meters (20 feet) high." "'It is the Devil!' say the locals and some imaginative ones." "Sheriff Legstra said that a woman told him 'the entity pointed to her with his finger and left her paralyzed.'" "Another local man said that last Monday (February 28, 2005), during an intense rain, the phantom managed to jam the car door of a vehicle with seven passengers aboard, who were armed and ready to hunt it down despite police warnings." "Residents of Santa Fe neighborhoods like Centenario and San Lorenzo are in an uproar over the incredible stories concerning the appearance of the ghostly entity." "It is the reason that many--at nightfall--lock themselves in and bolt the door. In all fairness, it must also be said that many pluck up their courage and go out in search of the ghost, armed with sticks, machetes and dark intentions." "On (Tuesday) March 1 (2005), Elsa let out a scream that was heard all along the Calle Entre Rios (street) and gave everyone goosebumps--so much that even the hardened boys of the El Pasillo (street) gang were alarmed." "Elsa, a hairstylist whose salon is located in the heart of barrio San Lorenzo, took to the street, surrounded by nephews, to tell anyone who was willing to listen that, while she was bathing the youngest one, the ghost pressed his face against the bathroom window, showing its claws menacingly and firing a menacing stare at her." "Everyone seemed in urgency after this new story, almost immediately those who were standing guard in vast numbers, wielding heavy clubs, shiny machetes, stilletos, pen knives and even humble kitchen knives." "Those around who were willing to settle the score, they went out after the apparition while various police patrols reached the site with the intention of avoiding a panicked lynching or a tragic mistake among the vigilantes themselves." "Ruben agreed with Elsa who said the phantom has red eyes like fire and told others that the horrifying personage dresses in black from head to toe." "Ruben also said, while everyone around him nodded, that the character being sought is a tall man with a long wavy mane of hair. And for that, our interviewee (Ruben) claims having seen it--together with his neighbors--as it emerged from Elsa's house, leaping from rooftop to rooftop." "'How do you explain,' he replied to a question" the newspaper El Litoral "asked, 'How this guy can climb a smooth wall 6 meters (20 feet) tall? How can you explain that it can leap across the street in a single bound, like the way it crossed Entre Rios Street, unless it was the Devil himself?'" "While a respectful silence had settled around Ruben- -a silence that would be interrupted only by the appearance of a police officer--they asked in turn, 'How can you explain why we couldn't catch him, when we shot him three times and hit him twice?'" "Sheriff Legstra asked local residents to remain calm. Until that moment, no one had been attacked or injured, he claimed." "Witnesses 'describe it as clad in black with red eyes. They say it can leap 5 meters (16 feet) into the air or 10 meters (33 feet) in length. That it can cross streets at a single bound." Sheriff Legstra said, "I have no official reports that any (police) agent has seen something similar. I was in the area yesterday (Thursday, March 3, 2005), and, as has occurred on the four preceding nights, I heard reports of people claiming to have seen it. In other words, it was being seen in three different locations at the same time." (Editor's Comment: To quote Famke Janssen in X2, "He's a teleporter.") The sheriff added, "Police who were dispatched said nothing was found." "As part of the new psychosis," he concluded, "That an episode such as this should repeat itself is something we fear, which is why we are asking people not to go out, to let the police do their job, to stay home. Police are in the area. In fact, the situation calmed down a lot last night. There were less people on the street, but I still ask everyone to let us do our job to avoid problems, to avoid any injuries since there are people armed with sticks and machetes looking for this character." (See the Argentinian newspapers La Capital for March 2, 2005, "Terror in Santa Fe;" El Litoral for March 2, 2005, "With the Devil at the window;" and Litoral del Dia for March 4, 2005, "Police chase 'the Rooftop Madman.'" Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Liliana Nunez Orellana por estes articulos.) (Editor's Comment: Meanwhile, at the Daily Planet..."Hey, Lois, I got to take a quick run down to Argentina. Want me to bring home any yerba mate?") LARGE TRIANGULAR UFOs SEEN TWICE IN VIRGINIA On Wednesday, February 23, 2005, eyewitnesses Cathy and Tom were driving south on the Capital Beltway, Interstate Highway I-495, when they saw something strange in the night sky. The couple reported, "As we approached Langley Air Force Base on the interstate, we noticed two distinct triangular bright lights ahead. We continued and passed directly underneath the large object. We looked up and could see that there were actually four triangular lights. Two were directly opposite each other, then further down the object there were two more but set well off from each other. On one end of the object, there was a small red light, and on the other end a very small blue-green light." "The object was completely stationary. No movement whatsoever. It remained so for the entire time we were able to keep it in sight. It was hard to tell the height, maybe 1,000 to 1,500 feet (300 to 450 meters) up. The object was dark. A very large object and it seemed very long." On Tuesday, February 22, 2005, at 12:54 a.m., Nate T. was outdoors at his home in Charlottesville, Virginia (population 45,049) when a strange object appeared in the sky from the west. Nate reported, "The object was a massive triangular shape with four big lights at the back and three small lights in the front. It also had four rows of windows on each side. You could see creatures looking out of them." "It approached from the west and hovered for five minutes, then flew away at 100 miles per hour (160 kilometers per hour). It was black, large and triangular. It was hovering about 50 feet (15 meters) in the air. It approached at 30 to 40 miles per hour (50 to 64 kilometers per hour) but then sped off at 100 miles per hour." (Email Form Reports) STRANGE ENCOUNTER IN MURRIETA, CALIFORNIA On Sunday, February 27, 2005, at 1:30 a.m., eyewitness Nicole was asleep in her bedroom in Murrieta, California (population 44,282) when "I was awakened by a weird noise that came from outside my window. When I woke up from a deep sleep, I saw my entire room was lighted with red and white lights flying everywhere. I knew this was not a dream because I was awake from that slight motor noise as the craft itself was moving away at slow speed." "When I woke up, I finally saw the lights disappear. I didn't notice any craft, but I sure noticed some lights that freaked me out." "I also have seen a cigar-shaped craft just hovering over town here in Murrieta. It was a clear night but dark so it had no colors I could make out. It was 610 feet (185 meters) off the ground." Murrieta, Cal. is on Interstate Highway I-15 about 40 miles (64 kilometers) southeast of Los Angeles. (Email Form Report) SAUCER TRACKS WOMAN MOTORIST IN PARMA, OHIO On Thursday, March 3, 2005, Miss Clark, the eyewitness, "was driving south on Broadview and stopped at the light in Pleasant Valley" in Parma, Ohio (population 85,655), a suburb south of Cleveland. "She saw an object hovering above Topps grocery store about 200 to 300 feet (60 to 90 meters) up. The object moved south as she drove south" towards Broadview Heights (population 15,967), and then it crossed the road to hover above the Lube Shop on the east side of the road close to Sprague Road." "She stopped the car at a parking lot on Broadview and Sprague and looked at the object from inside the car. She heard no sound coming from the object. It had a bright white light shining out and other bluish-green lights, as well. She said it was like a flattened oval on the bottom, and two box-like structures were on top like a multi-layer cake. It started moving north at a fast pace and moved out of sight." "The sighting lasted from 10:39 p.m. to 10:45 p.m. on Thursday (March 3, 2005)," her brother, Aaron Clark, reported, "She called me at 10:36 p.m. on her cell phone. I told her to sketch it, and she did. I told her to keep a camera and a videocamera in her car from now on. This is the third UFO she's seen since November (2004). She doesn't even like to talk about UFOs." Parma is on Ohio Route 94 approximately 8 miles (12 kilometers) south of Cleveland. (Many thanks to Aaron Clark for this report.) LARGE TRIANGULAR UFO HOVERS IN MONROE, N.Y. On Sunday, February 20, 2005, Tara Kyles "was driving on the New York Thruway between Monroe, N.Y. (population 7,780) and the next stop going about 10 miles (16 kilometers) south from the end of the Thruway. I was driving south on the Thruway at 11 p.m. in a snowstorm. We were driving very slow, approximately 35 miles per hour (56 kilometers per hour) due to the heavy snow, when I noticed a bright light to my right (east--J.T.)." "I looked up and saw black triangular-shaped object with three bright lights, one on each corner. It seemed to be hovering and stationary right above the treetops. I heard no noise though my (car) windows were closed, and I watched it for as long as I could." "As we passed the area, my line of view was blocked by the trees. I'd estimate that it was about 100 feet (30 meters) back from the road and about 50 feet (15 meters) in the air. It seemed strange that it was so close to the road and the treetops. Black triangle shape, bright white lights on each corner, very flat and large, at least 50 feet (15 meters) wide. I only saw it hovering in one spot above the trees." Monroe, N.Y. is on Interstate Highway I-84 about 50 miles (80 kilometers) northwest of New York City. Curiously, the site of Tara's encounter is only a mile or two west of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. (Email Form Report) (Editor's Comment: Now, what would a UFO be doing hovering a mile from the West Point campus during a heavy snowstorm? Could there be "silent contactees" in the Corps of Cadets? Just a thought...) BOOMERANG-SHAPED UFO SEEN IN MAPLE RIDGE, B.C. On Monday, February 28, 2005, at 8 p.m., eyewitness A.R. sighted, "many red and blue blinking lights that seemed to get closer and closer" to her home in Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada (population 56,173). "I thought it was a plane at first and then realised that it made no sound like any other plane that had flown over the house," she reported, "It looked like a huge boomerang, bigger than your average plane. The ones off in the distance all seemed to be flashing, going up and down and from side to side. The ones off in the distance seemed to be moving at great speeds." The UFO closest to her house "was 1,000 feet (300 meters) off the ground. Also, I noticed the moon didn't come up until 11:30 p.m. The object closest to me had red and blue and orange blinking lights." Maple Ridge, B.C. is just north of the Fraser River, about 20 miles (32 kilometers) east of Vancouver. (Email Form Report) MORE CROP CIRCLES APPEAR IN EASTERN ARGENTINA Three new crop circles appeared at a private airfield on the outskirts of Nueve de Julio, a small city in Argentina's Buenos Aires province. "Strange circular marks were detected on the runway grass at the Nueve de Julio Aero Clube on Thursday, January 27, 2005. Jorge Marcelo Ayram, the manager in charge of the club, discovered the odd imprints while mowing the runway apron. Upon being consulted about the origin of the circles, he pointed out that his watchdog had been restless the previous evening, disturbed and howling and prompting her owner to get up and check on her." "The time was 2 a.m., and Ayram, who was standing next to the dog, saw a strange light toward the front of their air station. At first he believed it was the full moon, but the size of the phenomenon and its sudden disappearance made him think otherwise." "Members of CUFOS-La Pampa," an Argentinian UFO study group, "visited the site on Friday, February 18, 2005, and discovered three circles aligned to each other, on the surface and aiming northward. The first measured 80 centimeters in diameter; the second 1.3 meters (4 feet) in diameter; and the third 10 to 12 meters (33 to 40 feet) in diameter. The outline traced by the circles shows dark open grass which contrasts sharply with the surrounding undergrowth." Nueve de Julio is located about 200 kilometers (120 miles) west-southwest of the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina's capital. (Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Raul Oscar Chavez para estas noticias. For more on Argentina's current spurt of crop circles, see UFO Roundup, volume 10, number 7 for February 16, 2005, "Crop circles appear in eastern Argentina," page 2.) HOVERING UFO SEEN BY A GIRL IN MONTREAL On Wednesday, February 23, 2005, at 9 p.m., her boyfriend had come over, Morgan B. reported, "When he had to leave, my dad drove him home, and I went with them. While we were in the car," near Pointe Claire in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, "I was staring out the window, and I thought I saw a UFO." "We were driving west, and it was coming from the south (my left side--M.B.). It was just before the overpass on St. Jean. At first I thought it was an airplane because it was kind of shaped like one, but, as I looked harder, I came to believe that it wasn't." "The lighting on it wasn't like that of an airplane. In only had round white-yellowish lights, and they were surrounding the bottom and, I think, the sides of it. It wasn't making any noise, and it wasn't moving. It was just sitting there." "I can't estimate how high it was. But it was pretty big...or just close to the ground. But since it was shaped like an airplane, I just dropped the thought that it might be a UFO." "Then we dropped my boyfriend off at his house and started back. Around the same spot where I saw the UFO, I looked out the (car) window out of curiosity to see if it was still there...and, to my surprise, it was!" "It didn't move. It was still just sitting there. I got freaked out and told my dad about it. Then I looked out the window. I saw it moving away really fast, going towards the north. I looked out the other window facing to the north, and the UFO was gone. It just vanished." "I don't know exactly what I saw, but if anyone else thinks they've seen the same thing, please contact me." (Email Form Report) FIFTY NEW GIANT DRAWINGS FOUND IN PERU'S DESERT "Archaeologists have discovered a group of giant figures sculpted out of the hills of Peru's southern coastal desert which are believed to predate the previously-found Nazca lines." "All 50 figures were etched all over a roughly 90- square-mile area near the city of Palpa, 220 kilometers (132 miles) southeast of Lima, the capital of Peru." Monica Gaetano de Silva, UFO Roundup's correspondent in Peru, reported that "Palpa is a town south of Ica. It's a really isolated area, in the valley of the Rio Grande. To the north is a 20-kilometer (12-mile) stretch of desert called the Pampa de Huayuri. To the south is the Pampa Colorada, 800 square kilometers of barren desert which brings you to the Nazca lines. The Rio Grande valley is famous for its oranges. It's the heart of Peru's citrus industry." "The (Palpa) drawings --which include human figures as well as animals such as birds, monkeys and felines--are believed to have been created by members of the Paracas culture between 600 and 100 B.C., said Johny Islas, the director of the Andean Institute for Archaeological Studies." "One prominent figure appears to represent a deity depicted on textiles and ceramics from the period, Islas said." "The recently discovered designs predate the country's famous Nazca lines, which have mystified scientists and were added to the United Nations' Cultural Heritage List in 1994." "The Nazca lines--which also include petroglyphs of various animals--cover a 58-kilometer (35-mile) stretch of desert about 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Lima and are one of Peru's top tourist attractions. The Nazca culture flourished from 50 B.C. to 600 A.D., Islas said." (See the newspaper El Comercio of Lima, Peru for February 28, 2005. Muchas gracias a Monica Gaetano de Silva por este articulo de diario.) (Editor's Comment: So the pre-Columbian Paracas, like the Nazcas, were building images than can only be seen from the air. Why? Who were they trying to signal?) From the UFO Files... 1955: THE HORSEHEADS MYSTERIES Horseheads, N.Y. (population 6,452) is a small town on Route 14 north of Elmira. First known as Fairport, "in 1845, the place was named Horseheads, commemorating an incident in the (War of the American) Revolution that occurred here; Gen. (John) Sullivan's men slew their worn- out and starving horses for food and left the heads for carrion" during the campaign of 1779. Intrigued by this legend, Howard Phillips Lovecraft (1890-1937) visited Horseheads during his tour of the Catskill mountains in the early 1920s. But the real weirdness didn't begin until 13 years after HPL's death. On April 8, 1950, a UFO was sighted by many in Horseheads. "In a pasture just outside Horseheads, N.Y., 'a slim circular object only three feet (0.9 meters) across at the base--of a light cardboard substance-- covered with luminous paint--constructed with considerable care--no indication that this gadget will fly--I did not open it to see what was inside,' said the Chief of Police, 'Some sort of radio tube jutted out of the top structure and was connected to the inside by a wire.'" "Object found by Ernest Ferris, a farmer." "Near by was found 'a molten substance on fire- scorched earth' and what appeared to be a burned-out flare on which could read '5 mins' and 'cau'" "It was turned over to the FBI agent, who took it to Elmira." A faked UFO? Or a genuine alien artifact of some kind? Then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover wasn't saying. Five years later, on Sunday, February 20, 1955, Horseheads was again the site of a Fortean event--this time it was a massive fall of angel hair that covered half-a-square-mile of the town with gossamer strands 2 inches (5 centimeters) deep. On Tuesday, February 22, 1955, "a chemistry professor today identified as radioactive a curtain of wispy gray fuzz that spread over part of this village two days ago." "Dr. Charles B. Rutenber, chemistry professor at Elmira College, said the fuzz was badly damaged, slightly radioactive cotton fibre." "Where the fibre came from before it settled on trees, shrubbery and houses Sunday night was a mystery." "Rutenber said he had conducted tests which showed the fibre was apparently waste material or a substance which had been heavily damaged in some sort of explosion." "Inquiries at area industrial installations failed to produce a clue into the nature of the 'fallout' which covered a residential area half-a-mile square." "Horseheads is a village of 3,500 population, six miles (10 kilometers) north of Elmira in south-central New York state." "Rutenber said a Geiger counter has established the radioactivity of the cobwebby fibre, but he said the radioactivity was not present to a dangerous degree. And, he declared, the radioactive content of the fibre was not unusual in view of the atomic (bomb) tests now underway in Nevada." (Editor's Note: During February and March, 1955, the old Atomic Energy Commission was setting off nuclear bombs at Frenchman's Flat, Nevada at the rate of one every two weeks.) Nor was Horseheads, N.Y. the only town in the USA experiencing strange sky falls fifty years ago. "They had chocolate snow at the ski resort" in Alta, Utah (population 370) "yesterday" (Sunday, March 27, 1955) "Mocha snow, anyway." "Snowflakes were described as definitely tan or light brown at the Wasatch Mountain ski spot east of Salt Lake City during a storm that dumped 15 inches (38 centimeters) of snow during the day. They changed to a less unnerving white toward afternoon." "The color was blamed on alkali dust in the air." Doubt: The Fortean Society Magazine reported, "Salty 'white goo' rained on Salt Lake City, Utah. Said to have been picked up from (the Bonneville) salt flats by the wind. Although the flats have been there ever so long, and wind is pretty common, the phenomenon 'caused consternation'" when it occurred on Friday, March 25, 1955. (See the Duluth, Minnesota News-Tribune for February 23, 1955, "Town puzzled by radioactive fuzz 'fallout.,' page 5; the Superior, Wis. Telegram for March 28, 1955, "Snow chocolate color in Utah," page 2; Doubt: The Fortean Society Magazine volume 2, number 42 for 1953, page 239; and volume 2, number 49 for 1954, page 359. Also, New York: A Guide to the Empire State, Oxford University Press, 8th Printing, 1962, page 655.) Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more UFO, Fortean and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, 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
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 9 Secrecy News -- 03/08/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:59:41 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:12:12 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/08/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 21 March 8, 2005 ** GOVERNMENT SECRECY CONTINUED TO RISE IN 2004 ** HANS BETHE ** HISTORICAL INTELLIGENCE BUDGETS: ANOTHER VOLLEY ** TAX BENEFITS FOR SECRET AGENTS ** NEW OFFICIAL RESOURCES ** PRC VIEWS HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE US GOVERNMENT SECRECY CONTINUED TO RISE IN 2004 The production of national security secrets continued to accelerate last year, rising to 16 million classification decisions in 2004 from 14 million the year before, according to new government statistics. Since the Bush Administration took office in 2001, annual classification activity has increased by a staggering 75%. The latest figures were presented in congressional testimony last week by William Leonard, director of the Information Security Oversight Office. "Based upon information furnished our office, the total number of classification decisions increased from 9 million in FY 2001 to 11 million in FY 2002, 14 million in FY 2003 and 16 million in FY 2004," he said. The FY 2004 figure, which had not previously been disclosed, will be formally announced in a report to the President due at the end of this month. Mr. Leonard preemptively cautioned that not all of this new secrecy is unwarranted. "For the sake of precision, I would note that, during the period from FY 2002 through FY 2004, the U.S. Government built a new structure for homeland security and engaged in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and against al-Qaeda, so it cannot be said conclusively from these data that the increase during this period in the number of classification decisions was due solely or even substantially to the phenomenon of 'over- classification'," he told a House subcommittee on March 2. A different set of questions was left unasked and unanswered in this account: Did excessive classification activity leave the nation needlessly unprepared for the attacks of September 11? Did excessive secrecy prematurely foreclose debate on the best way to constrain Iraqi WMD programs and confront Saddam Hussein? Has secrecy inhibited accountability for violations of human rights norms? Mr. Leonard testified at a hearing of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, chaired by Rep. Christopher Shays, on the subject of "Overclassification and Pseudo-Classification." Prepared testimony and related materials from that March 2 hearing are posted or linked here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/index.html HANS BETHE Physicist Hans Bethe, who died Sunday, was a scientist and a citizen of extraordinary stature. Much of what needed to be said of him can be found in this expansive obituary by William J. Broad of the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/07/science/08cnd-bethe.html What remains to be said is difficult to say, since a suitable vocabulary is lacking. Bethe embodied a conception of citizenship anchored in scientific activity, which gave it substance, direction and a kind of dignity. He was a last, late exemplar of 19th century German Bildung, which emphasized the disciplined self-cultivation of the personality. And though he did not think in such terms, his life may perhaps be considered a final echo of the aborted German-Jewish encounter of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As an FAS sponsor, Bethe spoke with clarity and courage on issues of arms control and disarmament. In a 1997 letter, he urged President Clinton to declare an end to U.S. development of weapons of mass destruction of all kinds. His 1997 letter, the President's response, a New York Times story and an appreciation by the late Sen. Moynihan, may be found here: http://www.fas.org/bethecr.htm Three lectures by Bethe have been posted online by Cornell University here (flagged by www.armscontrolwonk.com): http://bethe.cornell.edu/ HISTORICAL INTELLIGENCE BUDGETS: ANOTHER VOLLEY In the latest round of a continuing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit over whether the CIA should be obliged to disclose historical intelligence budgets, the CIA said that it should not be compelled to reveal the size of the 1963 CIA budget to the Federation of American Scientists, because FAS already knows what it is! "Indisputably, plaintiff has in his possession the very budget figure that he now demands," the CIA told a federal court March 1, asking that the matter be dismissed as moot. http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/1947/cia030105.pdf That is faulty reasoning, we replied March 7. "There is no FOIA exemption for information that is already in the public domain, or for information that may already be known by the requester." http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/1947/sa030705.pdf TAX BENEFITS FOR SECRET AGENTS Homeowners who sell their primary residences after two years enjoy substantial tax benefits from the profits of the sale. A new bill introduced in the Senate would extend those benefits to U.S. intelligence personnel who are serving abroad and are thus unable to fulfill the residency requirement. "If they had been stationed away from home while serving their country, they were essentially punished with higher taxes on the sales of their homes," observed Sen. Jay Rockefeller, introducing the bipartisan legislation on February 28. http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s469.html NEW OFFICIAL RESOURCES The Department of Energy released its latest report to Congress on inadvertent disclosures of classified nuclear weapons information in declassified files at the National Archives. Out of 1.4 million pages of publicly accessible documents examined, reviewers found a thousand or so containing classified information of varying levels of sensitivity. See this October 2004 report, released February 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/inadvertent15.pdf The State Department has published the latest volume of its official documentary history called Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), which deals with the United Nations from 1969-1972. Among the salient issues of the time were the question of how to structure Chinese representation and the selection of a new Secretary-General to succeed U Thant. The entire volume is posted online here: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/v/index.htm New legislation introduced by Senators Cornyn and Leahy to amend the Freedom of Information Act was assessed by the Department of Justice Office of Information and Privacy, which blessed the initiative as "a development that holds the possibility of leading to significant improvements in the Freedom of Information Act." See: http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/2005foiapost7.htm PRC VIEWS HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE US Last week the U.S. State Department issued its 2004 annual report to Congress on human rights practices around the world. Within days, China countered with its own report on "The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2004." "As in previous years, the [State Department] reports pointed fingers at the human rights situation in more than 190 countries and regions (including China) but kept silent on the US misdeeds in this field," the new PRC report said. "Therefore, the world people have to probe the human rights record behind the Statue of Liberty in the United States." Consisting largely of boilerplate criticism based on Western sources, the PRC response illustrates that the State Department human rights reports have a struck a nerve. But it also shows how the U.S. has increasingly come to be perceived as hypocritical on questions of human rights and social welfare. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/03/prc-humanrights.html _______________________________________________ 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 > Mar > Mar 9 Re: Jennings' Scary Special - Chace From: David Chace <davidwchace.nul> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 02:12:01 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:14:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings' Scary Special - Chace >From: Kelly Freeman [Mr] <Khfflsciufo.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:39:29 EST >Subject: Re: Jennings' Scary Special >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:05:59 EST >>Subject: Jennings' Special Scary <snip> >Remember Operation Right To Know? It's too bad that the >organizers of that group didn't realize that they should have >been active for the "long haul". Instead, they disbanded (as >far as I know), with unrealistic short-term expectations. I >believe something similar should be again be organized by >leaders in the field of Ufology, with an emphasis on >educating the media, etc. and without self-defeating >expectations that their efforts will succeed in the short term, >or that those targeted for "re-education" will necessarily >accept their views the first time such views are submitted. >The point is that we should remain steadfast in our efforts. >This is an opportunity for us, not a defeat in any way. Was that the group that organized that march on Washington back in the mid-nineties? In the late-eighties when I first became seriously interested in the UFO phenomenon (contact/abduction in particular) I half expected that some kind of major revelation from government and the media regarding the phenomenon was coming. I was aware of the abundant evidence of the UFO presence (sightings, photographs, radar cases, landing traces, and so on), but during those years when I watched the nightly news reports on the major networks it seemed like no one had ever heard of any of this evidence. It was an unsettling feeling, a kind of disconnect that was almost too much to bear. It was like simultaneously living in two different civilizations in two parallel universes. So I assumed some kind of revelation had to be coming, in order to restore some kind of balance and sense of reason to the world. However, since the mid-nineties I've actually become accustomed to this situation, this disconnect. What seems clear to me now is that our pluralistic society, our whole civilization really, is one in which knowledge is compartmentalized in some strange way, and that the process of breaking down the compartmentalization, so that the mainstream media can openly and objectively cover the UFO phenomenon and its implications, is going to be a long and arduous one. Some of those who have spent their lives investigating this phenomenon and attempting to educate the public, the media and the scientific community about their findings, may well die of old age before this all comes to a head. It's sad but true. >Greg, if anything is scary, it's not the special on UFOs but the >prospect that pillars of Ufology, such as Mr. Hall, threaten to >get out of it because of the content of the program. Yes, I >know Mr. Hall has spent a lifetime trying to uncover the >truth, but I cannot accept such a stance as he has taken. >As a witness to UFOs and an experiencer of the paranormal, I >don't have the luxury of making a decision such as Mr. Hall >has made. I, along with perhaps God knows how many >others, have to live with what has happened to us, and at least >for me, have_to_have those answers. Perhaps you, the leaders >of Ufology, haven't realized that simple truth or refuse to >fathom its implications. >If there is anything that angers me more than the special >itself, it is some of the responses to the program made in this >forum. Wake up. >I'll jump down off of this damn soapbox now. >Peace and light >Kelly Freeman Peter Jennings is clearly taking heat from both sides regarding his special. Along with all of Dick Hall's material, much of James McGaha's interview was also left on the cutting room floor, and I'm sure McGaha believes that this material would have made his position appear more credible in the eyes of the viewers, so he is understandably upset. (This is based on my reading of Chris Mooney's article at the CSICOP website.) I think we should be praising the Jennings program for the things it did right, as well as criticizing it for the things it did wrong. We need to give some positive reinforcement where that is due just as much as we need to make it clear where we think we (those who care about Roswell and the UFO abduction phenomenon, for example) were treated unfairly. I submit that that would be a good way to conduct ourselves, and (hopefully) perhaps also an effective way of communicating our concerns to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 9 Filer's Files #11 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 09:38:33 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:21:07 -0500 Subject: Filer's Files #11 - 2005 Filer=92s Files #11 =96 2005, Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern Vice President of Skywatch International March 9, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com Webmaster: C E Warren www.cewarren.com http://groups.aol.com/filersfiles?mmch_=3D0 Scientists Claim Life on Mars 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. NASA Scientists starting to agree with us, that there is life on Mars. 3800 Earthquakes within 72 Hours off Vancouver, Canada and photos of Interacting Pair of Galaxies. Is ET sending us a message with radio waves from our galaxy? UFOs were seen over Arizona, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Illinois, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Sightings were also reported in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, and Puerto Rico. Interacting Pair of Galaxies This dramatic image of a pair of galaxies was made using 8-meter Gemini South telescope at Cerro Pachon, Chile. NGC 1531 is the background galaxy with a bright core just above center and NGC 1532 is the foreground spiral galaxy laced with dust lanes. The pair is about 55 million light-years away in the southern constellation Eridanus. These galaxies lie close enough together so that each feels the influence of the other's gravity and has triggered star formation that is evidenced by the young, bright blue star clusters along the upper edge of the front spiral arm. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html Radio Waves from Center of our Galaxy Mystery radio bursts from the center of our galaxy are causing astronomers to search for the source of the powerful burst of intermittent radio waves. Is ET sending us a message or is a dying star sending out its last radio emissions? NASA Researchers Claim Life on Mars ESA image of Valles Marineris Canyon Space News Staff Writer Brian Berger[ ] writes that, "A pair of NASA scientists told a group of space officials at a private meeting here Sunday that they have found strong evidence that life may exist today on Mars, hidden away in caves and sustained by pockets of water. The scientists, Carol Stoker and Larry Lemke of NASA=92s Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley, told the group that they have submitted their findings to the journal Nature for publication in May, and their paper currently is being peer reviewed.What Stoker and Lemke have found, according to several attendees of the private meeting, is not direct proof of life on Mars, but methane signatures and other signs of possible biological activity remarkably similar to those recently discovered in caves here on Earth. Stoker and other researchers have long theorized that the Martian subsurface could harbor biological organisms that have developed unusual strategies for existing in extreme environments. That suspicion led Stoker and a team of U.S. and Spanish researchers in 2003 to southwestern Spain to search for subsurface life near the Rio Tinto river=97so-called because of its reddish tint=97the product of iron being dissolved in its highly acidic water. Stoker told SPACE.com in 2003, weeks before leading the expedition to southwestern Spain, that by studying the very acidic Rio Tinto, she and other scientists hoped to characterize the potential for a "chemical bioreactor" in the subsurface =96 an underground microbial ecosystem of sorts that might well control the chemistry of the surface environment. Making such a discovery at Rio Tinto, Stoker said in 2003, would mean uncovering a new, previously uncharacterized metabolic strategy for living in the subsurface. "For that reason, the search for life in the Rio Tinto is a good analog for searching for life on Mars," she said. Stoker told her private audience Sunday evening that by comparing discoveries made at Rio Tinto with data collected by ground-based telescopes and orbiting spacecraft, including the European Space Agency=92s Mars Express, she and Lemke have made a very a strong case that life exists below Mars=92 surface. They based their case in part on Mars=92 fluctuating methane signatures that could be a sign of an active underground biosphere and nearby surface concentrations of the sulfate jarosite, a mineral salt found on Earth in hot springs that have been found to harbor life despite their inhospitable environments. The Mars Rovers Opportunity, bolstered the case for water on Mars when it discovered jarosite and other mineral salts on a rocky outcropping in Merdiani Planum. In 1996 a team of NASA and Stanford University researchers created a stir when they published findings that meteorites recovered from the Allen Hills region of Antarctica contained evidence of possible past life on Mars. http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/marsexpress/153-090205-03340360-4-co-01-= OphirChasma_Hires.jpg Editor=92s Note: It is my opinion that Viking experiments by Dr. Gilbert Levin already discovered life on Mars in 1976. Also, Italian scientist Dr. Formisano who developed the Planetary Fourier Spectrometer on the European Space Agency's Mars orbiter says, "There is about 10 to 20 times more formaldehyde than methane on Mars and if you consider Annamarie Johnstone, PhD writes, "Kudos for being willing to print a hypothesis that "blueberries" are possibly microbes in a mineralized fossil inclusion, utilizing iron, as early as Feb. 2004, a year before two NASA Ames scientists describe a like hypothesis (scienceastronomy/mars_ life_050216.html) (Filers Files,#8, 2004). Mitch Battros - ECTV writes, "Seismologist and Geologist are rushing in from all over the world to witness this event." At this time the only press release is "Don=92t worry; the earthquakes are not large enough to create a tsunami." That being said, the excitement is more about witnessing a growing "volcano" right off the coast of Vancouver Island. A scientific SWAT team from Seattle is sailing to a spot off the coast of Vancouver Island, where they suspect an underwater eruption is under way. "We really don't know what to expect," said Edward Baker, an oceanographer at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory. "If we're very lucky, we may get pictures of brand- new lava on the seafloor." Editor's Note: The ring of fire continues to remain in an highly unsettled condition. High speed green fireballs are spotted in the area. Warning there is a strong possibility of powerful (+9) earthquakes in the= region. Arizona =96 Video Looks Like a Triangle ESTRELLA MOUNTAIN =96 Bill Hamilton writes, Last weeks report of a February 8, 2005, a 7:30 PM, of a couple seeing lights low and near the Palo Verde nuclear power plant that may have had a small electrical fire and had to shut down one reactor." "This video looks just like the Phoenix Lights I saw on March 13, 1997, the so-called flares at 10 PM. I have a video from 2002 taken in Rainbow Valley AZ where these amber lights frequently appear. This video was shot at much closer range than the March 13th event and plainly shows what I and Mike Kryszton have seen through a telescope: ORBS, not flares. They are perfectly round with no nimbus surrounding them and display a strange wavy pattern that seems to emanate from their centers. The reason why it is important to idethe shape of a trianglentify these orbs is they are associated with the Black Triangles. Thanks to Bill Hamilton AstroScience Research Network http://www.astrosciences.info/ "I don't see the logic of rejecting data just because they seem incredible." Fred Hoyle California - Flashes and a Humming Sound KELSEYVILLE -- On February 25, 2005, two witnesses noticed heavy air traffic that started around 2:00 AM, so much that it woke me from my sleep! It was dense fog last night so I couldn't see anything. I was sitting up listening to the noises and my husband then woke up to see what was the matter with me. He then stuck his head out the window and said "wow", you should hear this from the outside 3:30 AM. We could hear the faint sound of humming. He thought it may have been over our house. I think it sounded a little more distant, but close by. I finally worked the courage to take a peak out the window and I saw two bright flashes of light. It was like lightning flashes without the thunder. It was so bright I could see all around my house on the outside, it was sooooo weird. I didn't get much sleep last night, matter of fact I have no idea what time I finally gave in and fell asleep. The humming sound stayed until about 10 minutes more after I saw the flashes! Thanks to Brian Vike Colorado =96 Strange Helicopter DENVER -- Adam writes, "I truly enjoy reading Filer's Files and have always hoped that I might have a sighting; and I saw something flying over the Welshire subdivision of Denver last night. I was walking my dog at about 10:20 PM, last night, when I saw what appeared to be a very normal helicopter flying at 500 feet. The rotor wash was loud, but I suddenly noticed that extended in a straight line to points perhaps 130 feet in front of this chopper were a series of very, very dim red lights that were at a level altitude to the chopper. These dim red lights appeared to be in a rectangular or triangular shape, there were probably two lights per "side" of the rectangle with possibly a fifth light at the very front and to the inside of the straight line. I couldn't resolve any other aircraft in the darkness "behind" the dim red lights. The line of lights was at a perfectly straight angle. There were bright regulation lights on the chopper in back. It looked like a chopper with a drift net illuminated by red glass buoys in front of it. It was only after talking to my friend that he reminded me that people have seen choppers associated with "triangle" craft before. Thanks to Adam DC =96 Webcam Photo Controversy Gordon DeSpain writes, "Normally, I would not contest Dr. Bruce Maccabee's analysis, who states, "I believe it was a normal aircraft, probably a helicopter, with steady running lights and strobes.". 1. Gordon DeSpain asks, "Why do the clearance lights not show (the red or green light on the wingtip should leave a streak?". [] 2. The strobes are not equidistant to indicate a constant speed (roughly 53 pixels separating the left/center, 92 pixels separating the center/right flashes, 145 separating left/right). I'm not arguing that they're not strobes, simply that there may have been more than one visible to the camera, and, probably three to give this effect. The minimum is two, with one flashing twice during the exposure, the other flashing once. The speed of travel could be calculated if we could determine which one flashed twice, and, which two recorded flashes represented that strobe (left/right, left/center, center/right). If we consider this three flashes from one light, it indicates a speed increase on the order of 1.75X in a fraction of a second (assuming an increase rather than decrease between flashes). 3. The body of the craft exhibits a perfectly straight line, while the strobes are on three different levels, two appearing detached from the main body, with no visible clues indicating a course/altitude correction as a result of rolling the wings causing a change in perspective. Whichever is the leading end of the Craft should exhibit some type of change following an attitude/course change. 4. The rear (if it's not the front) appears to be 90 degrees to the main streak (side), though lined up to give the effect/illusion of a straight line over the length of rear and side streak combined. 5. The "rear" is in shadow relative to the 'body' streak, which is brightly illuminated over it's full length. 6. The side streak should be a multiple of the rear streak, but, so far, due to image quality I haven't been able to resolve this issue. I should be able to determine the true length of the object, but distortions due to resizing (even a Bitmapped image) don't reveal any hard spots that I can link together as "OK, this is the object in toto." 7. My experience with long exposures of moving objects (motorcycles, bullets and the like) is that there will be a streak over the length of the shutter open condition, and, the object will be captured as a relatively solid image at the moment of shutter closing. If the 'rear' is the actual shape of the object, it's a very strange plane. 8. The object appears to be reflecting light, rather than self- luminous. The strobes are ambiguous as well, and, could be simply spots reflecting light. You'll notice that all the ground lights visible go much farther into the blue spectrum (blue makes white whiter), and, the object is more into the yellow. Only one part of the craft (including the strobes) appears to approach the perfect 255-255-255 of the ground lights in the picture, and, that's the round(ish) end of the "Gutter" (255- 255-247) between the "rear" and the "body," which is 'raised' relative to the line of the body. The Gutter, incidentally, is uniquely distinct from the side, indicating it is a part of the rear, with no blurred slash connecting. The Capital Dome is the only ground object to approach this intensity, and it's reflecting light with almost the exact same intensity, spectrum, and, color numbers as the object (averaging 255-255-222). I believe we can all agree that the Capital Dome is not self- luminous. Thanks to Gordon DeSpain ILLINOIS -- TRIANGULAR UFO SIGHTED AURORA -- On February 15, 2005, at 8:30 PM, the witness was outdoors when he spotted the shape of a triangle approaching from the southwest just above the ceiling of clouds. There was no noise and no lights. He reports, "I could see the shape very distinctly because of the lights from the city." "The object continued on a northeasterly path, moving at a high rate of speed. It flew in a straight line, without deviation and I tracked it until it was out of sight." The object was bigger than a commercial airliner and was flying at about 400 feet off the ground. It was traveling at 300 to 400 miles per hour. Thanks to Brian Vike Missouri =96 Photo of Objects from Webcam. ST. LOUIS -- Mark Andrews writes, "The objects in the Midwest Haze Camera photo are much too large to be birds. I'm somewhat familiar with the vista of downtown St. Louis from the Illinois side of the river, and for any objects to show up so well from that distance (as shown in the photos) demands that they are at least the size of a mid-sized car. As I'm sure you're already aware, many of the best and most dramatic UFOs caught on film were not visible to the naked eye. My very strong hunch is that this might very well be one such case, and that the purveyors of the objects purposely arranged for the images to appear as they did; wanting to be seen. The web-cam takes photos once each hour (mwhazecam.net/st.html). Thanks to Mark Andrews Skywatch International Editor=92s Note: We need additional information and images to make good photo analysis. The objects could be dirt on the lens. Additional photos would clarify this. More resolution might determine they are large birds or balloons. New Hampshire =96 Sightings and Few Answers WEIRS TIMES carried an article and photo of a UFO on March 3, 2005. The article is titled, "UFOs over New Hampshire: Many Sightings and Few Answers." Roger Madsen writes "UFOs, unidentified flying objects, are a passion for a few true believers, an object of derision for many, and a mystery to the vast majority of mankind. Yet as ABCs Peter Jennings two-hour special on the subject last week showed, some 80 million Americans believe intelligent beings from another planet have visited earth and fully 40 million people believe they have seen a UFO. http://www.weirs.com/archivepdfs/wtimes030305.pdf The article shows a UFO over Stinson Lake, on February 2000. Buster Hinson of Bristol shot this picture of a snow covered landscape. He said, "He was unaware of the object at top left while taking the picture. Paul Spera's recent videography work is also mentioned on page 25, third paragraph. Paul emailed me this morning to tell me about both articles. Thank you, Paul. http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeomxpk/ North Carolina =96Sightings HIGH POINT --Alan Caviness writes, "For years, residents in an undisclosed area just west of High Point, North Carolina have experienced strange occurrences of the seemingly "paranormal" variety." The experiences vary widely and involve many different kinds of paranormal topics normally studied by investigators. After three years of field studies and monitoring, I have determined and confirmed many times over that the overall phenomenon is real and does indeed encompass many aspects of the paranormal world. The colleagues I work with also agree without reservation. Here is a typical photo: New Jersey =96 Huge Saucer PENNSAUKEN =96 A huge saucer was reported hovering over the Delaware River near Philadelphia at sunset on or about February 23, 2005. A woman who emigrated from the Dominican Republic stated, "She and her family of eight people saw the huge craft hovering over the river for at least fifteen minutes. It was at least as big as a football field. She said, "The saucer without lights or very dim lights was hovering about 500 feet above the water." She felt it may have taking on fresh water from the river. Her family had seen similar craft over the Dominican Republic on a regular basis but people were afraid to report the sightings. Ohio =96 UFO Sightings Continue CLEVELAND UFO =96 A UFO was spotted in Parma/Broadview Heights hovering for 35 minutes in one place. Aaron B. Clark wrote: "This may sound crazy but I think strange objects are following my sister around! This is the third UFO she's seen since November. She doesn't even like to talk about UFOs! She was driving south on Broadview and stopped at the light at Pleasant Valley. She saw an object hovering above Topps grocery store about 250 feet up. The object moved south as she drove south and it crossed the road and stopped to hover above the Lube Stop. She could hear no sound coming from the object. It had a bright white light shining out and other bluish green lights. She said it was like a flattened oval on the bottom and two box like structures were on top like a multi-layer cake. It started moving north at a fast pace and moved out of sight. This sighting lasted from about 10:39-10:45 PM on March 8, 2005: Thanks to Aaron http://www.clevelandufo.com FOSTORIA =96 George Ritter sent me this still image from his RCA VHS video camera yesterday, showing a similar UFO 100 miles west of Cleveland.[] CINCINNATI =96 I was driving home from work the other evening on February 20, 2005, at 10 PM, and noticed a huge bright light in the sky, just sitting there. I pulled my car over so I could get out and look, and watched for about three or four minutes. Finally, it began to slowly move about and then it just vanished. It could not have been a plane. Do you know what the light could have been? I would love to know. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director, www.nuforc.org/ Pennsylvania Light Rose Up and Hovered POTTSVILLE -- I was looking southeast of Pottsville on March 3, 2005, at 10:45 PM, and saw a light slowly rising about 100 to 150 feet left of blinking elf tower. This light rose up over a ridge near a water reservoir. The object then stopped and hovered. I would say about 250 feet. The light did not vary in intensity and shone for about two minutes then slowly faded and disappeared. I observed this through binoculars and could not get a good look at the shape since the light emitting from it prevented any further description. Also, the light that came from it did not illuminate anything around it. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home Texas - Oval/Disc KAUFMAN COUNTY -- On February 21, 2005, at 5:34 PM, I was taking pictures of this jet laying a chemtrail. I took 4 or 5 pictures and this one had a couple of objects in it. I didn't visually see these things but I was facing southwest when the picture was taken in fairly clear sky. They appear to me to be close to the trail and if they are, they are huge, a lot larger than the jet or trail as you can see. I like to take pictures and video of these jets and trails for the simple reason that objects seem to check them out and I catch a few when they do. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com Video photo taken Jan 6, 2005, over Kaufman County. Thanks to Mr. Lawalk [] Washington - Four Lights Hover Around Object SUMNER --I was upstairs looking out my bathroom window, on a warm evening. There were scattered, thin clouds that you can see through in the dark, otherwise, the night sky was clear in spots. Looking to my left towards town, lots of airplanes were in the flight path, one right after another probably three heading towards SeaTac International Airport. I heard someone talking kind of loud and excited on March 1, 2005, at 8:05 PM. I saw two lights in the sky very low and bright. As I leaned out my window to get a better look, suddenly I saw three more; they were spaced as if in a circle around a different looking thing. I figured the four positioned around the center light must be those low flying 'planes' (that hardly make any noise at all). All of them seemed to hover including the center one. They were lower than planes fly. At this point the lights on it looked as though it could be a saucer shape with two big white lights with a thin blue light behind them with two other smaller lights next to the big ones but spread out a little. When it leaned to its right to leave, it got very, very bright. Once accelerating in that direction, it looked like two round sections-one on top of the other - one light white and the other a pinkish purple but very soft. I believe they were flashing as it came by pretty close, maybe a couple of blocks away heading towards Edgewood sort of diagonally. Half way there it began jerking back and forth very quickly maybe three times and then continued on. There were five lights already moving in the same direction but one was closer to me. It, too, got very bright as it banked to follow the other one. As it went by, it looked to me like a Thunderbird design.www.hbccufo.com EPHRATA =96 EPHRATA =96 A silver metallic shiny cylinder shaped craft was reported flying just 600 feet over the witnesses for four minutes on February14, 2005, at 7 PM. It started looking like it was just a normal airplane then it got closer and all of sudden just stopped and then started going again the stopped again then took off really fast and that=92s the last we saw of it. Thanks to Peter Davenport www.nuforc.org Australia - White Flash and Power Outage BANORA POINT -- Around Midnight something strange happened to our town on the 24th of February 2005, causing a power outage for around four hours. My parents told me that they were sitting outside on our balcony at around midnight, when there was a very bright white flash in the sky, and straight after, the power went out. There was no thunder or sound, but they believed it to be just an exploding Power Transformer. The night after, I was talking to one of my friends that was awake at the time of the occurrence, and he, also, said that he witnessed a bright flash in the sky around the same time. Thanks to Brian Vike www.hbccufo.com Canada =96 Triangle WHITBY, ONTARIO -- On February 24, 2005, at 6:50 PM, the witness was driving home on Highway 401, and noticed the full moon and three white lights with a single red light in the center of a craft. It was hovering over a spot slightly northeast of my position; I'm going to guess it was "triangular". This hovering craft was definitely over Whitby, as I watched it while driving east toward it. My distance from the object was about 4 miles at an altitude of 2500 feet. As I drew closer to it, it started to move toward Oshawa, Ontario. It was definitely not a helicopter, it was way too long, not to mention the lighting sequence. The red light seemed to be rotating. I flashed my headlights on and off twice, while driving. It appeared to flash back, but not brightly, there was a difference in its lighting tone. After that happened as I drew closer to it, that's when it started to move off. Thanks to Brian Vike Langdale, B.C. -- A fellow telephoned Brian Vike to report a sighting of a strange object he witnessed on February 26, 2005 at 9:55 AM, in the parking lot at the BC Ferry Terminal. While standing in the parking lot with his back turned toward the ocean the man glanced up and saw two elongated, shiny silver objects and in the center of the two he was able to see a fuzzy grayish patch. As he followed the object with his eyes, it made a sharp 45 degree turn where the two elongated objects turned into a circular shape thing as he put it. After the turn, it quickly became just a point of light and quickly vanished in about two seconds. The altitude of the object was approximately 8,000 feet and no sound was heard whatsoever coming from the object. The witness "guessed" it may have been about 75 feet in length. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director www.hbccufo.com Army Report from Iraq Army Colonel Jess Marcel, Jr., Age 69 writes, "I am doing ok and happy with my assignment although the extreme heat has not arrived yet. I fly at least once or twice a week in a Blackhawk and had seven hours flying time yesterday going from Baghdad to Mosel, to Tikrit, Urbil and Kirkut. I have to say it is gratifying to see the folks in the countryside (shepherds) wave a greeting to us as we fly low level no higher than 50 feet unless you have to clear wires. We also do "candy bombs" where packages of candy are dropped out when kids are seen. We had to 'orbit' over Kirkut for 15 minutes yesterday and had some rocks thrown at us but we got the hell out before bullets were launched but that is an exception. Locally the daily mortar barrages on the camp have declined to only three or four attacks a week, a decided improvement since the elections, so we are winning although it is a very dangerous place yet. My old Humvee was replaced with an armored Humvee with bullet proof windows to drive (it is like driving a tank) but I feel a lot better since I do drive along the periphery of the camp where the bad guys are. I know the windows work because there is a bullet impact on the passenger side that occurred before the vehicle was assigned to me. Hopefully, there will not be any other 'tests' of the window integrity. No, I feel we are winning although we will be here for a long time." Thanks to Jess Marcel and Bond Johnson. Jess is famous for picking up pieces of a UFO, brought home by his Dad in Roswell, NM in 1947. Netherlands =96 Disks Chasing Each Other On February 22, 2005, at 3:45 PM, two disks were reported that were about as long as a car and white with vertical stripes on them. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director, www.nuforc.org/ PUERTO RICO - Route 303 Proclaimed "Extraterrestrial Highway" Puerto Rico Research Group reports, since UFO activity began in earnest in Southwestern Puerto Rico in 1987, with an alleged UFO base under Laguna Cartagena, Route 303 has played a significant role as a site for UFO sightings and alleged alien abductions. After many years of efforts, members of PRRG have managed to secure recognition for this two-lane highway as an "Extraterrestrial Highway". The following communiqu=E9 was received earlier today from Jos=E9 Mart=EDnez Echevarr=EDa of PRRG: "Greetings to all. We are pleased to announce the news that PR Route 303, running from Lajas to Cabo Rojo, has been proclaimed an Extraterrestrial Highway. This highway is known to many researchers in Puerto Rico for the number of accounts it has yielded, ranging from UFO sightings to alien encounters." A celebration will be held in Monte Indio, Sierra Bermeja, Route 303, in the city of Lajas on Saturday, April 9, 2005 from 6:00 pm onward. Translation (c) 2005. Scott Corrales, IHU. Special thanks to Jos=E9 Mart=EDnez E. Kiki - Dreams of UFOs Kiki writes, "When I was in college I went to a group who could hear communications telepathically from space people. It was all friendly. They were teaching how to use our minds to do things more efficiently. I don=92t know what happened to the leaders of the group. It was interesting. I saw the Peter Jennings report. They seemed to do the subject justice. I think the stories of the people who had been abducted were frightful, though. It was made quite clear that we were surrounded by much support from others in space. I am telling you this so you know I am not a doubter. I just have never seen a ship that I recognized as one. The reason I am writing is to tell you I had a dream last week. It is one of those dreams that I know is real. I was watching in space at night and I could see into the universe. There was a pin hole in space that ships were passing through, one after the other. As they came through they went into a formation, like a huge grid. There were thousands of them. I knew they were coming from many different dimensions into this one because we were on the brink of destroying our planet and they could not allow that to happen as it would create an imbalance in the whole creation. I did not have a feeling of any danger from them, simply support. I don=92t know anyone else to share this with. Many blessings in your work Thanks to Kiki. Editor's Note: We recieve letters from many people with similar dreams. At the same time we are recieving reports of high UFO activity from all over the world. Dreams are not considered as reliable evidence, but are they sometimes indicators? Is it possible for dreams to be transmitted by visitors? Are they attempting communication by entering our dreams? The evidence is mounting that we are not alone in the universe. Subscribe to Filer's Files to receive UFO CD So you won't miss a single breaking news story or the increased evidence for UFO and life in the universe. George A. Filer 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. Subscribe today and receive a free UFO Photo CD. Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ 08055. You can also Click: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. "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 you relocate, 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 > Mar > Mar 9 Secrecy News -- 03/10/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 05:06:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:26:26 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/10/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 22 March 10, 2005 ** SUDAN DEMANDS CLARIFICATION OF 1962 U.S. NUCLEAR TEST ** FBIS PHOTOS OF IRAN NUCLEAR FACILITIES ** HHS INFOSEC POLICY: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, OR WHATEVER ** SAYING NEY TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE SUDAN DEMANDS CLARIFICATION OF 1962 U.S. NUCLEAR TEST The government of Sudan is seeking clarification of reports that the United States carried out a nuclear explosive test in Sudan in 1962. Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Uthman Isma'il told Al Jazirah television yesterday that his country was responding to the disclosure of the Sudan nuclear test at a congressional hearing held by the House Armed Services Committee last week. But there was no such test. A review of the transcript of the March 2 House Armed Services Strategic Services Subcommittee hearing does indeed include a startling reference by Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) to a 1962 "Sudan" nuclear test. "The Sudan test displaced 12 million tons of earth and dug a crater 320 feet deep in over 1000 feet in diameter," she noted. It is clear from the context that she was referring to a well- known July 6, 1962 explosion at the Nevada Test Site codenamed "Sedan." The remarkable crater it left behind can be visited today by tourists. The term "Sedan" was mistakenly transcribed as "Sudan" both by Federal News Service and by FDCH Political Transcripts and has been so recorded in the Nexis news data base, where it continues to cause mischief. Sudanese Agriculture Minister Majzoub el-Khalifa suggested Wednesday that the purported U.S. nuclear test may have caused cancers in Sudan, according to a Xinhua news story today. See "US Envoy Summoned Over House Remarks on US Nuclear Tests in Sudan," Al Jazirah, March 9 (translated by CIA's Foreign Broadcast Information Service), and an excerpt from Rep. Tauscher's remarks, March 2, here: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/03/sudan.html FBIS PHOTOS OF IRAN NUCLEAR FACILITIES If open sources can easily mislead, as in the Sedan/Sudan case, at least they can be easily corrected. In any case, they remain a uniquely productive resource. So, for example, much of what is known about Iran's nuclear program, where clandestine human sources are said to be sparse at best, derives from the focused collection of open source material. Two recent photo collections compiled by the CIA's Foreign Broadcast Information Service illustrate the point (thanks to J). The Qatran Heavy Water Facility in Khondab near Arak is featured in this October 2004 report (2.3 MB PowerPoint file): http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/iran_hwf.ppt The Uranium Conversion Facility near Isfahan is profiled in this November 2004 document (8.7 MB PowerPoint file): http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/iran_ucf.ppt HHS INFOSEC POLICY: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, OR WHATEVER The Department of Health and Human Services updated its information security policies in a December 2004 policy issuance. The 64 page document is prominently marked "for official use only." On the other hand, it states candidly on the title page, "Disclosure is not expected to cause serious harm to HHS." See "Information Security Program Policy," Department of Health and Human Services, December 15, 2004 (thanks to RT): http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/hhs-infosec.pdf SAYING NEY TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE The Congressional Research Service policy of refusing to provide direct public access to CRS publications is mandated by Congress and is defended most vigorously by Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH), chairman of the House Committee on House Administration. Rep. Ney recently reiterated for Newhouse News his view that the CRS mission "is to provide information to Congress and not the public" and that "making all reports public could inhibit lawmakers who want to learn more about sensitive topics." See the interesting report "Demand for Public Information is Surging" by Chuck McCutcheon, Newhouse News Service, March 8: http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/mccutcheon030805.html While there is a place for confidential reports prepared for individual lawmakers, the blanket CRS policy precluding direct public access makes no sense and invites defiance. Some recent CRS products that might inhibit Rep. Ney include the following. "FY2006 Appropriations for State and Local Homeland Security," February 14, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RS22050.pdf "The Cost of Operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Enhanced Security," updated February 9, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS21644.pdf "The Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative: An Overview," February 15, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22053.pdf "Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-War Governance," updated January 28, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL31339.pdf "Implications of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations upon the Regulation of Consular Identification Cards," updated January 26, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21627.pdf "Honduras: Political and Economic Situation and U.S. Relations," updated January 19, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS21103.pdf "Iran's Nuclear Program: Recent Developments," updated January 14, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS21592.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 > Mar > Mar 9 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 10:42:48 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 10:11:27 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:49:36 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:53:54 -0000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >><snip> >And in your resolution (above) where the auditor periodically >strides round insisting on things being done his way, are you >suggesting that we are already in that situation and that all >the debate and fuss between Dr. Salla and others is just the >employees moaning and grinding their teeth until he eventually >leaves the room, or are you suggesting that we need to aim for >that condition wherebye, although there is strong verbal >disagreement, at least we're all working in the same building >and possibly even in the same office? Hi Stuart, I see the collective organism that is The List as going through an introspective exercise of testing and reaffirming the barriers in its own mind between the evidential issue and the presently unquantified audit-risk issue. The conclusion it will inevitably settle on is that there remains a non-zero audit risk in respect of whistleblower testimony because the probability that some of it might be true cannot be set at zero. What an auditor would do, I suppose, is then make sure that there are procedures "in place" (as they horribly say) to monitor that testimony and minimise unforeseeable intelligence failures by way of a risk-based analysis, whilst at the same time ensuring that those procedures do not compromise the more rigorous evidence-based analysis going on next door. Of course these activities coexist in each of us to some extent; collectively they are objectified in factions that label one another and tend to polarise. The polarisation is not a bad thing, it is the natural process by which the collective mind keeps these issues apart. It is good mental hygiene! It is right that Paul Kimball, for example, (and me, also) should be sceptical of the claims championed by Michael Salla, and highly critical when Michael advocates that his very open risk-based strategy should be adopted also by those doing the evidence-based work. At the same time Michael Salla has a valid audit function, and in a way you could say that if he did not exist then ufology would be obliged to invent him! But having then objectified its audit procedure to circumvent exopolitical risk, in the form of Michael Salla, it is the responsibility of the evidenced-based half of the ufological mind to then go on with its work as though the other half is of no account. The cost of minimising risk in this way is that there will be false alarms from time to time, but this is acceptable. Any real-world warning system that works at all - radar for example - is going to have a non-zero false alarm rate. It just means that you need to be very careful interpreting the display.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Jennings On C2C? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 04:04:31 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:08:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Jennings On C2C? - Hatch >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:38:38 EST >Subject: Jennings On C2C? >You know I had to ask. >Turn about's fair play. >Think Jennings would appear on C2C and let George or Art >or Linda Moulton-Howe have a go at him? >Think Jennings would have the cajones to do it? Should >we start a letter writing campaign? >He could be grilled by Stan Friedman and Royce Myers. >It'd be a better fight than the first Ali vs. Frazier. Hi Greg:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:19:18 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:10:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Lehmberg >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:18:21 -0500 >Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? <snip> >I am often asked, "Do you believe in UFOs?" to which I reply, >"If you hold a pencil over the table and let it go do you >_believe_ it will fall on the table?" >This is often followed by further discussion, but the person >usually get the point about "belief". Can't _wait_ to use that myself... consider it _stolen_ fair and square! <g> Moreover, your post made me reflect on the irony of being dismissed as a believer when the problem is more accurately described as having the belief burned out of me... as a result of _enduring_ the mainstream's duplicitous and reactionary authoritarianisms. I don't believe in hijacked governments, predator institutions, conflicted sciences, non-accountable agencies, and the validity of a biased status quo. I can't believe the pelicanist klasskurtzians of CSICOPia. I _don't_ believe! I'm a non-believer. Irony.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:50:49 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:13:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - King >From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 >Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >I received this message via another mailing List. >What to make of it, I am unsure. >I forward it exactly as received. >Geoff Richardson >http://www.thewhyfiles.net >----- >THE GREAT INTERNET UFO HOAX. >http://img45.exs.cx/img45/1214/luemap9hb.jpg >Description: On Saturday, March 19, Many people on the internet >will hoax the world with the biggest mass UFO sighting in years. >The craft will zoom around the United States and the world >according to the diagram in the link. ALL TIMES ARE PM UNLESS >NOTED >NOTE TO ALL: YOU CANNOT GET IN TROUBLE FOR REPORTING THIS TO ANY >OF THE FOLLOWING. YOU HAVE MY 100% GURANTEE. ALSO ALL REPORTS >CAN BE MADE ANONYMOUSLY >What the **** do I report seeing? >http://img58.exs.cx/img58/8521/ufodiagram8bh.jpg >The above is a rough estimate of what you saw - a craft with 4 >lights, 2 of which blinked several colors (42). IT IS BY NO >MEANS A GUIDELINE. The cool thing about UFO sightings is, >everyone who sees one has a different interpretation of it. Did >the craft slow to almost a dead stop when it was only a mile >away from you, only to zoom across the sky faster than any >aircraft you've ever seen? Up to you. Anothing detail to add to >your report is that you heard the craft making a >"loooooooooooooooooo" sound as it zoomed away from you. >How is this going to happen? Well, it's simple, really, but we >need your help! The craft described above will make it's way >around the United States and the world as shown in the diagram >in the link. Simply report your sighting as happening at >APPROXIMATELY (not exactly) the appropriate time, and that's it. >Your report will sound more serious if you sound a little >'shaken up' by the whole incident. The best time to call is >within a half hour of your sighting, but if you cannot call >until the next day, call anyway, a late call is better than >none. This will not happen unless you help us out by doing any >of the following: >Report the sighting to the National UFO Reporting center by >calling 206-722-3000 Hi Geoff, The site originates in Dallas, TX, and is hosted through TUCOWS. The administrative, Technical, and billing contacts are all the same entity... theplanet.com, a local internet service provider. Technical contact "handle" for the IP address is "Peter Pathos", and his phone number is 214-782-7800. He apparently works for theplanet.com.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:57:30 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:15:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Shough >From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 >Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >I received this message via another mailing List. >What to make of it, I am unsure. >I forward it exactly as received. >Geoff Richardson >THE GREAT INTERNET UFO HOAX. >http://img45.exs.cx/img45/1214/luemap9hb.jpg >Description: On Saturday, March 19, Many people on the internet >will hoax the world with the biggest mass UFO sighting in years. >The craft will zoom around the United States and the world >according to the diagram in the link. ALL TIMES ARE PM UNLESS >NOTED >NOTE TO ALL: YOU CANNOT GET IN TROUBLE FOR REPORTING THIS TO ANY >OF THE FOLLOWING. YOU HAVE MY 100% GURANTEE. ALSO ALL REPORTS >CAN BE MADE ANONYMOUSLY >What the **** do I report seeing? >http://img58.exs.cx/img58/8521/ufodiagram8bh.jpg >The above is a rough estimate of what you saw - a craft with 4 >lights, 2 of which blinked several colors (42). IT IS BY NO >MEANS A GUIDELINE. The cool thing about UFO sightings is, >everyone who sees one has a different interpretation of it. Did >the craft slow to almost a dead stop when it was only a mile >away from you, only to zoom across the sky faster than any >aircraft you've ever seen? Up to you. Anothing detail to add to >your report is that you heard the craft making a >"loooooooooooooooooo" sound as it zoomed away from you. >How is this going to happen? Well, it's simple, really, but we >need your help! The craft described above will make it's way >around the United States and the world as shown in the diagram >in the link. Simply report your sighting as happening at >APPROXIMATELY (not exactly) the appropriate time, and that's it. >Your report will sound more serious if you sound a little >'shaken up' by the whole incident. The best time to call is >within a half hour of your sighting, but if you cannot call >until the next day, call anyway, a late call is better than >none. This will not happen unless you help us out by doing any >of the following: >Report the sighting to the National UFO Reporting center by >calling 206-722-3000 Whatever else it is it sounds like the basis of an interesting experiment. Properly designed, something like this could provide useful statistical data for a variety of purposes. But I do
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:43:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:21:44 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs - >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 18:29:42 +0000 >Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 09:01:13 -1000 >>Subject: Re: UFO Whistleblowers & Special Access Programs <snip> >Therein lies one of the >most serious problems in ufology; a total lack of critical >standards and a will to believe despite transparent evidence of >fraud. >- Richard Hall And again, I have to point at an underlying generator of an 'information void' facilitated by a suspect mainstream which allows for and even encourages that which you would decry here. You bemoan the symptoms, Sir, and ignore the disease. Remember the HAL 9000 computer in Clark's second 2001 SO film? It failed and went crazy in the landmark first film as a result of becoming embroiled in Humanity's culture of secrecy and the knowledge void that came as a result. And it didn't matter that it was in on the joke; it went crazy, anyway, in the utter faithlessness of it all... Individuals are each their own HAL 9000 computer. I'm compelled to believe that Lazar and others are a devise of our secrecy culture to manage truth, to hide the truth in plain sight, to drag us back and forth across the line of credulity so hard and often that the line gets smudged. Much of our evidence is leaked to us in this fashion, as has been pointed out before... good info passed on by 'non-good' persons so as to discredit that information... what allows for that behavior? That's the real enemy of reason, I suspect.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:04:44 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:23:42 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Lehmberg >From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 >Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I wanted to share my review of a book I just received last week. >This book is incredible! This book has UFO sightings, for over >30 years all in one volume. I have not been able to put the book >down for me it is the bible for Ufology. <snip> You've convinced me Ms. Conte... I'm going to order one just so I'll have it in the house as you say. <g> >Where to order: >Scarecrow Press, Inc. >4720 Boston Way >Lanham, Maryland 20706 >1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 >http://www.scarecrowpress.com/ >ISBN 0-8108-3881-8 >Thanks for letting me share, >Carrie
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:42:01 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:25:06 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kaeser >From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 >Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I wanted to share my review of a book I just received last week. >This book is incredible! This book has UFO sightings, for over >30 years all in one volume. I have not been able to put the book >down for me it is the bible for Ufology. You've pointed to a fact that many of us have known since its release. Richard Hall's update to the classic UFO Evidence I published originally by NICAP is a must have for anyone who is truly interested in this field of study. <snip> >My cost for the book and shipping was under $60.00 - less than >$2.00 for a year of sightings. This is a bargain and the best >part, you have all the sightings and information for 30 years in >one place and easy to find. >Where to order: >Scarecrow Press, Inc. >4720 Boston Way >Lanham, Maryland 20706 >1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 >http://www.scarecrowpress.com/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:27:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller List I have been in the unusual position of reading the criticism and reaction to the Jenning's docu first and then watching it after. I live in the UK and have only just received a copy from a friend. With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many on this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what to expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment to this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have "balance" and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed how it should be. Jennings was not tasked with making a propaganda film. I thought it was an excellent, honest effort. Actually, not quite totally honest because I do agree with the comments made about the Roswell piece. I have no problem with the "facts" that were thrown at us and neither did I sense it was done, as others have suggested, as some form of sop to the US government. How it struck me was that someone on the production side had already made his mind up beforehand and wasn't going to be persuaded by any volume of evidence that he might have come across while researching for the programme. That was dishonest. I think you Yanks are fortunate to have had a programme look at the subject seriously and to have had it treated with respect by a senior presenter. Can't say the same about the UK where a couple of miserable sceptics seem to dominate this type of production.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: The Death Of Ufology - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:44:54 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:29:54 -0500 Subject: Re: The Death Of Ufology - Lehmberg >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:34:15 -0500 >Subject: Re: The Death Of Ufology >>From: Norio Hayakawa <Groom51S4.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 18:32:49 EST >>Subject: The Death Of Ufology >>The Death Of Ufology >>by Norio Hayakawa >>I hear from some UFO-believing circles that with the dismal >>effect of the much anticipated but overwhelmingly disappointing >>Peter Jennings's recent UFO Special, that Ufology seems to be >>going nowhere or worse yet, is even dead. <snip> >I have concluded that there really is something unusual flying >around!! Hot damn! You could be right!!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Dr. John Mack UK Legal Proceedings From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:46:09 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:33:00 -0500 Subject: Dr. John Mack UK Legal Proceedings It seems that my previous correspondance to this List about the legal proceedings regarding the death of Dr. John Mack were somewhate naively premature. It appears that when you kill a pedestrian in the UK while being (allegedly) smashed out of your brains, the law doesn't hurry itself about the matter too much. My post in early February confirming that Raymond Czechowski would be brought to trial on March 9th 2005 was wrong. He did indeed attend court yesterday but under the banner of something called "a mention" or some such nonsense. He returns to court again on April 20th when pleas and direction will be discussed. A trial date should be set then. At this rate it is obvious that it could well be a year after
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:59:43 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:47:36 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Ledger >From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 >Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I wanted to share my review of a book I just received last week. >This book is incredible! This book has UFO sightings, for over >30 years all in one volume. I have not been able to put the book >down for me it is the bible for Ufology. <snip> >Where to order: >Scarecrow Press, Inc. >4720 Boston Way >Lanham, Maryland 20706 >1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 >http://www.scarecrowpress.com/ >ISBN 0-8108-3881-8 >Thanks for letting me share, >Carrie Hey Dick, You have a new publicist? Seriously, don't leave home without it. As well Carrie, you can also get the first book The UFO Evidence and you might also want to look at Jerry Clark's "The UFO Book" and his UFO Encyclopedias.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:17:23 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:51:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:54:28 EST >Subject: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs >I hate to say I told you so..... >Greg >----- >Source: The Chicago Sun-Times >http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/cst-nws-stein071.html >03-07-05 >UFOs Are Only In Your Dreams -- Keep Them There >by >Neil Steinberg Sun-Times Columnist ><nsteinberg.nul> <snip> >What most undermines the UFO case is precisely the endless >number of sightings and claims served up to support it. They >suggest UFOs of every possible description -- big, small, round, >glowing, dark, cylindrical, square, fast, slow. Which means we >are either a) constantly visited by a vast armada of celestial >visitors of every known description who somehow never end up at >Daley Plaza at noon. Or, b) Gee, maybe people are making all >this up. >I, and the half of America that can read without moving our >lips, chose B. Hi Greg, While Mr. Steinberg may have mastered the art of reading with immobile lips, he seems to have a deficiency elsewhere. He has his A and his B right, but he completely misses the "C" of his multiple choice explanation, to whit... c) Some UFO sightings are the real deal, but only perhaps 15% of them. The 50% of Americans that believe in UFOs need no proof and the news media uses the 85% of explainable UFOs to justify not taking the rest seriously. I, and the other critical thinking, open minded types that sometimes think there are real mysteries to unravel choose "C".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:14:36 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:53:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Groff >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:54:28 EST >Subject: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs >I hate to say I told you so..... >Greg >----- >Source: The Chicago Sun-Times >http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/cst-nws-stein071.html >03-07-05 >UFOs Are Only In Your Dreams -- Keep Them There >by >Neil Steinberg Sun-Times Columnist ><nsteinberg.nul> >Opening shot >I couldn't bring myself to watch Peter Jennings' two-hour >special on ABC recently what-iffing the existence of UFOs. Half >the people in America believe in flying saucers, and there is a >big enough mountain of "evidence" of extraterrestrial visitation >that an army of TV journalists could happily mine it for years >while going through the motions of weighing facts. >The thing is, you don't need two hours to explain why UFOs are >half hallucination, half fraud. I can do it in a single >paragraph. Here goes: >Two undisputed facts: The universe is very large, and time is >very long. Though no one questions the possibility of flying >objects at some point in some place in the galaxy, there is no >convincing evidence of UFOs here and now. Extraordinary claims >demand extraordinary proof, but instead we are offered the same >just-out-of-the-corner-of-your-eyesight nonsense that is the >hallmark of all hoaxes, from perpetual motion to alchemy. We >never hear of sightings from the army of astronomers monitoring >the skies all over the world, do we? Instead we get pie plates >on a string that become more obviously fake with each passing >year, shored up with periodic mass hysterias. His "argument" fails at it's premise... twice. These are not facts and they are not undisputed. We certainly perceive the universe as being vast and we perceive time is some kind of eternal process but if anyone only slightly understands Special Relativity we see that time is relative and String and M-brane theory tell us that the shortest distance between two points could be folded space-time. This is the same concept that seems to be lost on some (but not all) SETI-ists.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:02:26 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:56:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting - King >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:34:57 -0500 >Subject: Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting >>Source: The Alaska Highway News - Fort St. John - The Yukon >>http://tinyurl.com/6nrz9 >>03-03-05 >>Local Claims UFO Sighting >>By Sarah Young >>Alaska Highway News <snip> >>"These things are highly polished and moving very fast," he >>said. "I don't know exactly what they are, but they're solid and >>silent. >Highly polished? Light reflected from objects that are _almost_ >in line with the sun cause bright reflections (technically a >result of "forward gloss"... the reflectivity of forward >scattered light; in this case light rays from the sun are >scattered or reflected into a direction only slightly different >from the original direction of the light rays). >Consider this: >grazing angle reflection of sunlight from black >valvet is quite >bright. >Tiny objects zipping around in the atmosphere, or large dust >particles or plant seeds, etc. are not generally visible >_unless_ you look almost in the direction of the sun. The safest >way to do this, of course,is to let a roof or some object block >the direct light of the sun so you see only the skyglow >immediately adjacent to the sun. Hi Bruce, Indeed the "JohnBro technique" as it was popularized if I recall... using a partially blocked sun to light typically invisible flittering things... resulted in myriad "rods" being imaged by just about anyone with the time to waste. What is amazing is how many living things are around us every second of whose presence we are oblivious. So much so that photographing or video-recording a patch of sky using such light tricks almost always results in seeing amazing, otherworldly things because they can't believe those things are bugs or that so many are flying around all the time. Yet they are, and they are. JohnBro had a whole fleet modeled in a 3D app, and had elaborate docking mechanisms, thrust outlets, winglets, windscreens, etc. They should call JohnBro the "Mothman". <hehe>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: The Hums - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:06:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:00:56 -0500 Subject: Re: The Hums - White >From: Darryl Barker <admin.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 17:32:27 -0600 (CST) >Subject: Re: The Hums <snip> >On the day before one of the recent U.S. >Presidential debates held at Washington University (my employer) >in St. Louis, Missouri, I experienced something I've never felt >before. I was in a university building setting up video >equipment for a visiting lecturer and abruptly, my eardrums >started buzzing like something was shooting through my skull. It >was the most intense vibration I've ever felt that had no >apparent source of origin. Let me comment that intense vibration, both of body parts and of objects which are not in contact with anything vibrating, is a somewhat common experience among our electronic harassment group members. We have one fellow who has such aggravated vibration of his head that he had to leave his university undergrad course because he was disrupting classes. Neither he nor our group know of any technology which could do this. _Extremely_ powerful pulsed radio signals _might_ do such a thing, but the power levels which could do that would be so high as to instantly burn the hapless target to a cinder. >It was not the typical high-frequency burst of sound often >heard in the ear. _That_really_ makes my ears perk up! Please contact me off-List and tell me more. That is "us" quite often, too.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 10 Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:56:39 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:03:40 -0500 Subject: Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams - >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:21 -0600 >Subject: Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:26:22 -1000 >>Subject: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams >>Aloha List members, >>I am very concerned by a message I just received from James >>Gilliland concerning the lack of coverage of Mt Adams, >>Washington, UFO sightings. James and ECETI (www.eceti.org) have >>an impressive database of sightings from a range of witnesses >>yet he claims these are not included in the National UFO >>Reporting Center database. As I'm sure members are aware, James >>is a strong supporter of the ETH and has had numerous witnesses >>confirm the sightings there. He has an impressive online >>collection of videos and photos supporting the UFO sightings. He >>also claims that the UFOs respond to communications from >>observers which tends to support the ETH. James is concerned >>that this may be part of an ongoing campaign to coverup the >>extensive sightings at Mt Adams, and more disturbingly discredit >>his broader claims concerning the ETH. ><snip> >Hello Dr. Salla, >Gilliland is not seeing UFOs. His web site completely explains >what the things he shows are. Emissaries from the Star >Brotherhood have to get here somehow. How you could confuse his >"Sattva Sanctuary" beam ships, plasma ships, energy vortexes, >orbs, Mary energy beams, and Mother ships for Unidentified >objects is a mystery to me. <snip> >Sample call to NUFORC... >NUFORC: Hello, NUFORC. >Caller: Hi, I wanted to report an energy vortex. >NUFORC: Uhh, ok. An energy vortex. Where are you located? >Caller: The Sattva Sanctuary near Mt. Adams. We were channeling >Melia from Orion and the vortex just opened up before us. >NUFORC: Ok. What did this look like? >Caller: Well, it looked like a big cloud over the mountain. >NUFORC: I see. What led you to conclude that this was an energy >vortex? >Caller: James told us. >NUFORC: What happened when the vortex appeared? >Caller: We were filled with awe that Melia would confirm her >presence, and we basked in the glow of her presence. >NUFORC: Well, do you think it could have been a cloud? >Caller: I don't think. I know what it was. It was >Melia from Orion opening an energy vortex. <snip> Hi Kyle: <LOL> You won't find the James Gilliland materials in my database either. Stuff like that gets filtered out somehow. I see Dr. Salla doesn't mind promoting it however, I guess it passed the element-115 (Lazar) test.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:08:19 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm >I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's >only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know >what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the >unusual. >UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue >Book. >With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these >subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official >conclusions are. >Fair is fair, and at least folks will have something official to At this website you can find the FBI file on flying saucers, a file that "didn't exist" (a la J. Edgar Hoover) until it was released in 1977 as a result of my FOIA request. If you search carefully through through the 1600 page file you will find that top AF officials seriously considered the interplanetary explanation way back in 1952.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:44 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:10:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Maccabee >From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 >Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >I received this message via another mailing List. >What to make of it, I am unsure. >I forward it exactly as received. >Geoff Richardson >http://www.thewhyfiles.net ----- >THE GREAT INTERNET UFO HOAX. >http://img45.exs.cx/img45/1214/luemap9hb.jpg >Description: On Saturday, March 19, Many people on the internet >will hoax the world with the biggest mass UFO sighting in years. >The craft will zoom around the United States and the world >according to the diagram in the link. ALL TIMES ARE PM UNLESS >NOTED >NOTE TO ALL: YOU CANNOT GET IN TROUBLE FOR REPORTING THIS TO ANY >OF THE FOLLOWING. YOU HAVE MY 100% GURANTEE. ALSO ALL REPORTS >CAN BE MADE ANONYMOUSLY <snip> >Report the sighting to the National UFO Reporting center by >calling 206-722-3000
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:13:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Maccabee >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:54:28 EST >Subject: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs >I hate to say I told you so..... >Greg ----- >Source: The Chicago Sun-Times >http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/cst-nws-stein071.html >03-07-05 >UFOs Are Only In Your Dreams -- Keep Them There >by >Neil Steinberg Sun-Times Columnist ><nsteinberg.nul> >Opening shot >I couldn't bring myself to watch Peter Jennings' two-hour >special on ABC recently what-iffing the existence of UFOs. Half >the people in America believe in flying saucers, and there is a >big enough mountain of "evidence" of extraterrestrial visitation >that an army of TV journalists could happily mine it for years >while going through the motions of weighing facts. >The thing is, you don't need two hours to explain why UFOs are >half hallucination, half fraud. I can do it in a single >paragraph. Here goes: >Two undisputed facts: The universe is very large, and time is > >very long. Though no one questions the possibility of flying >objects at some point in some place in the galaxy, there is no >convincing evidence of UFOs here and now. Extraordinary claims >demand extraordinary proof, but instead we are offered the same >just-out-of-the-corner-of-your-eyesight nonsense that is the >hallmark of all hoaxes, from perpetual motion to alchemy. We >never hear of sightings from the army of astronomers monitoring >the skies all over the world, do we? At least he leaves this as a question, indicating that he isn't positive that it is one of his "facts." He apparently never talked to Clyde Tombaugh, discoverer or Pluto (not the dog). >Instead we get pie plates >on a string that become more obviously fake with each passing >year, shored up with periodic mass hysterias. Clearly if that were the case I wouldn't be here >What most undermines the UFO case is precisely the endless >number of sightings and claims served up to support it. They >suggest UFOs of every possible description -- big, small, round, >glowing, dark, cylindrical, square, fast, slow. Which means we >are either a) constantly visited by a vast armada of celestial >visitors of every known description who somehow never end up at >Daley Plaza at noon. Or, b) Gee, maybe people are making all >this up. >I, and the half of America that can read without moving our >lips, chose B.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: UFO Interview On UK Radio - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:05:29 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:15:01 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Interview On UK Radio - Rimmer >From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:39:13 -0000 >Subject: UFO Interview On UK Radio >I'll be a guest on James Whale's show on the Talk Sport radio >station this Monday night, between around 11pm and 1am. >I'll be discussing the latest news in ufology, taking questions >from callers and giving listeners the chance to relate details >of any UFO sightings they may have had. >I'll be discussing Bryan Appleyard's new book, Aliens: Why They >Are Here, and the inclusion of UFOs on the agenda at this year's >Newcastle Science Festival - separate post to follow. I also got asked to appear on this show, but as the researcher seemed to be more concerned with the Laughlan, Nevada, bun-fight. I'll be interested to see who they get as the token sceptic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:08:42 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:16:48 -0500 Subject: Re: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >To: To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:21:26 -0500 >Subject: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe Argentina >INEXPLICATA >The Journal of Hispanic Ufology >March 6, 2005 >Source: http://www.infobae.com/notas/nota.php?Idx=170363&IdxSeccion=100439# >Date: 03.04.05 >A Mysterious Character Harasses Santa Fe Residents >Local residents say it jumps from house to house, is dressed in >black and has red eyes. After hundreds of complaints, police is >looking for it. Listen to the Sheriff's story on Radio 10. >Santa Fe is jumping. Residents of the southern area are >frightened by the appearance of a strange entity they've dubbed >"the rooftop madman" and who - according to their accounts - >leaps from roof to roof engaging in acrobatics. >Witness claim it stands two meters tall, is entirely clad in >black and wears a balaclava; it sports a cape and its eyes shine >red according to the information received by researchers. This >character is able to cross the streets by leaping from one >rooftop to the next, taking acrobatic leaps that can be of up to >five meters high and ten meters long. This is fascinating. It seems very similar to Spring-Heel Jack who terrorised parts of London in the 19th century. There's a very full account of the events by Mike Dash in Fortean Studies, Volume 3, 1996.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission From: Dave Haith <visions.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:33:32 -0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:43:40 -0500 Subject: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Former NASA Employee The report, below, is the recollection of a trusted friend of mine who would be happy for the incident to be fully investigated by researchers on this List. To avoid giving him unnecessary hassle he would like to remain incognito for the present but would probably be willing to go public if his case was being treated seriously. He is happy to communicate with anybody keen to get to grips with his story - but initially prefers to do it through me via email. Write to me privately or via the List and I will forward on to 'D', who I have to say I have complete respect for. I have done some checking on the Web and can find no inconsistencies regarding his descriptions of the MSC and those who worked there at the time. But I have neither the expertise, contacts or resources to further investigate what appears to be a very important case. DH ----- An Oil Drop On A Camera Lens When I first started working for NASA, its initials, not the name, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, was how it was referred to. NASA is with whom I began employment in 1958 as a security guard on Wayside in Houston Texas. They hadn't even started building Manned Spacecraft Center at Webster yet, which would later be called MSC at Clear Lake. In 1961, I transferred to the Fire Department at the fledgling MSC and started training as a Fire and Safety Technician. The contractor responsible for Fire and Safety was Houston Fire and Safety. They held the contract for five years, losing out to Wackenhut Corporation out of Coral Gables Florida in 1966 because Wackenhut incorporated all phases of fire, safety and security under one blanket contract. Some say that George Wackenhut had first, Kennedy's, then Johnson's ear, but I haven't seen proof of it. Everybody who hired in as a Fire Fighter was cross-trained in almost every aspect of maintenance operations. I attended numerous schools on fire alarm systems, pump repair, electrical and mechanical maintenance, physical plant operations, and last and certainly not the least, fire, safety and security. We were told that we had to pass a very rigid security clearance investigation, and that our job would be forfeit if we did no pass. I passed with flying colors and kept my job. There were several who did not pass, and we were never told why they had been laid off. When I started, there were approximately three hundred eighty men who were attached to the fire department there at MSC. I saw a lot of men come and go during my twenty-six years of employment, but I never saw anyone who was willing to speak out about the rigid security. Even in later years, I kept in touch with several of my closest friends, when conversations turned to anything we were told not to talk about, there was always someone there to remind us that we had been told not to discuss it, even after we were no longer there. I saw things, and heard statements from Astronauts that I didn't discuss, even with my wife or family. It was like a gigantic trust handed us and we honored it. To this day, I don't talk about everything I heard when I was around the Astronauts, at least not in detail. There were several incidents that occurred during my tenure as an employee and to several of the Fire Fighters that got all of us thinking about how our government wasn't telling all they knew. For instance, in Building #1 on Johnson Space center, which was Building #2 when I first started work there, most of the north center of the second floor was the "crypto" room. We didn't know what went on in the room, but we did know that we weren't allowed in the room under normal circumstances. However, when an alarm came in at the Fire Station, we responded to the floor of the building that showed up on the enunciator panel at the station, One time, around 1964, we responded to Bldg.#2 to find that the alarm originated from the "crypto" room. However, the doors were open and we just walked in to check the minor panel located there. The whole east wall was covered with photos of UFOs. As we finished up, the officer of that room came back in and found us there. He actually pulled his sidearm and pointed it at us before demanding to know why we had entered that room. He eventually accepted our explanation, but it took Everette D. Shafer*, head of NASA Security to vouch for us before the man would shut off his threats towards us. Everette Shafer reminded him, that had the armed officer been there in the room with the door locked, the incident could have been avoided. No, that was one very unhappy officer. I think he was Air Force, but I could be wrong; he was a Captain, I do remember that. When I came back from the Cape in 1968, we had another incident in the very same room, and the same officer was there also. This time, he had Mr. Shafer to give the okay for us to enter the room, with him as our armed escort. But this time the walls on all four sides were photo-to-photo of UFOs and other very strange looking aircraft. We did our job, got out of there, but Mr. Shafer and the officer both told us to not speak to anyone of what we saw or observed in that room, ever! During Man Rated Tests, the fire department was trained to be rescuers should anything happen. Or job was to stand-by in readiness during many long hours of boring, repetitious, and meaningless exercises. Most times it was not the Astronauts themselves who performed the exercises, rather it was trained test subjects who did. We all became acquainted with them. Buildings #7, #32, and #33 on Manned Spacecraft Center, were the test sites for Vacuum Chamber related tests. In Building #32, was housed the largest vacuum chamber in the free world. In Building #33, was the ultra-high vacuum test chamber, and Building #7 housed three test chambers. Building #7 is also where the Astronauts Space suits were manufactured. Throughout the sixties, we performed numerous duties, some at MSC, while others were at Area 2000 at Ellington AFB in Genoa, Texas. Area 2000 was where the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle was tested and flown by test pilots and Astronauts. I was Crew Chief of the Contract Fire Department personnel at Area 2000 for close to a year, working all three shifts due to loss of personnel or whatever, but eventually being promoted up the ladder to Training Officer. Not anything really special happened while I was Training Officer, but I did get to go places that was off limits to other personnel. It was one of my jobs to draw the pre-fire attack plans for every building on Site, to accomplish that job, I had the need to enter all buildings and accurately record everything of interest towards fire, safety, and security onto drawings. That is why I remember so much detail concerning the buildings, their locations, the interior layouts, and where all exits and equipment relating to Fire, Safety and Security were located. Another part of everyone's job was the Safety patrols during any mission. From the first day on the job, before we were trained to become good little NASA Fire Fighters, we were told that we would perform various duties during our employment, that we would be constantly training, ensuring that we all would have the latest knowledge to do our job with the highest of proficiency. Part of the training regimen was to know, and I do mean know, every building so intimately that we could draw a set of plans for them in our sleep. We ate, slept, and dreamed of building plans; construction materials inside and out, how many panels and manufacturer name of all alarm systems; how to repair or reset those systems; what was in the buildings that could be dangerous to us during emergencies.etc. but mostly the interior layout, hallways, exits, room locations. With that small introduction, I will now attempt to give you the details of the safety patrols for Integrated Mission Control Center, commonly known as Building #30 on Johnson Space Center. Building #30 is not just one building, rather it is two separate buildings, each having distinct functions. There is the Administrative side that houses support personnel, and the Mission Operations Control Rooms, otherwise known as the MOCR. By the way, at the time I was there, the Admin side of Building #30 was the building that housed the office of James Oberg. There are two MOCR's located in IMCC, one on the second floor and one on the third floor. The building is like a big square, windowless structure sitting right next to the Southwestern Bell building. You can't miss it, because it is the only building that looks like it. Three stories inside, it looks more like a five- storied structure from the outside. As you have most likely ascertained by now, there are some very high ceilings inside the MOCR's. Although we were never told we couldn't go into the MOCR's during missions, all of the safety inspectors assumed that we weren't welcome, that maybe we would be a distraction. However, we were allowed in every section surrounding the MOCR's. On the second and third floors, there was the outside section, and the center section with a hallway completely around the inside of the building that separated the outside section from the inside. The outside section of the building housed the air handlers, workshops, soft and hardware support offices, and tool rooms, while the inside portion was dedicated to the MOCR and it's support. In the MOCR itself, was a huge screen that stretched across the entire wall. It was the mission map, which kept the technicians apprised where the vehicle was at any given moment during its orbits above the earth. On one end was the big television screen, which received its picture from a large bank of cameras directly behind the screen. Those cameras generated a lot of heat, and part of our duty during inspections was to make sure that there weren't any ignitable materials in that area. It was kept dark for some reason, but the cameras gave off enough light so a person didn't stumble around in there. It was also very cold most of the time, especially during missions. At the back of the MOCR is a series of glass windows. These windows are set into the wall that makes up the barrier that separates the viewing room from the MOCR. The viewing room has two doors for entry. Entry is accomplished by getting off the elevator, taking a right down the hall, and the first door is the first entryway. About twenty-five feet further down the hall is the second door. Situated between them is a small door about three to four feet high. This door lets a maintenance technician into the area under the viewing room. On each side of the room, to the front are located phone booths, one on each side of the window. There are about eight rows of seats with a set of slight stairs that separate them into two sections. The seats are similar to any seat you may see in a movie house, but way more comfortable. Mounted on the wall above the big windows are two large screen colored TV's with several high mounted speakers so the viewer can listen in to the conversations between the Astronauts and the ground crews. At the back of the room, right at the top of the center stairs, is a minor alarm panel. It was this minor alarm panel that safety had to monitor during all missions. The room was relatively quiet, cool and very comfortable. It was here I always chose to take a pipe break. My partner was also a pipe smoker, so we shared stories, listened to the quiet banter between the ground crew and the vehicle, and actually didn't pay much attention to what was going on in the MOCR. Nothing out of the way ever occurred in the Missions, but during one particular Mission, something so unique happened that I would always remember it. Jim Baker and I had been doing the regular routine safety inspection during a Manned Mission to the Moon. We entered the viewing room at the end of our patrol, and as was our wont, sat at the back of the room to enjoy a pipe. We both smoked a pipe, and the viewing room allowed smokers. We had been there for no longer than fifteen minutes, it may have been longer, but I doubt it, when the stage left door opened and in walked several, at least five of the upper echelon administrators of Johnson Space Center. Uh, it actually wasn't called Johnson Space Center at that time; rather the name was Manned Spacecraft Center. Anyway, I do know that one of the people was definitely Chrome Dome, as we were irreverently known to call Dr. Gilruth. At that time I had hair and found it funny to refer to one of the finest minds our country had by the moniker, "Chrome Dome." Just prior to their entering the viewing room, Jim and I noticed that the Technicians in the MOCR had gotten up and left the room. Now, that isn't unusual during a normal EVA, but the Astronauts were in Hadley's Rille. They couldn't be seen because they were over the edge, down in the Rille itself. The Lunar Rover was about thirty, maybe forty or more yards from the edge, and had the left front camera on the spot where the Astronauts had disappeared. You could hear the Astronauts voices talking, but as in most of the dialogs, we weren't paying close attention to what they were saying. We did notice the technicians getting up and leaving the MOCR. Jim is the one who actually said something about it. "Looks as if everyone got a bee in their bonnet at the same time, don't it?" "Most probably their piss and lunch break," I offered. It was right after I made that statement, that Dr. Gilruth entered, and several others came in with him. They didn't look back, just went to the center of the viewing room and were talking excitedly among themselves and pointing towards the big screen to the right of the main screen in the MOCR. Jim and I then paid close attention to what was on the screen. There was an object above the spot where the Astronauts were supposed to be in Hadley's Rille, just hovering. I am totally positive as to it being an object; it was round, it had a shiny side with a shadow side, with the shadow side matching the shadows on the moon, and though all the video shots coming from the moon looked black and white, they could actually have been in color. The harsh lighting was probably responsible for the illusion of black and white. Anyway, The object started a slow move from screen left to screen right. The camera on the left front of the Rover followed the object as it moved screen right. Soon it was apparent that it actually wasn't moving screen right, but was circling the Rover. The Rover has two mounted cameras on it. One camera was mounted on the left front and one on the right rear. As the object came into view of the right rear, that camera picked up the object and continued tracking it as it circled, very slowly around the Rover. It finally came to the point where the right rear camera could no longer follow it, so the left front camera picked up the image again and followed it to where it was once more above where the Astronauts were in Hadley's Rille. I uttered something that brought us to the attention of Dr. Gilruth and the others. "What the crap is that? What caused me to utter that phrase was, the object took off straight up and went out of sight in less than a second. It may have been longer, but seemed like it was gone in the blink of an eye, but I was still aware that it had actually gone straight up. One of the men there, I still think it was Everette Shafer, turned and asked us what we were doing in the room, and we told them that we were there to inspect the fire alarm panel at the rear of the room and to take our smoke break. And to ask a question of our own. "What in hell was that about?" Can you believe they actually told us it was a drop of oil on the lens of the camera on the moon? Truth! Now, I am not stupid, though I have done a few stupid things in my life, like getting married the first time, but I know a pile of schlock when I hear it! It wasn't a drop of oil, no way! I opened my mouth and said, "There's no way it was on the lens on the camera on the moon." "The temperature would freeze the drop solid." Which the man holding my clearance in his hand, reading my name replied, "I mean it was a drop of oil on the camera lens at the back of that screen." To which he pointed. Okay, it was a good place to shut up and get out of the viewing room, but.. Once more I said something because as I have previously stated, I'm not stupid! "There's no way that drop of oil is on any one of those lenses at the back of the screen, because of the temperature." "The heat is high enough back there to set the drop of oil on fire." Who ever it was holding my badge in his hand, says, "If you want to keep your job, you'll get out of here and keep your mouth shut about what occurred here." Not about what I saw, not about why I was in there, just get out and keep my mouth shut about what had occured. I pulled away from him, turned to Jim and said lets go. When we exited the room, to our surprise, there was Dick Nieber and Loring E. Williams of security on the doors. They were as surprised at seeing us come out of the room as we were at seeing them standing guard there. Further, they told us that Andrado and two others were on the rear doors to keep unauthorized people out of there. Then they told us their story: They were pulled away from vehicular patrol and told to go immediately to IMCC and the second floor MOCR viewing room and stand guard until further notice. They were told that absolutely nobody other than Dr. Gilruth and the people who were with him were to be allowed into the room. It's no wonder our being there disturbed Dr. Gilruth and the others; we weren't supposed to be there. When Nieber asked us what had happened in there, we told them we couldn't discuss it. They thought that the Astronauts had been killed. That was what had been circulating between them while they were guarding the doors to the viewing room. Wrong! That same evening, I sat at the typewriter and wrote out everything, time, date, place, and mission, plus all the names I could remember of who were there with all the facts concerning the incident, and asked Jim Baker to read it and sign it. He read it and signed it on condition that I would give him a copy of the report. I went to the copier, and made six complete copies of the report and gave Jim one of them. Incidentally, when we arrived back at the fire station, Sgt. Thomas Walsh asked us to come to the dispatcher's office to speak to him. He closed the door and told us that he'd received a call from Shafer, that no matter what we had seen or heard in the viewing room, we were not supposed to discuss it with anyone at all, ever, because it had to do with National Security. "National Security over a drop of oil on a camera lens?" I think not! Jim Baker died in 1983 of a sudden heart attack. He was forty- six and one of my best friends and we got together regularly at his home, in his gun shop to discuss different people and things. The last time I saw him alive, I asked him if he still had his report hidden away and he told me he had actually burned his copy, but had given a copy to another friend from West Virginia who wanted it. I retired in 1979, and moved to Austin Texas. I was security dispatcher for the LBJ Presidential Library there in Austin when I got a call from Jim's daughter, Amey, telling me that her father had passed away early that morning. Jim's last words to me, there in his little gun shop was, "You sure raised hell over that drop of oil, but you were right, they
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Frustration - Gottschall From: Sheryl Gottschall <gottscha.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:13:25 +1000 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:11:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Frustration - Gottschall >From: Simon Hicks <slh.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:44:40 +0800 >Subject: Re: Frustration >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:18:06 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Frustration >Steve, >Good point and this is the reason why I decided to produce the >attached brief video - that being it is of a size that allows it >to be emailed and has content that should be compelling enough >to the uninitiated to get them to open their minds. >I hope that at least some of you feel the same way and forward >this video on to your friends. >It can be downloaded from: >http://members.iinet.net.au/~wlh/dp/DP%20Trailer%20sl.wmv >and is 1.5mb for 5 minutes duration. Hi Simon, Just wanted to say thanks for making that emailable trailer. It's very useful. I don't know why these things haven't been done before and sent to the media campaigning the UFO issue. If we pooled our resources rather than fight over them the UFO community would be such an opposing force. Maybe we'll wake up to that one day.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Voyager Probes In Funding Crisis From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:06:56 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:26:44 -0500 Subject: Voyager Probes In Funding Crisis Source: BBC News http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4338245.stm 03-10-05 Voyager Probes In Funding Crisis Nasa's twin Voyager probes may have to close down in October to save money, the US space agency has said. Launched in 1977, Voyagers One and Two are now more than 14 billion and 11 billion km from Earth, respectively. They are on their final mission to locate the boundary between the Sun's domain and interstellar space. But the agency's Earth-Sun System division has had to cut its budget for next year from $74m to $53m, meaning that some projects will be abandoned. Although the Voyager probes are thought to have another 15 years of life left in them, they are very expensive to run, costing Nasa about $4.2m a year for operations and data analysis. Other missions like Ulysses, which was launched in 1990 to explore the Sun's polar regions, might also have to be abandoned after the end of the fiscal year in October.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Holman From: Brett Holman <b.holman.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:14:00 +1100 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:28:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Holman >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 >Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? Hi Kyle, >I noticed this image at MSSS' MOC Gallery. It was dated January >of this year... >http://tinyurl.com/6sqvg >And I found it strikingly similar to images I saw here: >http://tinyurl.com/639eb >and here: >http://tinyurl.com/5ylxg >I'm sure the scale is off, or the scene on Mars is easily >explainable. But it sure took me by surprise on first glance. Interesting. But I notice that there are shadows from small hills and so on in the MSSS picture - but none associated with the bands, as you would expect if they were terraces (as there are in the other terrestrial images you link to.) So I think these are just differently coloured bands or strata of rock. It's also what the caption suggests - it also gives an indication of the image scale.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 04:42:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:30:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? - Warren >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:19:18 -0600 >Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 21:18:21 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Ufologists On SETI Program? ><snip> >>I am often asked, "Do you believe in UFOs?" to which I reply, >>"If you hold a pencil over the table and let it go do you >>_believe_ it will fall on the table?" >>This is often followed by further discussion, but the person >>usually get the point about "belief". >Can't _wait_ to use that myself... consider it _stolen_ fair and >square! <g> >Moreover, your post made me reflect on the irony of being >dismissed as a believer when the problem is more accurately >described as having the belief burned out of me... as a result >of _enduring_ the mainstream's duplicitous and reactionary >authoritarianisms. I don't believe in hijacked governments, >predator institutions, conflicted sciences, non-accountable >agencies, and the validity of a biased status quo. I can't >believe the pelicanist klasskurtzians of CSICOPia. I _don't_ >believe! I'm a non-believer. Irony. >alienview.nul -:|:- > www.AlienView.net Gentlemen, To use the verb, "believe" in association with a "factual thing," i.e., UFO(s) is nonsensical.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:55:42 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:31:57 -0500 Subject: Re: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:08:42 +0000 >Subject: Re: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe Argentina >>From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >>To: To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:21:26 -0500 >>Subject: The Rooftop Madman" Appears in Santa Fe Argentina >>INEXPLICATA >>The Journal of Hispanic Ufology >>March 6, 2005 >>Source: http://www.infobae.com/notas/nota.php?Idx=170363&IdxSeccion=100439# >>Date: 03.04.05 >>A Mysterious Character Harasses Santa Fe Residents >>Local residents say it jumps from house to house, is dressed in >>black and has red eyes. After hundreds of complaints, police is >>looking for it. Listen to the Sheriff's story on Radio 10. >This is fascinating. It seems very similar to Spring-Heel Jack >who terrorised parts of London in the 19th century. There's a >very full account of the events by Mike Dash in Fortean Studies, >Volume 3, 1996. Wait a minute. I remember reading about 'Spring-Heel Jack' when I was a wee lad. Folks still talked about him like he was real. We had the 'Jersey Devil' back then with similar characteristics. People really believe the stories. Few years ago didn't India have 'The Monkey Man'. Similar behavior and caused people to jump off roofs and carry on. Keep a fair weather eye when rolling with these 'monster' stories. Some people take them too seriously. Best,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:56:50 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:38:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm >>I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's >>only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know >>what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the >>unusual. >>UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue >>Book. >>With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these >>subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official >>conclusions are. >At this website you can find the FBI file on flying saucers, a >file that "didn't exist" (a la J. Edgar Hoover) until it was >released in 1977 as a result of my FOIA request. If you search >carefully through through the 1600 page file you will find that >top AF officials seriously considered the interplanetary >explanation way back in 1952. Doc, you sure have a sharp eye! Those early FBI documents always cracked me up. For something that doesn't exist, for a subject that officially the U.S. isn't interested in there sure is a harvest wagon full of documents that says otherwise. I remember several years ago slogging through years of news microfilm like Jan Aldrich of project1947.com and finding an article during the '47 saucer wave that had the U.S. government put forward the ETH first! Everyone else thought the saucers were Soviet or even the work of the wee folk. Soon as the ETH was put out there bold and without ridicule, the heat came down. Tribute to Jennings' special is how the investigators originally and seriously presented the ETH as the source of the phenomenon but got shot down because the general said there was no proof. >But you can find the whole story in "The UFO FBI Connection" >(which also includes the CIA connection) and you can read >the key FBI documents in the history of 1952 at: >http://brumac.8k.com/1952YEAROFUFO/1952YEAROFUFO.html Thanks for the link Doc. That sure shows 'em.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 11 UFO Phenomena From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:00:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:00:02 -0500 Subject: UFO Phenomena Source: Talon Marks - the newspaper of Cerritos College, Norwalk, California http://tinyurl.com/5rl6g 03-09-05 UFO Phenomena Diona Carrillo "Hello...is there anybody out there?" If you're a Pink Floyd fan, then you obviously know those were lyrics from the song "Is there anybody out there." Not only are those lyrics, but they also bring up an interesting question, to me anyway, regarding if we really are alone in this huge universe we are a part of. For decades there have been sightings of UFOs by millions and millions of people. It is a mystery that only science can solve, and yet the phenomenon remains largely unexamined. Almost 50 percent of Americans, according to recent polls, and millions of people elsewhere in the world believe that UFOs are real. The idea of aliens seems a bit far fetched and unbelievable to the other 50 percent of people in America, but to honestly believe and argue that we (meaning all life forms on Earth) are the only forms of life in a universe that is full of billions of galaxies, to me, is extremely egocentric. From the arguments of non-believers such as Dr. Alan Heimlich as far back as 1948, to pilots continually spotting UFOs in the late 1960s, to the start of project blue book, which was used get the documentation of UFO sightings and lure them out of newspapers and the media by different persuasion tactics, to the controversial discoveries at Roswell, UFOs and aliens have really gotten people's attention. We watch movies such as "Signs" and "The Forgotten" and think, wow, what a great movie. But is it just a movie, or could those situations really happen? Could aliens actually exist? It seems in movies aliens are portrayed as having a mean and evil persona by chasing away families, destroying homes and lives and scaring the hell out of people. But from what has been said about aliens and abductions from people who claim they've been abducted and seen UFOs doesn't really fit in with what we are shown aliens are capable of, in movies at least. No doubt it makes for a great movie, but to me it serves as a bigger purpose. Movies about aliens, unless based on true stories, are often overexaggerated and unrealistic. Which could only lead to us, the viewers, assuming aliens, UFOs and fiction should all be placed under the same genre. An even bigger influence on this concept is the TV program X- Files that Fox aired about untold truths regarding the UFO phenomena and the conspiracy's behind them. Just another fiction-based tactic to make us believe the entire concept is based on sensationalism. Sometimes it seems that the whole issue is merely a science vs. myth debate, but wouldn't it be great if it wasn't? Cover-ups are often suspected by our government when the issue of UFOs and aliens is mentioned. Roswell could be the biggest conspiracy yet, but who knows if we'll ever know...but I sure want to. When unidentified debris from a flying disk consisting of metals never seen or created by mankind were found at Roswell on July 8, 1947, most people concluded it was enough evidence to believe that it was not from this earth. But surprisingly, the very next day, a press conference was gathered, and soon after, a press release denying that any type of flying disk was found and telling people it was only parts of a weather balloon had a lasting effect of people. For 30 years Roswell was ignored until Major Jesse Marcel, who originally found the debris, was again contacted by researcher Stan Friedman, because Marcel says he is sure the debris was nothing from earth. So what to believe? I've come up with my own two senses on the topic. In my mind "aliens" exist just as much as you and I exist on this earth. Who knows, maybe some other life form out there is trying to figure out if we actually exist or if our traces of being are fictitious. Not only do I believe aliens exist, but in my mind, if visits from aliens to earth are happening and the claims people are making about abductions are true, then it seems as though they are not here to chase families, destroy homes and lives and scare the hell out of people. If I were to conclude why aliens are visiting it would be to learn about us just as we are attempting to learn about them. But, from the "evidence" that has been found, I would also conclude that these extraterrestrials are much more intelligent life forms then us, and I have to imagine that their intelligence can be billions of years ahead of ours, which makes for an even bigger controversial theory. But, the facts are in and scientists say that there is no hard evidence that aliens exist, and that there is a slim chance we'll ever find evidence; but to completely rule the idea out and put it away, to forget about it, would only lesson the chances of knowing if there are other life forms out there. Most of the reporting on this subject by the mainstream media holds those who claim to have seen UFOs up to ridicule. UFO sightings are the butt of the joke nowadays. Sources who confirm they've been abducted or have seen UFOs are often criticized on personal levels and often called crazy in order to conclude that in no way could those situations the claim to have experienced happened. Could that be just another cover-up to the truth? So maybe seeing is believing to some, but believing in possibilities and having the courage and determination to know
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Hello Aliens This Is Earth Calling From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:26:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:26:48 -0500 Subject: Hello Aliens This Is Earth Calling Source: NewScientist.Com http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7128 03-10-05 Hello Aliens This Is Earth Calling Kelly Young NewScientist.com news service A group of engineers has offered a solution for people who want a direct line to aliens - by broadcasting their phone calls directly into space. People wanting to contact extraterrestrial beings through www.TalkToAliens.com can dial a premium rate US number and have their call routed through a transmitter and sent into space through a 3.2-metre-wide dish in central Connecticut, US. The service, launched on 27 February, will cost users $3.99 per minute, says Eric Knight, president of the company. He says that a large radio receiver - like the Arecibo dish in Puerto Rico - situated on a distant planet might be large enough for an alien civilisation to receive the calls. The company is not aiming its antenna at specific stars with the potential to harbour life. Rather, they have opted to track across the Milky Way galaxy to cover a host of nearby stars. Christopher Rose at Rutgers University in New Jersey, US, has studied the energy efficiency of beaming radio signals to outer space. He calculated an estimate for New Scientist that, at best, the signal from the phone calls could only be properly received about two light years away. But the nearest star to our solar system is about four light years away: "Unfortunately, I suspect that customers of this service have little hope of getting their messages across," Rose says. Ambassadors for Earth Humans have been broadcasting radio waves for the better part of a century. "Anything you want to broadcast - that's fine," says Fred Walter, an astronomer at Stony Brook University, New York, US. "It's just adding to the noise and the clutter." The company is not monitoring the phone calls to space but, on its website, people are asked to be "good Earth Ambassadors". Knight adds: "I think people should use common sense and judgment, too." The service is run by a group of engineers, the Civilian Space Exploration Team, that launched the first civilian rocket into space on 17 May 2004. The uncrewed rocket reached an altitude 116 kilometres - the widely accepted cusp of space is at 100 km. Pics in space Since the alien hotline was turned on, www.TalkToAliens.com has fielded hundreds of calls, averaging about three minutes each. The service is similar to companies that let you name a star, Walter says. "If you want to do it, you're not hurting anybody." The company is also working on a way to send people's emails, digital photos and videos into the void. The announcement comes just over a week after the chief executive of Craigslist, Jim Buckmaster, won an eBay auction for $1225 to send a message into space through the Florida-based Deep Space Communication Network in the US. Craigslist - an
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:26:10 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:35:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Groff >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:44 -0500 >Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >>From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 >>Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >>I received this message via another mailing List. >>What to make of it, I am unsure. >>I forward it exactly as received. >>Geoff Richardson >>http://www.thewhyfiles.net >----- >>THE GREAT INTERNET UFO HOAX. > >>http://img45.exs.cx/img45/1214/luemap9hb.jpg <snip> >>Report the sighting to the National UFO Reporting center by >>calling 206-722-3000 >I saw this several days ago. Just what we need... a bunch of >internet yo-yo's talking up the time of the Peter Davenport, AKA >"The Lone Gunman" according to Jennings' special. >Good thing they announced it in advance. Peter told me that he's already received several hundred
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 13:06:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:39:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Ledger >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:14:36 -0600 >Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:54:28 EST >>Subject: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs >>I hate to say I told you so..... >>Greg >>----- >>Source: The Chicago Sun-Times >>http://www.suntimes.com/output/steinberg/cst-nws-stein071.html >>03-07-05 >>UFOs Are Only In Your Dreams -- Keep Them There >>by >>Neil Steinberg Sun-Times Columnist >><nsteinberg.nul Terry, Kyle, Greg and the others who have responded with some dismay to the article, Don't tell us, tell him. I did. If he gets enough he will probably respond with another article even more vitriolic. Then respond to that and also send letters to the editor. Not complaining letters per se but more of an advisory nature. Keep tossing the ball back. Be brief and concise and without any hint of rancor or any of the wild-eyed "believer" rhetoric. I suggest the use of words like amusing and poorly researched and ask about his UFO book. Did it get published? I think I mentioned something about how I hoped his usual articles were better prepared than this "little" effort. I also mentioned that he must have gotten the short straw from the assignment editor that day and that it appeared that he was writing for his fellow reporters rather than from any real knowledge of the phenomenon.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 I Have Found The Average UFO Believer From: William Bolt <ab5sy.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:25:54 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:56:55 -0500 Subject: I Have Found The Average UFO Believer For those of you whom have devoted much of your life and money to UFO research and wonder why more so-called 'believers' have failed to be supportive, I think I now know why. To start with they are very supportive... to the tune of over 3 million bucks and thousands of man hours to save... are you ready for this? To save the Star Trek Enterprise TV program. All around the globe they are showing up at rally points to protest the planned removal of Enterprise from the tube. So now you know where they are and I bet they will remain glued to their couches, eyes glazed over worship'n the likes of Wm Shatner.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Argentine Rooftop Madman Still At Large From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:11:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:09:52 -0500 Subject: Argentine Rooftop Madman Still At Large INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 11, 2005 Source: www.ElLitoral.com Date: 10 March 2005 Argentina: The Rooftop Madman Still At Large Stories of apparitions will not cease in Barrio San Lorenzo. Psychologists are working with local residents Residents of Barrio San Lorenzo remain frightened and agitated by the apparitions of the ghostly character dubbed "Rooftop Madman" (Loco de los Techos). Given prevailing state of nervous tension, two psychologists began working with the population through the health assistance center located in the area. As part of the plan, periodic meetings have been held with local residents. The next one is slated for this afternoon at 18:00 hours. Interested parties have been invited - by means of handbills -- to seek individual interviews with the mental health professionals. Meanwhile, the ghostly characters' "visits" continue taking place according to numerous stories that are heard daily in the streets of San Lorenzo. This morning, a 60 year-old man told El Litoral that he saw the "Madman" in a hallway in his own home, while another woman from the 4000 block of Entre Rios St. claims having seen the phantom on the top of an old pine tree. "My 11
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:14:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:10:51 -0500 Subject: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:02:26 -0600 >Subject: Re: Yukon Local Claims UFO Sighting >What is amazing is how many living things are around us every >second of whose presence we are oblivious. So much so that >photographing or video-recording a patch of sky using such light >tricks almost always results in seeing amazing, otherworldly >things because they can't believe those things are bugs or that >so many are flying around all the time. Yet they are, and they >are. The same amazing sights occur when shining a bright laser into
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 International Network of Experiencer Therapists From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:26:17 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:18:59 -0500 Subject: International Network of Experiencer Therapists Launch of INET: International Network of Experiencer Therapists INET launches; made possible by alliance of organizations On behalf of the International Contact Support Network (ICSN), the John E. Mack Institute (JEMI), the Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support (OPUS), and, we hope, other organizations to be announced, I'd like to briefly share news about an effort we have allied for: We are coming together for the purpose of maintaining a master network or directory of therapists who service the "experiencer" population - people whose lives have been deeply affected by alien encounters or similar extraordinary experiences. We are allied for a priority that supersedes any of our varying opinions and beliefs about aliens: helping people-in-need without pathologizing them. It is our collective intention to broaden this alliance to include other groups in the United States, Canada, and abroad that have each been attempting to maintain their own regional lists of clinicians. Each group will then invite the therapists they know and trust into the network, which we have dubbed the International Network of Experiencer Therapists (INET). This network is owned by no one but serves many. Furthermore, it is a secure network, accessible only by representatives of each group of the alliance and by the therapists themselves. (Therapists can also use INET for secure communication between colleagues). Currently, OPUS and JEMI have begun to invite the therapists whom they know into INET, and others are making preparations to do the same. At this time we would like to invite interested parties - representatives of organizations who have similar needs and similar clinical lists - to please contact any of us for more information on how to ally with this effort for the benefit of all. I hasten to mention that this secure network is entirely free, and if that sounds too good to be true, be assured that truth can indeed be stranger than fiction. (We have several people to thank for making this possible, but I want to keep this announcement brief). Will Bueche Representing JEMI, can be reached at info [at] johnemackinstitute.org or call 617-497-2667 June Steiner, representing OPUS, can be reached at JuniMoon7 [at] aol.com Lester Velez, representing OPUS, can be reached at LesterV424 [at] aol.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 O'[I Don't Believe A Word Of This]Reilly Checks In From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:07:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:47:19 -0500 Subject: O'[I Don't Believe A Word Of This]Reilly Checks In Well, Wild Bill O'Reilly has had his say on UFOs and, indirectly, on Jennings' show. He devoted 6 1/2 minutes of his March 11 show to the subject. Bill Isn't impressed. Mark Rodeghier was straightfaced but Bill had a continual "Mona Lisa Smile", some might say a smirk, when asking whether or not Mark really believed what he was saying. Unexplained sightings are not unexpected. But what bothers him is that with all the scientific stuff (satellites, telescopes, etc.) there is no clear evidence. O'Reilly is not impressed with the conspiracy theory - government cover up. Bill doesn't buy abductions, even though he apparently talked to some lady who made a claim of a sighting (and abduction?) Jed Turnbull of the Intruders Foundation said he believes because the people come to him with consistent stories. Bill pointed out that all one has to do is read the Internet to find out what is "supposed" to happen during an abduction. People could be making up stories for attention. He asked Mark, do you believe that there are hundreds of people who have been abducted? Mark indirectly said yes. But Bill went back to "gaining attention" as the reason for reporting such stories. Jed commented that there were abductions even in NYC and Bill responded in a jocular manner that he could walk outside and find 18 aliens in New York. He ended on a skeptical note without being debunking about it. He did not have a "noted skeptic" on the show. The show ended with O'Reilly challenging the aliens to pick on someone their own size... him. (Obvously, he doesn't know of the dimimutive size of most aliens.) I gather that it was all an amusing laugh for him. However, he did not mount a strong counter-argument that there is nothing to it. He bascally left it that he wasn't convinced, so there!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:56:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >I have been in the unusual position of reading the criticism and >reaction to the Jenning's docu first and then watching it after. >I live in the UK and have only just received a copy from a >friend. >With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many on >this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what to >expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment to >this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious >positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have "balance" >and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed how it should >be. Jennings was not tasked with making a propaganda film. Oh, no? I'm really disappointed that we can't agree. Moreover, it's a little irritating to be told my expectations were too high when I had to be satisfied with an hour and change of bald character assassination (forgetting the preceding's fallacious and unearned opposite), themed and axe-grinding photographic technique employment, disinformation by the canal barge, 'their' choice of two-color Harvard professor, intimations of equity in the debate where there was (and is) no equity, revisitations (reinventions!) of learned science largely discredited, damning faint praise, and the list could go on... All we saw was flop-umentary masquerading as bad mock-umentary. No one should buy in to this abject waste of video tape. Shining it on as a toe-in-the-water or good first-step is to forget that there have been much better first steps through 50 plus years of cultural media nose-bubbling... through Morrow, Cronkite, Wallace, and King et sig al. It's time to wade in, is my estimation - take _successive_ steps forward beyond that "first step." Anybody trying to see something else in ABCs 'crapumentary' only looks for a cloud's silver lining... and verily, there can be none. The _sun_ must first be up, and Jennings' whitewash played with the sun _way_ down.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:16:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:00:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? - Lehmberg >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:26:10 -0600 >Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:44 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Upcoming UFO Hoax? >>>From: Geoff Richardson <geoff.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:53 -0000 >>>Subject: Upcoming UFO Hoax? <snip> >>>Report the sighting to the National UFO Reporting center by >>>calling 206-722-3000 >>I saw this several days ago. Just what we need... a bunch of >>internet yo-yo's talking up the time of the Peter Davenport, AKA >>"The Lone Gunman" according to Jennings' special. >>Good thing they announced it in advance. >Peter told me that he's already received several hundred >warnings about the hoax. He says it's probably more than the >number of hoaxed reports he will receive on the 19th. Wow! Several hundred _warnings_. That is _so_ encouraging and inspiring and a tribute to Mr. Davenport... "The Lone Gunman" Indeed. In this climate of hoax legitimatization made famous by the likes of Andy Roberts - and do hurry with your E-mail, darling <big hug> - and fatuous current events vis a vis mainstream crap-umentaries, one would suspect that more would want to be in on the 'big joke' with the added pleasure of throwing a hurdle down in front of their more courageous betters. Sincerely, people who prosecute little activities like this need to be seriously neutered so they can be precluded from producing further progeny that would engage in such a thing. Oooops, just let me go reset that breaker. Thoughtlessly and out of cowardice, I suspect, these persons cry the _worst_ kind of wolf, and I think they should be prosecuted furiously for their, likely criminal, transgressions. Dust raising bastards and fewer bitches. If the reader engages in this egregious waste of a good man's time, they're the worst kind of sociopath and truly beneath concern, consideration, and even contempt. Piss on 'im 'n fewer 'er... Guv'na...
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: International Network of Experiencer From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:59:11 +0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:23:19 -0500 Subject: Re: International Network of Experiencer >From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:26:17 -0800 (PST) >Subject: International Network of Experiencer Therapists Launch >Launch of INET: International Network of Experiencer Therapists >INET launches; made possible by alliance of organizations >On behalf of the International Contact Support Network (ICSN), >the John E. Mack Institute (JEMI), the Organization for >Paranormal Understanding and Support (OPUS), and, we hope, other >organizations to be announced, I'd like to briefly share news >about an effort we have allied for: >We are coming together for the purpose of maintaining a master >network or directory of therapists who service the "experiencer" >population - people whose lives have been deeply affected by >alien encounters or similar extraordinary experiences. We are >allied for a priority that supersedes any of our varying >opinions and beliefs about aliens: helping people-in-need >without pathologizing them. >It is our collective intention to broaden this alliance to >include other groups in the United States, Canada, and abroad >that have each been attempting to maintain their own regional >lists of clinicians. Each group will then invite the therapists >they know and trust into the network, which we have dubbed the >International Network of Experiencer Therapists (INET). >This network is owned by no one but serves many. Furthermore, it >is a secure network, accessible only by representatives of each >group of the alliance and by the therapists themselves. >(Therapists can also use INET for secure communication between >colleagues). Currently, OPUS and JEMI have begun to invite the >therapists whom they know into INET, and others are making >preparations to do the same. >At this time we would like to invite interested parties - >representatives of organizations who have similar needs and >similar clinical lists - to please contact any of us for more >information on how to ally with this effort for the benefit of >all. >I hasten to mention that this secure network is entirely free, >and if that sounds too good to be true, be assured that truth >can indeed be stranger than fiction. (We have several people to >thank for making this possible, but I want to keep this >announcement brief). >Will Bueche Will, Such a network is badly needed, and I wholeheartedly support it... with one exceedingly important proviso: The professional participants should be asked to pledge that during their supportive work with experiencers they will not attempt to persuade the latter of any particular interpretation. They should take pains to remain religiously or philosophically neutral and avoid imposing their personal belief systems on the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:00:42 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:26:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Hatch >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 >Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? >Hi List, >I noticed this image at MSSS' MOC Gallery. It was dated January of this year... >http://tinyurl.com/6sqvg >And I found it strikingly similar to images I saw >here: http://tinyurl.com/639eb >and here: http://tinyurl.com/5ylxg >I'm sure the scale is off, or the scene on Mars is easily >explainable. But it sure took me by surprise on first glance. Hello Kyle: Very interesting images! I wish MSSS or Nasa or somebody official would make some comment on these images. If I didn't know they were on Mars, I would have suggested rice paddies in Asia, strip mines yes, but more likely stratification due the the evaporation of ancient seas. I would like to know what the scientists make of images like these... not late-nite talk show guests, but creditable experts. Best
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:05:10 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:32:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Clark >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many on >>this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what to >>expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment to >>this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious >>positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have "balance" >>and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed how it should >>be. Jennings was not tasked with making a propaganda film. I agree, Stuart, and I'm pleased to have your assessment. The Jennings program, which I recently viewed for the second time, is a good one. Not perfect, since perfection does not exist in this world (and certainly not when an extraordinarily complex subject is addressed in 80 minutes) but probably the best -- and the most pro-UFO - documentary we are likely to see from a major broadcast news operation in our lifetimes. Of course anyone expecting Jennings to pound his desk and shout,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 12 Kim Purvis? From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:25:01 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:39:04 -0500 Subject: Kim Purvis? Dear List members, My search for Patricia Arnold was in error, it is in fact Kim Purvis I am looking for (daughter of Kenneth Arnold) and she used to belong to something called, Saucer Inc. Can anyone put me in contact with her please.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Re: INET Launch - Velez From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:12:13 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:59:04 -0500 Subject: Re: INET Launch - Velez >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:59:11 +0000 >Subject: Re: INET Launch >>From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:26:17 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: International Network of Experiencer Therapists Launch >>Launch of INET: International Network of Experiencer Therapists >>INET launches; made possible by alliance of organizations >>On behalf of the International Contact Support Network (ICSN), >>the John E. Mack Institute (JEMI), the Organization for >>Paranormal Understanding and Support (OPUS), and, we hope, other >>organizations to be announced, I'd like to briefly share news >>about an effort we have allied for: >>We are coming together for the purpose of maintaining a master >>network or directory of therapists who service the "experiencer" >>population - people whose lives have been deeply affected by >>alien encounters or similar extraordinary experiences. We are >>allied for a priority that supersedes any of our varying >>opinions and beliefs about aliens: helping people-in-need >>without pathologizing them. >>It is our collective intention to broaden this alliance to >>include other groups in the United States, Canada, and abroad >>that have each been attempting to maintain their own regional >>lists of clinicians. Each group will then invite the therapists >>they know and trust into the network, which we have dubbed the >>International Network of Experiencer Therapists (INET). >>This network is owned by no one but serves many. Furthermore, it >>is a secure network, accessible only by representatives of each >>group of the alliance and by the therapists themselves. >>(Therapists can also use INET for secure communication between >>colleagues). Currently, OPUS and JEMI have begun to invite the >>therapists whom they know into INET, and others are making >>preparations to do the same. >>At this time we would like to invite interested parties - >>representatives of organizations who have similar needs and >>similar clinical lists - to please contact any of us for more >>information on how to ally with this effort for the benefit of >>all. >>I hasten to mention that this secure network is entirely free, >>and if that sounds too good to be true, be assured that truth >>can indeed be stranger than fiction. (We have several people to >>thank for making this possible, but I want to keep this >>announcement brief). >Such a network is badly needed, and I wholeheartedly support >it... with one exceedingly important proviso: >The professional participants should be asked to pledge that >during their supportive work with experiencers they will not >attempt to persuade the latter of any particular interpretation. >They should take pains to remain religiously or philosophically >neutral and avoid imposing their personal belief systems on the >subjects. Hi Will, Dick, All, Kudos to Will! This has been needed for more than twenty years. Budd and I attempted to put such a network together about six years ago without much success. I'm in complete agreement with Dick Hall's 'proviso'. I wish you much luck and please be sure to say hello to my friends at OPUS for me! Great people over there.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Re: Argentine Rooftop Madman Still At Large - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:20:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:38:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Argentine Rooftop Madman Still At Large - White >From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:11:24 -0500 >Subject: Argentine Rooftop Madman Still At Large >INEXPLICATA >The Journal of Hispanic Ufology >March 11, 2005 >Source: www.ElLitoral.com >Date: 10 March 2005 >Argentina: The Rooftop Madman Still At Large <snip> Just a comment on the side here. This creature is alleged to have actually and physically influenced things like car door locks, so my comment may or may not apply. My remote thought is that I wonder if the Rooftop Madman may be an advanced technology hologram? I wanted to say that a few of my group, the electronic harassment (and vigilante gang stalking) targets do have what we regard as "3D holograms" once in a while, and these include figures that actually move, and appear solid even in daylight. These figures have been reported to disappear instantly. They are not ghosts. And having figures appear on roofs is within our experience. I didn't give these much thought (not having had one myself to my knowledge) but recently, a caller to a talk show mentioned that an extremely realistic and _solid-appearing_ "hologram" was seen at a recent marketing trade show. Unfortunately, the host didn't seek details. The listener described this hologram as fully 3-dimensional and up in mid-air, not projected in front of or behind a screen. The image was of a cosmetic product and visitors to this trade show were busy amusing themselves by trying, unusccessfully, to grab the bottle image, so said the caller.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Freeman From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:51:42 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:39:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs - Freeman >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 13:06:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Chicago Sun-Times Bashes UFOs <snip> >Terry, Kyle, Greg and the others who have responded with some >dismay to the article, >Don't tell us, tell him. >I did. >If he gets enough he will probably respond with another article >even more vitriolic. Then respond to that and also send letters >to the editor. Not complaining letters per se but more of an >advisory nature. >Keep tossing the ball back. Be brief and concise and without any >hint of rancor or any of the wild-eyed "believer" rhetoric. I >suggest the use of words like amusing and poorly researched and >ask about his UFO book. Did it get published? Right on, Don! >I think I mentioned something about how I hoped his usual >articles were better prepared than this "little" effort. >I also mentioned that he must have gotten the short straw from >the assignment editor that day and that it appeared that he was >writing for his fellow reporters rather than from any real >knowledge of the phenomenon.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Rescue Mission From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:46:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:46:07 -0500 Subject: Rescue Mission Source: The Financial Times - London, UK http://news.ft.com/cms/s/31ddeb9e-9127-11d9-8a7a-00000e2511c8.html 03-11-05 Rescue Mission By Alan Cane Aliens: Why They Are Here by Bryan Appleyard Scribner 15.99 [UK Pounds], 336 pages Bryan Appleyard, a robustly sane and respected author, risked mind and reputation to write Aliens: Why They Are Here, an investigation into why the past 50 years have seen a flood of sightings of flying saucers and reports of contact with extra- terrestrials. Aware that most accounts of meetings with aliens emerge under hypnosis, he had himself hypnotised by the eminently respectable Dr David Oakley of University College, London. Surprised by his susceptibility to the influence, he was even more shaken when he "saw" a flying saucer in his Norfolk garden. Dr Oakley broke the trance before anxiety over the "sighting" could embed itself in his brain. Writing seriously about grey creatures with vestigial nostrils and slanting, unfathomable eyes may do you few favours with your peers. John Mack, professor of psychiatry at Harvard, spoke from experience in warning Appleyard: "Careers are really derailed by an interest in this subject." Appleyard recounts that people have backed away from him when he mentioned the subject of the book. So why did an award winning journalist with a fine record for investigating the relationship between science and society persevere with a project more likely to attract ridicule than acclaim? Essentially because he believes that aliens are real and here, not in any physical sense but as an indelible element in the human psyche whose presence has something valuable to say about the human condition - and more specifically the state of western society. He writes: "Outside our western, scientific, secular culture, people would be unamazed to be told somebody had been communicating with spirits or ghosts. It is normal. The default human belief condition is that there is another world in close proximity to ours and the two routinely interact. We are the aberration." We in the west, he argues, are too smart, too modern, too rational, too scientific to believe anymore in hobgoblins and foul fiends: so we fill our collective subconscious with alien visitors, unidentified flying objects, flying saucers and extra-terrestrials to counter our abject terror of being alone and lonely in a universe so inhumanly vast that - in Douglas Adams' The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, at least - mere knowledge of its size brings madness. It is not a new idea. In 1958, the psychologist Carl Jung wrote Flying Saucers, a Modern Myth, noting that flying saucer stories began to appear in 1947, two years after the first atomic bombs were exploded, and a time of great tension between the US and the Soviet Union. He used the word "myth" to mean a sacred story reflecting deep inner needs. Just as in earlier times, people would have had visions of gods and angels as instruments of deliverance, so we conjure images of beings of superior intelligence and technology to save us from nuclear annihilation. Appleyard essentially extends and builds on Jung's thesis, also taking 1947 as his point of departure, the year in which the skies started to turn black with alien armadas - or would have if every sighting had been corroborated. UFOs, of course, were just the beginning. Soon there were reports of meetings between humans and aliens and abductions where people who seemed perfectly rational claimed to have been spirited away by aliens and subjected to procedures of a clinical and often sexual nature. Appleyard quotes abductee investigator Budd Hopkins: "Though human doctors tends to focus first on our cardiac, vascular and respiratory systems, aliens tend to go straight for the genitals," frequently with devices sharing a marked resemblance to those on display in sex shops. The astonishing volume of UFO sightings and abduction accounts promoted a number of official and semi-official investigations. Extrapolation of the results of one survey suggested that two per cent of US citizens, some five million people, believed they had been abducted: "The sheer transportation logistics were overwhelming. Showers of people must be constantly hurtling up and down in the skies above America," Appleyard notes with amusement. The hard fact, of course, is that there is no evidence that alien craft or extra-terrestrials have ever visited Earth. Every official investigation into the phenomenon has concluded that there were rational explanations for apparent sightings. Our best telescopes have been scanning the heavens for scores of years without detecting any signs of what we might accept as life. Which is not to say that all those people claiming alien contact are frauds, liars or mad: simply that we don't understand the mental processes that gave rise to their experiences, any more than we understand the visions of shamans and witch doctors. Appleyard must have had great fun researching and writing this book, mixing material from a host of science fiction books, films and television programmes including Blade Runner, The X-Files and Close Encounters of the Third Kind with cod-scientific studies such as Erich von Daniken's Chariots of the Gods and official reports. He is particularly fond of The X-Files' paranoid agent Fox Mulder, who he sees as "the believer who will not be deflected from his belief, the seeker after knowledge, the dragon slayer". The book is a good, fun read, and Appleyard is an engaging writer. But it is 300 pages of alien intelligence and I have to wonder whether the subject has the scholarly weight to justify such an extensive treatment. Appleyard could, I'm sure, have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:31:11 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:53:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Fleming >From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:00:42 -0800 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 >>Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? >>Hi List, >>I noticed this image at MSSS' MOC Gallery. It was dated January of this >>year... >>http://tinyurl.com/6sqvg >>And I found it strikingly similar to images I saw >>here: http://tinyurl.com/639eb >>and here: http://tinyurl.com/5ylxg >>I'm sure the scale is off, or the scene on Mars is easily >>explainable. But it sure took me by surprise on first glance. >Very interesting images! >I wish MSSS or Nasa or somebody official would make some comment >on these images. >If I didn't know they were on Mars, I would have suggested rice >paddies in Asia, strip mines yes, but more likely stratification >due the the evaporation of ancient seas. Larry, I think only the first image in the list was from Mars. The other two are apparently strip mines on Earth that Kyle cited as comparable to the Mars image. I was a little confused on that myself. The Mars image is interesting, but before I realized that the two other images were from Earth, I decided that it was the most natural-looking of the three. But the confusion here reminds me of what I've always thought would be an interesting experiment: Show a test group of scientists an assortment of images, some of known artificial, but eroded, structures on Earth and some of the odder features imaged on Mars, without telling them which was which. I'd be curious to see how many of structures in both groups of images were explained as dunes and geological faults and so forth and how many of the terrestrial images were correctly identified as artificial. One of the strangest things on Mars I've seen so far is in this image about half-way down: http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m15012/m1501228a.jpg It's been nicknamed the "Top Flite" because it looks like a golf ball in a crater. The mundane explanation is that its a pile of sand that's accumulated in the bottom of the crater. I wonder how many geologists would stick to that explanation if they were told this was something on Earth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 13 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Allan From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 12:09:48 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:57:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Allan >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>I have been in the unusual position of reading the criticism and >>reaction to the Jenning's docu first and then watching it after. >>I live in the UK and have only just received a copy from a >>friend. >>With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many on >>this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what to >>expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment to >>this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious >>positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have "balance" >>and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed how it should >>be. Jennings was not tasked with making a propaganda film. >Oh, no? >I'm really disappointed that we can't agree. Moreover, it's a >little irritating to be told my expectations were too high when >I had to be satisfied with an hour and change of bald character >assassination (forgetting the preceding's fallacious and >unearned opposite), themed and axe-grinding photographic >technique employment, disinformation by the canal barge, 'their' >choice of two-color Harvard professor, intimations of equity in >the debate where there was (and is) no equity, revisitations >(reinventions!) of learned science largely discredited, damning >faint praise, and the list could go on... >All we saw was flop-umentary masquerading as bad mock-umentary. >No one should buy in to this abject waste of video tape. Shining >it on as a toe-in-the-water or good first-step is to forget that >there have been much better first steps through 50 plus years of >cultural media nose-bubbling... through Morrow, Cronkite, >Wallace, and King et sig al. >It's time to wade in, is my estimation - take _successive_ steps >forward beyond that "first step." Anybody trying to see >something else in ABCs 'crapumentary' only looks for a cloud's >silver lining... and verily, there can be none. The _sun_ must >first be up, and Jennings' whitewash played with the sun _way_ >down. So we now have 'crapumentary', 'flopumentary', and 'mockumentary'. It seems to me that the Lehmberg dictionary of Ufology (and perhaps of the whole English language) is needed more than ever. Even 'disinformation by the canal barge' needs a definition somewhere. I do wonder if, say, Andy Roberts & Dave Clarke had been on the said show, whether Mr Lehmberg would have been so furious that he may have expired during the airing and thus no longer be with us. For the sake of this forum, it is as well that the aforementioned duo were absent. Presumably "Morrow" is "Murrow" (Ed Murrow). I have no idea whether he (going back a long time) was pro, con or on the fence. Finally, let me remind Mr Lehmberg, that learned science does have a role, big role, to play in any discussion of UFOs. If he does not like it, i.e. does not like real scientists' participation (unless they are very pro-ETH) then by all means bring back Dave and Andy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 07:17:46 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:10:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:05:10 -0600 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many on >>>this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what to >>>expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment to >>>this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious >>>positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have "balance" >>>and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed how it should >>>be. Jennings was not tasked with making a propaganda film. >I agree, Stuart, and I'm pleased to have your assessment. >The Jennings program, which I recently viewed for the second >time, is a good one. Not perfect, since perfection does not >exist in this world (and certainly not when an extraordinarily >complex subject is addressed in 80 minutes) but probably the >best - and the most pro-UFO - documentary we are likely to see >from a major broadcast news operation in our lifetimes. >Of course anyone expecting Jennings to pound his desk and shout, >"Aliens are here!" was bound to be disappointed. You and Mr. Miller are two of the good guys in the estimation of _this_ loose cannon, so your impressions carry weight with me and are respected right out of the gate. That said... Your immediately preceding would qualify as Reductio ad Absurdum, wouldn't it, Sir? Behavior such as you describe seems a little extreme... even attributed to me. <g> This is forgetting that is does not remotely address my concerns, concerns expressed where even you seemed appropriately, if calmly, distressed when on the SDI program with Stanton Friedman a couple of weeks ago. What _about_ bald character assassination (forgetting the fallacious and unearned opposite of the preceding), themed and axe-grinding photographic technique employments, clueless disinformation by the canal barge, 'their' choice of two-color Harvard professor, intimations of equity in the debate where there was (and is) _no_ equity in that debate, revisitations (reinventions!) of "learned science" largely discredited, and damning faint praise? Airily Dismissing a person with "unrealistic expectations of desk pounding" is to avoid the real issue, I think, and that is the issue regarding the acceptance of Jennings' apostasy as a good first step when that "first step" has already been made several times by the 'mainstream' through Morrow, Cronkite, Wallace, and King et sig al. Wendy Connors has produced an aural history of "first steps"... The toe has been in the water for half a century and everybody understands the water is cold. Fine, it remains we _will_ have to get in the water. Is it more imagination that the aforementioned metaphoric steps are followed by a slide back to the rear to some zero or minus position in advancement? And is it my imagination, do you think, that each step gets successfully shorter in execution so that in some future time that "first step" of advancement will be null in the aggregate? With all respect, gentlemen, it's time to wade in, is my estimation - insist on successive steps forward beyond that "first step." We'll warm up in the swim. Again - I'm of the opinion that anyone trying to see something else in ABC's _crapumentary_ only looks for a cloud's silver lining... and verily, there can be none. The sun must first be up, and Jennings' whitewash played to a sun that was way down.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:35:45 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:13:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 12:09:48 -0000 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal <snip> >So we now have 'crapumentary', 'flopumentary', and >'mockumentary'. It seems to me that the Lehmberg dictionary of >Ufology (and perhaps of the whole English language) is needed >more than ever. Step off Mr. Allan - if you don't have anything constructive to say, perhaps you should take your own advice... perhaps. Moreover, these literary inventions bleed coherence, Sir, so your fatuous 'dictionary' is not remotely needed. >Even 'disinformation by the canal barge' needs a definition >somewhere. I'm only astonished that you've heard of neither barges or canals, Sir. A barge is a large flat-bottomed boat that can haul lots of 'crap' and a canal is a long, skinny body of water on which that 'crap hauler' floats. >I do wonder if, say, Andy Roberts & Dave Clarke had been on >the said show, whether Mr Lehmberg would have been so furious >that he may have expired during the airing and thus no longer >be with us. For the sake of this forum, it is as well that the >aforementioned duo were absent. I'd have survived, Sir, the essay would have would have been a little longer, is all. >Presumably "Morrow" is "Murrow" (Ed Murrow). >I have no idea whether he (going back a long time) was >pro, con or on the fence. "Murrow" - Oh, woe, what am I _now_ to do? I've misspelled a given name and my credibility has _completely_ evaporated! I'll stick my head in a microwave for a minute on 'high' in an attempt to atone. 'K...? 'K. Oh, and unlike Jennings, Murrow was a newsman. He didn't have a pro/con/fence 'position'. He just reported the news. "Murrow" (did I get that right?) rolls in his grave over the likes of Peter Jennings. >Finally, let me remind Mr Lehmberg, that learned science does >have a role, big role, to play in any discussion of UFOs. If he >does not like it, i.e. does not like real scientists' >participation (unless they are very pro-ETH) then by all means >bring back Dave and Andy. Then let me remind Mr. Allan, in turn, that 'real' science needs to get up off it's moldy dead ass and involve itself in some of that discussion. Oh, and that ill considered metaphoric death wish for me was not taken lightly, Sir. As far as I was concerned our disagreement would not require your death, Mr. Allan, even in metaphor. ...Pretty juvenile. Are you my first death threat? <g>. >But as I never saw the program perhaps I ought to keep my mouth >shut. Perhaps. Perhaps... even _after_ you've seen the program. Perhaps.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:53:00 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:14:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - King >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:31:11 -0600 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:00:42 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 >>>Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? <snip> >>If I didn't know they were on Mars, I would have >>suggested rice paddies in Asia, strip mines yes, >>but more likely stratification due the >>evaporation of ancient seas. <snip> >The Mars image is interesting, but before I realized >that the two other images were from Earth, I decided >that it was >the most natural-looking of the three. <snip> >One of the strangest things on Mars I've seen so far >is in this image about half-way down: >http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m15012/m1501228a.jpg >It's been nicknamed the "Top Flite" because it looks like a golf >ball in a crater. The mundane explanation is that its a pile of >sand that's accumulated in the bottom of the crater. I wonder >how many geologists would stick to that explanation if they were >told this was something on Earth. <snip> Larry, Lan, others, Indeed, the Mars image does show striations likely left by differential erosion rather than mining as in the other earthly images. It was more of a pattern recognition thing with me. Thanks to you for your comments. I don't really believe there is strip mining underway on Mars...yet. <g> Like Lan, I have been wondering what the "golf ball" would look like up close, but would probably be disappointed as the apparent "geometry" at a distance dissolved into a more random, natural pattern at closer proximity. There absolutely have been several images from Mars which intrigue me, and none quite so much as the "banyan tree" images that captured Arthur Clark's attention. Seen here... http://www.curiousnotions.com/mars/mars_plants.html ...the image is convincing on many points and would constitute some truly unusual mineral deposits, while trees would seem an obvious solution were it not on Mars. More interesting though is the fact that the rovers have found abundant evidence of mineral salts, and it is these salts which could allow liquid water to flow even in near-arctic conditions. The fact that banyan trees here on earth also live long lives sprawling in briny water seems more of a coincidence that comfort would allow. Hopefully we'll see more and better images of this intriguing area...and the golf ball...among others. I agree that your image experiment would be fun. It would also be a good part of a curriculum in teaching image observers how to discern natural actions and formations from evidence of design.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:28:44 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:16:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal <snip> >>With the benefit of hindsight, it is obvious that very many >>on this List had totally unrealistic expectations about what >>to expect, probably a reflection of the emotional commitment >>to this subject. But to have expected 80 minutes of glorious >>positive puff was incredibly naive. Documentaries have >>"balance" and balance was exactly what we got, and indeed >>how it should be. Jennings was not tasked with making a >>propaganda film. >Oh, no? >I'm really disappointed that we can't agree. Moreover, it's a >little irritating to be told my expectations were too high >when I had to be satisfied with an hour and change of bald >character assassination (forgetting the preceding's >fallacious and unearned opposite), themed and axe-grinding >photographic technique employment, disinformation by the >canal barge, 'their' choice of two-color Harvard professor, >intimations of equity in the debate where there was (and is) >no equity, revisitations (reinventions!) of learned science >largely discredited, damning faint praise, and the list could >go on... >All we saw was flop-umentary masquerading as bad >mock-umentary. No one should buy in to this abject waste of >video tape. Shining it on as a toe-in-the-water or good >first-step is to forget that there have been much better first >steps through 50 plus years of cultural media nose- >bubbling... through Morrow, Cronkite, Wallace, and King et >sig al. >It's time to wade in, is my estimation - take _successive_ >steps forward beyond that "first step." Anybody trying to see >something else in ABCs 'crapumentary' only looks for a cloud's >silver lining... and verily, there can be none. The _sun_ must >first be up, and Jennings' whitewash played with the sun _way_ >down. Hello Alfred, I think the word that sums up our differences is "expectations". No one could possibly disagree with what you want, which, considering the now elapsed time span, is more than reasonable. You hoped for and expected it now. I didn't. As I give more and more thought over time as to how this matter will eventually be dealt with, I cannot help but conclude that, barring any sudden untoward circumstances, it will very much be a softly softly approach. In fact, the public will do the graft and work it out for themselves which, when you think about it, is a quite brilliant concept. And they will do that Alfred, as I was wittering on last night, after we eventually get an announcement of "the discovery" of Life on Mars. That just has to be the first step and quite frankly, I think is the most realistic and likely scenario. And back door method though that may be, once that happens the gloves are off. This Life they will hold up to us may only be visible under a magnification of Lord knows what but the principle is established. Life will be shown to exist on another planet and from there on in, we will have climbed to the top of the hill and will be looking down the very long slope towards the finishing line. The good news Alfred is that unlike the scenario of having to wait for an announcement of what we would really like to hear, namely the incumbent going on the telly and telling the world that aliens are real and like watching "Survivor" etc., a statement by the way which you are never likely to hear in your life time, you almost certainly _will_ be around to hear the announcement of Life on Mars, of that I have little doubt. And while thinking on, spare a thought Sir for that poor kid with the squeegee up there on the red(?) planet, the one who, while all this has been going on, has been quietly cleaning Opportunity's solar panels every night without ever getting a tip or even a pat on the back. Now that's dedication.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:19:7 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:18:51 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:42:01 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 >>Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>I wanted to share my review of a book I just received last week. >>This book is incredible! This book has UFO sightings, for over >>30 years all in one volume. I have not been able to put the book >>down for me it is the bible for Ufology. >You've pointed to a fact that many of us have known since its >release. Richard Hall's update to the classic UFO Evidence I >published originally by NICAP is a must have for anyone who is >truly interested in this field of study. ><snip> >>My cost for the book and shipping was under $60.00 - less than >>$2.00 for a year of sightings. This is a bargain and the best >>part, you have all the sightings and information for 30 years in >>one place and easy to find. >>Where to order: >>Scarecrow Press, Inc. >>4720 Boston Way >>Lanham, Maryland 20706 >>1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 >>http://www.scarecrowpress.com/ >>ISBN 0-8108-3881-8 >Good information that deserves to be repeated. I have recently talked to several people who claimed they were UFO researchers for 5 to 10 years and hadn't heard of or never read either or both UFO Evidence Volume I or II. How tragic! I remember when Volume II came out there were complaints about the high cost. Get your library to order it then! I tend to use Volume I everyday, and it is now generally available at a low price. The UFO Evidence Volume II is a highly valuable reference work and should be read by all who are seriously interested in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Some Of My Personal Sightings Near Mt Adams/Yakima From: John Novak <changingplanet.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 12:56:45 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:22:46 -0500 Subject: Some Of My Personal Sightings Near Mt Adams/Yakima Many here have taken issue with Michael Salla's email on James Gilliland's sightings from Trout Lake, WA. For instance: >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:46:21 -0600 >Subject: Re: James Gilliland & UFO Sightings On Mt Adams <snip> >Dr. Salla, the NUFORC is a place for people to report things >they cannot identify. Mr. Gilliland has his sightings well >quantified, identified, categorized, and probably makes a tidy >sum convincing his "Sanctuary" visitors that these things are >what he says they are. I was his webmaster for years. He couldn't afford to pay me. He can barely finance his own property. As anyone in this field knows, the only way to make a "tidy" profit is to sell your soul to Hollywood for a movie contract or get your book on Oprah Winfrey. But then again, you would not know that considering you've never been to James' ranch. <snip> >Gilliland's site is full of photos of birds, lens and light >anomalies that are easily duplicated, terminology that is >designed to sucker people into spending money, and his entire >enterprise appears to be less than honest in presentation and >interpretation. >Gilliland is not a researcher. He's a pundit, and a pseudo- >minister of a non-church. >Pollute any serious UFO database with this? Please. As one researcher I know of on this list once said after visiting the ranch, "If this is supposed to be a scam by James to get rich, then he needs a better scam." Not one of you debunkers has taken the time to go there yourself. To make such statements from afar is both unscientific and unethical IF you view yourself as an unbiased scientist, reporter, investigator, whatever. Here's some reports from those who have been to the area: Kenneth Arnold's original UFO testimonial from 1947 By Kenneth Arnold http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/arnoldka.htm Investigation of Nocturnal Lights at Toppenish, Washington (Field project undertaken in August, 1972 at the request of Dr. J. Allen Hynek) By David Akers Part 1: http://www.setv.org/research/studies/yakima/yakstdy1.html Part 2: http://www.setv.org/research/studies/yakima/yakstdy2.html Part 3: http://www.setv.org/research/studies/yakima/yakstdy3.html The William J. Vogal Study Archives http://www.vogelstudy.org/archives.htm Examining the Earthlight Theory By Greg Long http://www.keelynet.com/UFO/earthlgt.txt The Yakima UFO Enigma By Spar Giedeman http://www.psiapplications.com/spar11.html James Gilliland / Mt. Adams Investigation By Steve Moreno http://www.psiapplications.com/gillrep.html Below are a few of the events I witnessed firsthand. -John Novak www.supremalex.org -------------- Monday, June 26, 2000 At approximately 11:30 PM PST on the night of Monday, June 26th, I caught out of the corner of my eye a bright white light flash in the sky almost directly above me and the other 4 people present. I immediately focused my attention on this area of the sky. Several seconds later, I saw another flash from the same spot at what appeared to be at a very high altitude. The flash went off maybe two or three more times in an irregular pattern when I saw what looked like smaller, dimmer white lights (too many to count) zooming back and forth (east to west and west to east) at an extremely high speed for about 2-3 seconds. It actually looked like short bursts of laser beams being shot back and forth, contained within a small square of stars that was just a bit larger the size of my fist at arms length. All this happened within about a ten second time span, and I am the only one of the five of us that I can say for certain saw this activity I've described up to this point. My son says he thinks he saw the smaller, zooming lights, but he was "seeing" lots of things that night that nobody else saw. Considering he's only 8 years old, I can't be sure that he wasn't just saying that to make dad happy. That's not to say he didn't see anything, but I just can't be certain. However, I can tell you that this event really upset him, and it took me several hours of talking to him to alleviate his fears of an "alien invasion force" destroying the planet (he had just recently read the book, "Titan A.E." where this happens). At this point I called out to everyone that was something going on above us and to look up. The single white flashing light lit up again and did so several times over the next minute or so. We then saw two very bright, golden white lights coming from the west at a pace of what looked like twice the speed of most satellites I've seen fly right through the center of the square of stars where all the activity had taken place. These two lights did not flash the whole time we watched them, which was about 10 seconds or so. All five of us saw this. The entire event from the first flash out of the corner of my eye until the two objects flew out of sight happened within about 2-3 minutes. --------- At approximately 10:20 PM PST on Wednesday, May 9th, 2001, just minutes after listening to Art Bell talk about all the mainstream coverage the Disclosure Project was getting that day, John & Kim Novak, James Gilliland and one other adult witness saw a large, very slow moving triangle fly nearly right over head at the Sattva Sanctuary in Trout Lake, Washington. It was first spotted right underneath the big dipper and headed in a south east direction at a very slow rate of speed until it disappeared above the trees going beyond the horizon. There was absolutely no sound. I extended my hand out several times to gauge the size of it and I was able to just about cover it's size with my fist. The entire length of time it was in my view was approximately 4-5 minutes. Either this was three independent lights each about the size of an average star in the sky traveling in an absolutely perfect triangular pattern, or it was one very large triangular shaped object with a light at each point. We tend to think it was one object based on the fact that it appeared to be tipping on it's side several times. All the lights moved exactly the way a large triangular object with a light on each point would making a maneuver like this. Someone inside the house turned on all the lights right when James got the video camera on it. So he had to pick up the camera and run to a shaded spot. He wasn't able to see the triangle through the viewfinder, but just pointing the camera at it zooming in and out hoping for the best. He was able to get a few shots of it. Another note of interest in this sighting is that Kim and I had our 3 year old son out skywatching with us for the first time. We asked him to show us where the spaceships were. He pointed right to the area where the triangle was first spotted less than two minutes before it appeared. --- Date: Sun Aug 5, 2001 3:37 pm Subject: Report from Trout Lake - Low Altitude UFO Flyby My wife and I returned last night from an unscheduled visit to the Sattva Sanctuary, (Trout Lake, WA) in case those on our lists were wondering why you hadn't had any emails from us lately. I will have to say that this was one of the most memorable trips there we have ever made for a variety of reasons, some of which I will describe now, others in the not too distant future. Thursday night (August 3, 2001), just before midnight, Kim and I took our son to our room to put him to bed so we could go back outside to skywatch. We had a fairly good crowd present with us, about 15-20 or so. We had a large orange-white ball of light fly right over the ranch at what seemed to be at an altitude of around 30,000 ft. or so just after 10:00 PM. It kept a constant direction heading SW to NE and was totally silent and was captured on film. Many in the crowd saw several objects or steaks of light hit it from the ground (was the military firing on it? It had no visible effect on it from what we could see). So it had already been a successful night by the time we took our son inside, and we were very eager to get back outside. I had set up bedding on the floor, tuned the lights out and was laying down with my son, who kept going between me and my wife laying on the bed next to us. Suddenly, Kim said her ears were ringing and her entire body was vibrating. Within 5-10 seconds of her saying this, we hear the group outside erupt in cheering. I immediately jumped up and ran out the door and looked up to see a UFO fully flared up in a brilliant ice-blue color the size of a dinner plate flying NE. It lit up the ground and the trees by me. And it made no sound. Now, understand that I have seen some pretty astonishing stuff up at the ranch, but never that close. This thing was about 500 ft. or lower, right over the ranch. I screamed for Kim to get out here. I must of sounded pretty freaked out to my son who started crying, especially after mom scrambled for her glasses trying to hurry and get out. Poor guy :) It stayed flared up in this blue color for about 5-8 seconds or so, then shrunk down to a orange-white ball of light the size of my thumbnail at arms length and headed off until it was out of sight over the horizon. Apparently, this UFO had come from behind Mt. Adams (almost due north from the ranch) and make a wide turn headed SW, then turned NE to fly right over our heads. The crowd said it was an orange-white light until it was overhead when it flared up and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:26:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm >>I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's >>only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know >>what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the >>unusual. >>UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue >>Book. >>With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these >>subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official >>conclusions are. >>Fair is fair, and at least folks will have something official to >At this website you can find the FBI file on flying saucers, a >file that "didn't exist" (a la J. Edgar Hoover) until it was >released in 1977 as a result of my FOIA request. If you search >carefully through through the 1600 page file you will find that >top AF officials seriously considered the interplanetary >explanation way back in 1952. >But you can find the whole story in "The UFO FBI Connection" >(which also includes the CIA connection) and you can read >the key FBI documents in the history of 1952 at: >http://brumac.8k.com/1952YEAROFUFO/1952YEAROFUFO.html Please note that the FBI treatment of MJ-12 is based entirely on the false, baseless claims of Air Force Colonel Richard Weaver... whose specialty, not surprisingly, was Disinformation. The copy of the MJ-12 documents with the word BOGUS hand written on them, is from Weaver. It is identical to what Weaver sent Nick Redfern several years ago. When an FOIA request was sent separately by both myself and Nick for all memos, reports, documents of any kind to support his contention to a foreign national that the documents were bogus, "Nothing could be found in response to the request." Talk about research by proclamation. Weaver is featured prominently - he earned it - in my new paper "Government UFO Lies".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 15:02:09 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:28:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Hatch >From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:31:11 -0600 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:00:42 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:38:16 -0600 >>>Subject: Strip Mining On Mars? >>>I noticed this image at MSSS' MOC Gallery. >>>It was dated January of this year... >>>http://tinyurl.com/6sqvg >>>And I found it strikingly similar to images I saw >>>here: http://tinyurl.com/639eb >>>and here: http://tinyurl.com/5ylxg >>>I'm sure the scale is off, or the scene on Mars is easily >>>explainable. But it sure took me by surprise on first glance. >>Very interesting images! >>I wish MSSS or Nasa or somebody official would make some comment >>on these images. >>If I didn't know they were on Mars, I would have suggested rice >>paddies in Asia, strip mines yes, but more likely stratification >>due the the evaporation of ancient seas. >Larry, >I think only the first image in the list was from Mars. The >other two are apparently strip mines on Earth that Kyle cited as >comparable to the Mars image. I was a little confused on that >myself. The Mars image is interesting, but before I realized >that the two other images were from Earth, I decided that it was >the most natural-looking of the three. >One of the strangest things on Mars I've seen so far is in this >image about half-way down: >http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/fullres/divided/m15012/m1501228a.jpg >It's been nicknamed the "Top Flite" because it looks like a >golf ball in a crater. The mundane explanation is that its a >pile of sand that's accumulated in the bottom of the crater. I >wonder how many geologists would stick to that explanation if >they were told this was something on Earth. <snip> Hi Lan: It looks almost perfectly triangular to me, the object in the crater that is. Did they mean a golf tee, rather than a ball? I suppose it could be explained as the remains of some meteoric event which made the crater in the first place.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: UFO Rip-Off - Bourdais From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:09:39 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:31:08 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Rip-Off - Bourdais >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 00:12:43 -0500 >Subject: Re: UFO Rip-Off >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:21:04 EST >>Subject: UFO Rip-Off <snip> >>Do you have any idea what would happen if just one smidgen of >>disclosure came from the Feds? Guys like Friedman and Maccabee >>and Hopkins etc. would suddenly become 'Knights of the Day' and >>tons of money would flow their way. >Don't worry. Never happen. If the Fed's owned-up, even a little >bit, the press would start running around like dogs treeing a >cat. "Why weren't we told about this? Who knew what when where >why how and why didn't you tell me first!" they would bellow. >Money would flow to people who could do something with the >information (assuming something can be done with it) like giant >industrial organizations. >The people who have been slogging it out in the ditches with >the data would be shuffled to th back of the crowd and be soon >forgotten. >Who wouldn't be forgotten? >The press would have a field day with all the nuts and wackos >with the most bizarre stories (aliens ate my grandmother, the >bodysnatchers work out of Vegas (where everything stays), my >sister married a 9 foot praying-mantis-type, etc.) Weekly Word >News would become the New York Times of Ufology. >Am I being a bit cynical here? >Hmmmm..... Bruce and all I am sure that many "serious" newspapers have good documentation, ready for use, in case of a breakthrough. For those who are still skeptical, like we have just seen with the Financial Times, they will catch-up fast, with an army of reporters. However, I bet more on a scenario of gradual release, in which good ufologists have a role to play there. Like you, Richard Hall and others - keep the good work! The ABC show goes along
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Battles Over Access To Government Records On Rise From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:49:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:49:16 -0500 Subject: Battles Over Access To Government Records On Rise Source: The Morning Call - Allentown, Pennsylvania http://tinyurl.com/3k97k 03-13-05 Across U.S., battles over access to government records on the rise Officials blame 9/11 for restrictions. Some say they go too far. By Robert Tanner The Associated Press Fall River, Mass. Ed Lambert, Al Lima and Mike Miozza never thought of themselves as activists, just regular guys. Then an energy company announced plans to build a terminal for liquefied natural gas in this small community on the Taunton River. The men =97 the mayor, a city planner and an engineer =97 had nightmare visions of gas igniting into a huge fireball on the river, and asked for government-held reports that studied the threat to the town if the plant or a tanker were attacked. But like many people who ask for government records these days, they didn't get what they were looking for. "It's a farce," Miozza said. And it's happening across the country. To a Virginia homeowner seeking plans for a gas pipeline near his home. To Wyoming politicians worried about local dams. To an environmental group that wants the studies on 100-year floods and dam failures in a Southwest river canyon. All asked for records, and all were turned down. Behind the rejections is a transformation of the nation's Freedom of Information Act =97 a federal law that allows public access to government reports, documents and other records. That freedom is supposed to be balanced by the needs of national defense and privacy, and government officials argue that America's war on terror has made a new, more closely guarded approach necessary. The law itself hasn't been changed, but the balance shifted after the Sept. 11 attacks with a series of actions by the Bush administration and Congress. The creation of the Homeland Security Department effectively added another reason government doesn't have to open its books. States and local governments followed suit, moving more information out of public view. "We're denied information that could put our community at risk," Lambert said during an interview in his sixth-floor office, the granite mills, sea gulls and steep hills of Fall River spread out below the windows. "It seems to us like a bad movie =85 yet we're all living it." Originally passed in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act grew out of a backlash to the Cold War-culture of government secrecy that flourished amid the nation's worries about communism. The Watergate scandals spurred a strengthening of the law, giving it teeth for the first time, and it has since been revised =97 most recently in 1996, when it was updated to make more information available over the Internet. The American policy has inspired governments across the globe. Slowly at first, but increasingly in the last decade, nation after nation =97 from Japan to South Africa to Armenia =97 opened their government information to citizens. While the U.S. law often is associated with journalists and government watchdog groups, private citizens use it far more frequently. Individuals with questions for Social Security or Veterans Affairs, usually about their personal records, are the biggest users. Prison inmates frequently make Freedom of Information Act requests, as do businesses, since documents can reveal details about government contracts and their competitors. In all, more than 3.2 million FOIA requests were made to the federal government in fiscal year 2003, the last year with complete figures, the Justice Department said. That's up from 1.9 million in 1999. Staff time on such requests equaled a full year's work of more than 5,000 employees. The CIA's Web site, where information requests can be made online, offers a glimpse into the public's interests. January's top information searches? "UFO" (2,019 times) and "Vietnam" (1,889 times). Other searches in the top 25 included "Iraq," "mind control," "Bay of Pigs" and "mapping the global future." Although many requests are for personal records and some might be pointless, in the end, the idea is to help people keep an eye on how they are being governed, invigorating American democracy. But the changes in the last few years have raised alarms from journalists and public interest and civil liberties groups. "Instead of government officials being considered public servants, they are now more and more like gatekeepers who can determine what the public can know," said Steven Aftergood, a Washington-based government watchdog who runs the Federation of American Scientists. "And that's a profound change." A shift in standards A month and a day after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, former Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a memo as part of the guidance the Justice Department provides to federal agencies as they consider whether to grant requests for information. Shifting from the Clinton administration's standard that experts say emphasized "maximum responsible disclosure," Ashcroft encouraged staff to consider "institutional, commercial and personal privacy interests" and said the Justice Department would defend any rejections unless they lacked a "sound legal basis." Another memo followed five months later from White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, urging agencies to "safeguard" information that could help in the development or use of weapons of mass destruction, and other information that could be used "to harm the security of our nation." Following that note, thousands of documents were removed from public access, according to government watchdog groups and federal agencies. Finally, with the creation of the Homeland Security Department, the administration and Congress created an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act that allows private companies to give the agency information that can then be kept secret if it is considered "critical infrastructure." The idea is to get companies to share more information with the promise it won't be made public. "Unquestionably, agencies do look at information now through a post-9-11 lens," said Daniel J. Metcalfe, co-director of the Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy. He helped Ashcroft draft his Oct. 12 memo, although he noted work on it started long before the terrorist attacks. The Card memo that followed and the provision in the Homeland Security Act helped create a new tone for handling information requests, but Metcalfe stressed they did not change the law. Access on a condition In Fall River, that tone meant the denial of information. "We're trying to balance the public's need to know with the need to keep this information from getting into the hands of those who would kill our citizens," said Bryan Lee at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which holds the reports. "Nobody here wants to be the equivalent of the State Department administrator who gave the visas to the terrorists who came into this country," Lee said. His agency would allow Lambert, Lima and Miozza to see the records regarding the Fall River plant only if they promised not to speak about them. Lambert refused, figuring as mayor it would limit his ability to address the subject in public. Lima and Miozza agreed, but said so much of the material they saw was blacked out that it was useless. "What's the use of the information if we can't talk about it?" Lima said. "It's this surreal, Kafka-esque situation." The terminal, if approved, would hold 58 million gallons of gas, with aircraft carrier-sized tankers coming up the narrow river roughly once a week. Residents say it's an unacceptable risk, with homes and schools all within a mile =97 the range for second- degree burns if the fuel ignited, according to government studies.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:26:58 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:18:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:28:44 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal <snip> >With you in spirit <burp!> Burp? I was with you to there, myself, even if I didn't agree with all of it... remembering there was still no explanation in your conciliatory, inspiring, and sincere explication for the slicky- boy torpedoes that honorable men had to suffer, canted production values, and crass disinformation expulsion from the mainstream... all of which is not being held to account... shined on, as it were. It just may _be_ I'm not intellectually 'sober' enough to be less than satisfied with _any_ 'explanation' for all of that provoking my concern and so perplexingly absent from yours. Sincerely. And, it's not key to my survival, and I may live to be disappointed, but I suspect we _will_ know the truths beyond microbes on Mars, Sir, in our lifetimes. Richard Hall's lifetime even, and that the news is not all bad. It's all part of the well admitted aggregate acceleration to the denouement. Besides, to paraphrase another of the "less than sober", reach exceeds grasp or what is heaven for, Mr. Miller? What is it that keeps the necessary bean counter, counting the beans. The musician reaching for the tune, the legit scientist in her tedious
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:10:28 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:19:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm >>>I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's >>>only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know >>>what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the >>>unusual. >>>UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue >>>Book. >>>With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these >>>subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official >>>conclusions are. >>>Fair is fair, and at least folks will have something official to >>At this website you can find the FBI file on flying saucers, a >>file that "didn't exist" (a la J. Edgar Hoover) until it was >>released in 1977 as a result of my FOIA request. If you search >>carefully through through the 1600 page file you will find that >>top AF officials seriously considered the interplanetary >>explanation way back in 1952. >>But you can find the whole story in "The UFO FBI Connection" >>(which also includes the CIA connection) and you can read >>the key FBI documents in the history of 1952 at: >>http://brumac.8k.com/1952YEAROFUFO/1952YEAROFUFO.html >Please note that the FBI treatment of MJ-12 is based entirely on >the false, baseless claims of Air Force Colonel Richard >Weaver... whose specialty, not surprisingly, was Disinformation. >The copy of the MJ-12 documents with the word BOGUS hand written >on them, is from Weaver. It is identical to what Weaver sent >Nick Redfern several years ago. >When an FOIA request was sent separately by both myself and Nick >for all memos, reports, documents of any kind to support his >contention to a foreign national that the documents were bogus, >"Nothing could be found in response to the request." >Talk about research by proclamation. Weaver is featured >prominently - he earned it - in my new paper "Government UFO >Lies". >Yes, he is the one who wrote the big fat MOGUL report with its >false claims about MOGUL, Marcel, myself, etc ad nauseum "Government UFO Lies"! I'm making a bee-line to your website to order that one! Can we order it there?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 10:35:23 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:22:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:19:7 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:42:01 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Carrie Conte <cconte1.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:49:55 -0500 >>>Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>You've pointed to a fact that many of us have known since its >>release. Richard Hall's update to the classic UFO Evidence I >>published originally by NICAP is a must have for anyone who is >>truly interested in this field of study. >>>My cost for the book and shipping was under $60.00 - less than >>>$2.00 for a year of sightings. This is a bargain and the best >>>part, you have all the sightings and information for 30 years in >>>one place and easy to find. >>>Where to order: >>>Scarecrow Press, Inc. >>>4720 Boston Way >>>Lanham, Maryland 20706 >>>1-800-462-6420 fax 717-794-3803 >>>http://www.scarecrowpress.com/ >>>ISBN 0-8108-3881-8 >I have recently talked to several people who claimed they were >UFO researchers for 5 to 10 years and hadn't heard of or never >read either or both UFO Evidence Volume I or II. How tragic! I >remember when Volume II came out there were complaints about the >high cost. >Get your library to order it then! I tend to use Volume I >everyday, and it is now generally available at a low price. >The UFO Evidence Volume II is a highly valuable reference work >and should be read by all who are seriously interested in the >subject. Allow me to add my voice to the choir. The UFO Evidence volumes belong in everybody's library. They're among the small handful of essential works in ufology, surely on any serious list of the Top 10
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Battles Over Access To Government Records On From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:42:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:27:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Battles Over Access To Government Records On As "National Security" adversely impacts our ability to obtain information from those we elect to govern us, Sunshine Week reports that a greater number of people are expressing concern about Government secrecy: http://www.ky3.com/newsdetailed.asp?id=3D7716 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A new survey conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs on behalf of Sunshine Week shows that seven out of 10 Americans are concerned about government secrecy, and more than half think there's not enough access to government records. Undertaken in conjunction with Sunshine Week, March 13-19, a nationwide, multi-media initiative to spark public dialogue about the importance of open government and freedom of information, the survey repeated several questions asked in a poll in 2000, providing a benchmark in public attitudes on these issues. The response on the secrecy question was virtually unchanged from the earlier survey, suggesting that Americans remain troubled by government secrecy even in the face of their heightened national security concerns following 9/11. In the new survey, 35 per cent said they are "very concerned" about government secrecy; the same percentage said they were "somewhat concerned." In the 2000 poll, 38 percent of respondents said they were "very concerned," and 34 percent were "somewhat concerned." Significantly, more people (68 percent) in the new survey said they feel public access to government records is "crucial to the functioning of good government." In the 2000 poll, 60 percent answered similarly. "We were surprised to see that there was little change in public thinking on secrecy after the attacks of 9/11," noted Andy Alexander , chairman of the American Society of Newspaper Editor's Freedom of Information Committee and Washington bureau chief for Cox Newspapers. "With the ongoing war and continuing concerns about terrorism, you might think that people would be more tolerant of government's tightening control of information, but these results suggest that's not the case. The survey indicates people are not only concerned about secrecy but also recognize the importance of access to information about their government," Alexander added. Despite their concerns about government secrecy and access to information, almost four in 10 of the adults surveyed in 2005 (39 percent) said had heard nothing in the news lately about "freedom of information" or "sunshine laws." Nevertheless, six in 10 adults (61 percent) said they'd heard at least something about the issue. "These numbers show us that although people are concerned about access to government information, they may not be as aware of the specific laws that protect that right," Alexander explained. "We hope that the critical mass of news, opinion and programs about FOI during Sunshine Week will help spark public discussion and raise that awareness." Other results from the survey include: - More than half (52 percent) of respondents said there is "too little" access to government records, compared to only a third (36 percent) who believe the amount of access is "just about right" and only 6 percent who think there is "too much" access. In 2000, 48 percent said "too little"; 30 percent, "just about right"; and 7 percent, "too much" access. - Although nearly half of Americans (48 percent) said there is "too little" access to government meetings and hearings, a close 42 percent believe the amount of access is "just right" and 5 percent think there is "too much" access to these events. In the 2000 survey, 45 percent thought there was "too little" access, 38 percent said "just right" and 5 percent responded "too much." - When it comes to court records, however, fully half of adults (50 percent) said the amount of access to court records is "just about right" while only a third (33 percent) said there is "too little," and just 9 percent responded that there is "too much" access to court records. In 2000, 45 percent of adults said there was "too little" access to court records, 32 percent said it was "just right" and 7 percent thought there was "too much." - The number of people who requested records from a government agency jumped 10 percentage points from 2000 to 2005, to 30 percent. Most of those requests in 2005 were from local government (24 percent), followed closely by state government (21 percent) and only 10 percent from the federal government. The 2000 report found only 13 percent who had requested records from a local government agency, 7 percent from the state and only 3 percent from the federal government. Nevertheless, more people have not requested records from a government agency-69 percent in 2005, 80 percent in 2000. - An encouraging note is that among those who had requested a government document or record, two thirds (65 percent) had a good experience; only 20 percent reported a bad experience. Ipsos-Public Affairs surveyed 1,003 adults from March 4-6, 2005. The margin of error is =B13.1 percent for all adults. Ipsos-Public Affairs, headquartered in Washington D.C., is a non-partisan, objective, survey-based research company that conducts strategic research initiatives for a diverse number of American and international organizations, including The Associated Press, for whom it conducts national and international public opinion polling. With offices in New York City , Chicago , San Francisco , Washington and affiliates around the world, Ipsos-Public Affairs is an Ipsos company, a leading global survey-based market research group, and is on the Web at www.ipsos-pa.com/pa/. Polling for the survey in 2000 was conducted on behalf of the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center and ASNE by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut from Nov. 9-19; 1,005 adults were interviewed, with a =B1 3 percent margin of error. Results are online at www.freedomforum.org/publications/first/foi/foiinthedigitalage.p df. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D The Baltimore Sun also published a story on the impact that Terrorism has had on the FOIA process: http://tinyurl.com/6dygn Secrecy on the rise In post-911 era, many public records aren't very public By Stephen Kiehl Sun Staff Originally published March 13, 2005 Larry Sasich wants to know why the Food and Drug Administration rejected parecoxib, a pain medication proposed for use after surgery. David Arkush wants to know about automobile safety defects reported by carmakers to the federal government, so that he can make sure the government is properly monitoring the auto industry. Both work for Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer-advocacy organization in Washington, and neither is getting what he wants. More and more public records aren't so public anymore. The end of the Cold War and the rise of the Internet age created a culture of openness in which the government released millions of records. In 1997 alone, 204 million pages were declassified. But advocates for open government say we appear to have entered a dark new era of secrecy. They note: - In President Bush's first term, the government made 51.2 million decisions to classify records and related documents, about as many as were made in both terms of the Clinton presidency. - At the same time, fewer documents are being declassified. The government declassified 43.1 million pages in 2003, down significantly from the Clinton years. - Federal agencies are fully granting fewer Freedom of Information Act requests. The CIA, for instance, fully granted 427 FOIA requests last year, down from 3,188 granted in 1998. - Some agencies are taking longer to process FOIA requests. Eight federal agencies reported median processing times of over one year, according to a report last year by the Government Accountability Office. - The departments of Commerce, Defense and Energy, among others, have removed thousands of documents from their Web sites because they are worried about national security risks. Government officials say there's a good reason why so much more is being kept secret. The Sept. 11 attacks forced them to re- evaluate information that was once considered public, and balance the public's right to that information with national security interests. "Unquestionably, agencies look at information now through a post-9/11 lens," said John Nowacki, senior counsel for the Justice Department. The withholding of information touches many areas of American life. The American Society of Newspaper Editors is spearheading a drive to declare today Sunshine Sunday, the kickoff of Sunshine Week: Your Right to Know. Backed by a wide array of media groups, Sunshine Week is meant to focus on the issue of the public's right of access to government information. Among those stung by increasing secrecy are advocacy groups like Public Citizen, auto safety groups, historians, environmentalists, firefighters and others. All are concerned that lack of access to important public information could keep them from doing their jobs. Arkush, from Public Citizen, has filed suit to get information collected from the TREAD Act of 2000, passed in response to the explosions of Firestone tires that were linked to at least 100 deaths. Under the act, automakers must submit to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data on warranty claims, property-damage claims and other information on the safety of each vehicle. But NHTSA has refused to make the information public, saying it includes confidential business information. Arkush says NHTSA can't be trusted to appropriately analyze the data. "NHTSA has a long history of failing to monitor the auto industry carefully, and Congress intended the public to be able to hold NHTSA accountable," said Arkush, an attorney with Public Citizen. "We would do a similar analysis as they do, and if we spot any potential manufacturing defects, we would petition them to do something." The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which uses public records on accident data in its road-safety reports, has found it harder to access certain kinds of information gathered by states. Susan Ferguson, the institute's senior vice president for research, said the group sometimes likes to interview drivers to get more details on accidents. But that's been tough. "There are times you would like to talk to people and try to understand what went on, and many states aren't allowed to give you personal information," she said. Presidential records are also harder to access these days because of an executive order issued by Bush shortly after taking office in January 2001. The order allows former presidents and vice presidents to veto the release of their records and appears to trump the Presidential Record Act, which states the National Archives must release policy-related records after 12 years. Bush's order led to a legal fight that delayed the release of 68,000 pages of Reagan-era records. But the courts have not addressed the larger question of Bush's executive order, which is still in effect. Historians say it is illegal and are continuing to challenge it in court. "This executive order in essence creates law rather than interprets law," said Bruce Craig, executive director of the National Coalition for History. "These types of records are the bread and butter of how history gets written." Craig said he waited nine years to get a document released by the FBI that related to the Harry Dexter White espionage case from the late 1940s. He said a culture of secrecy has enveloped Washington similar to what happened during the anarchist threat of the early 1900s or the McCarthyism of the 1950s. "Excessive government secrecy does the government more harm than good," Craig said. "It constitutes a breakdown of the trust that people have in the government. When you have openness, you have accountability." Larry Sasich, a pharmacist and research analyst at Public Citizen, has been trying since last fall to get a copy of the FDA letter denying approval of parecoxib, an injectable Cox-2 inhibitor similar to Bextra and other pain medication that has recently drawn scrutiny as potentially dangerous. The FDA denial came in 2002, but the agency's reasons have not been made public. The drug has been approved for use in 40 other countries. Sasich says the FDA denial letter could provide important information, not only to people using the drug in those countries but also to people in the United States who use Bextra, which has a similar composition. "We would assume, from what we now know indirectly because of the Bextra reviews, that the letter would basically say parecoxib was not approved because of increased risk of heart attacks and strokes," Sasich said. Some of his information on the drug has come from Pfizer's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. "The government feels more of a responsibility toward investors than it does toward patients," he said. The Sierra Club is trying to find out who attended meetings of Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force in 2001 a group that produced a report calling for more oil and gas drilling, as well as more nuclear power. The administration has refused, saying the Constitution protects such information. After hearing the case last year, the Supreme Court sent it back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for further review. A decision is expected by August. "It shouldn't be a state secret as to who is writing the plan that will supposedly guide our energy policy for the next decade," said David Bookbinder, senior counsel for the Sierra Club. "Democracy is founded on access to information and knowledge about what the government is doing." Firefighters, meanwhile, are concerned about the recent buzz over the identification placards that are posted on trains and trucks carrying hazardous materials. Some have suggested the placards give too much information to potential terrorists. But firefighters say the placards are essential. "There is a concern we're giving an invitation to terrorism," said Rich Duffy, who deals with health, safety and medical issues for the International Association of Firefighters. "But we have to deal with hazardous incidents every day, and not knowing it puts not only our members in serious danger, but it puts the public in serious danger." It's a good example of how withholding information can do more harm than good, say advocates for greater public access. They note that the 9/11 Commission Report cited one way in which the attacks might have been prevented. If Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had known of the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, he would have called off the attacks, according to an intelligence report on the interrogation of a key al-Qaida member. The consequences of keeping the arrest secret were devastating, say advocates for access. "Information hoarding killed people on 9/11," said Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University. "So publicity is our defense. Openness is our security." Even some in the government say too much is being classified. J. William Leonard, director of the Information Security Oversight Office, a part of the U.S. National Archives, said the default position for many bureaucrats is to stamp something as
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:38:58 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:51:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc <snip> >Please note that the FBI treatment of MJ-12 is based entirely on >the false, baseless claims of Air Force Colonel Richard >Weaver... whose specialty, not surprisingly, was Disinformation. Stan: Over the years you've claimed that Colonel Weaver's expertise was disinformation. I've always been curious - upon what information is that conclusion based? Is it simply because he disagreed with you over MJ-12 and Roswell, or was do you have evidence of his service record that he was a disinformation guy? With respect to MJ-12, here are four questions I should have asked while making my MJ-12 film, but didn't. Better late than never, I guess: 1. Why has no in-depth investigation been conducted by MJ-12 proponents into the second alleged crash referred to in the EBD, the El Indio - Guerrero incident? In fact, why is that alleged incident not discussed - at all - by you in either "Final Report on Operation Majestic 12" or his later book Top Secret/Majic? Investigators Tom Deuley and Dennis Stacy have offered a decidedly terrestrial explanation for this incident (a 1944 crash of a USAAF spotter plane in the same area). I'm not convinced that their explanation is the right one, but I have not seen any refutation of it by MJ-12 proponents, or even a real discussion of it; 2. Why is no mention made of the rapid decline of Vannevar Bush's role in government after World War II, and the unlikelihood that he would have been appointed to such a super secret project as MJ-12 by President Truman. 3. Why is there no mention in the MJ-12 documents of a second crash on the Plains of San Augustin, which Stan Friedman maintains happened (see Crash at Corona)? How can this inconsistency be reconciled? The argument that this was a preliminary briefing, and that San Augustin would not need to be mentioned (the only explanation I have heard), makes no logical sense, particularly as the author of the EBD saw fit to mention the alleged El Indio crash. For proponents of both MJ-12 and the Aztec incident, such as William Steinman, the same question must be asked and answered. 4. James Forrestal suffered his mental breakdown and resigned as Secretary of Defence in late March, 1949. Yet, according to the EBD, he remained a member of MJ-12 until his death on 22 May, 1949. Why would he not have been immediately replaced, as he no longer held the President's confidence, he was no longer Secretary of Defence, and, most important, he was psychologically unbalanced? If not then, why was he not immediately replaced after his death? This was the most important subject in the United States, after all, and yet, here was MJ-12, down to MJ-11, for well over a year, until the supposed appointment of new CIA director Walter B. Smith on 1 August, 1950. Why not just replace Forrestal with his successor at Defence, Louis Johnson, a man Truman trusted (he had served as his chief fundraiser in the 1948 election) and who had a solid background in government (Roosevelt's representative to India in 1942, Assistant Secretary of War 1937 - 1940). Or why not replace him with Secretary of the Air Force Stuart Symington, a logical choice considering the Air Force was supposedly on the front-lines of the UFO problem? Could it be that a hoaxer used Smith because he / she / they could use the date 1 August 1950, the only time in a several month period that Smith met Truman, which, If a researcher discovered it, would seem to authenticate the document? Which makes more sense? MJ-11 for well over a year, for no reason, or Smith getting the nod in August 1950?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 Secrecy News -- 03/14/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:32:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:53:16 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/14/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 23 March 14, 2005 ** SUNSHINE WEEK BEGINS ** ENERGY DEPT MAY RELEASE PORTIONS OF URANIUM HISTORY ** VANDENBERG TAKES LAUNCH SCHEDULE OFFLINE ** JOAN GRIMSON NAMED TO PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD ** SPACE STATION TANGLED UP IN IRAN NONPROLIFERATION ACT ** SIHANOUK, KING OF BLOGS SUNSHINE WEEK BEGINS News organizations, openness advocates and others are promoting the week of March 13, dubbed "Sunshine Week," as an occasion for recalling and reinforcing the value of open government. A variety of links, leads and other resources for reporters and others can be found on the main Sunshine Week web site here: http://www.sunshineweek.org/ Among other notable events scheduled for the week are a March 15 hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Cornyn/Leahy bill to strengthen the Freedom of Information Act (judiciary.senate.gov), and the National Freedom of Information Day conference March 16 at the Freedom Forum (www.firstamendmentcenter.org). Sunshine Week is sponsored in part by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation (www.knightfdn.org), which also supports Secrecy News and other open government initiatives. ENERGY DEPT MAY RELEASE PORTIONS OF URANIUM HISTORY After a decade of equivocation, the Department of Energy may soon release portions of its long-promised history of highly enriched uranium production from 1945 to 1996. In January of this year, DOE once again categorically denied a Freedom of Information Act request for the document, which was originally supposed to be published in 1997 (SN, 02/01/05). But upon appeal from the Federation of American Scientists, DOE officials last week said the blanket denial could not be sustained, and that while some portions of the document were exempt from disclosure, others were not. So, for example, "information revealing the location and quantity of fissile material can be properly withheld" for security reasons. However, the report also "contains a great deal of purely factual information, such as facts, figures, photographs and historical narrative...A significant amount of the withheld factual information contained in the Report could be released without revealing the location or quantities of fissile materials." Accordingly, the DOE Office of Security was advised that it "cannot continue to withhold this information under the cited reasoning" and must either release all such factual information or else provide a new rationale for withholding it. The March 7 ruling of the DOE Office of Hearings and Appeals is available here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/03/doe-heu-appeal.pdf A previously published companion report on the history of plutonium production, entitled "Plutonium: The First 50 Years," is here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/pu50y.html VANDENBERG TAKES LAUNCH SCHEDULE OFFLINE The U.S. Air Force has removed its unclassified launch schedule for the Western Range launch site at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California from public access, the Santa Maria Times reported yesterday. "Although the launches aren't classified, we still must weigh operational security concerns when determining what and how much information to make available and when to make it available," Capt. Todd Fleming, Vandenberg Air Force Base's public affairs chief, said in response to written questions from the Times. "We are currently evaluating the security risks with providing such easy and early public access to launch information." "Vandenberg's unclassified schedule Web site has evolved from giving detailed information such as launch dates and liftoff times to more recently revealing only the month for a mission. Now even that is gone...," the Times reported. See "Launch Schedule Off Web" by Janene Scully, Santa Maria Times, March 13: http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2005/03/13/news/local/ne ws01.txt JOAN GRIMSON NAMED TO PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD Joan Vail Grimson, a former staff member of the Moynihan Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy, the National Security Council, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, was named last week as the seventh member of the nine-member Public Interest Declassification Board, a new advisory body. She was appointed by Senate Majority Leader Frist, as noted in the March 10 Congressional Record: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/grimson.html Two more members have yet to be named to the PIDB, one by the House Republican leadership and one by the Senate Democratic leadership. SPACE STATION TANGLED UP IN IRAN NONPROLIFERATION ACT The Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000, intended in part to curb the transfer of sensitive technologies from Russia to Iran, is now poised to jeopardize U.S.-Russian cooperation on the International Space Station. The 2000 statute has the "potential to stop the space-station program dead in its tracks," said David Goldston of the House Science Committee in an interview with the Economist, which reported the story in its March 12 issue. A new report from the Congressional Research Service provides background on the Act and its largely unintended impact on the International Space Station. See "The Iran Nonproliferation Act and the International Space Station: Issues and Options," March 2, here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RS22072.pdf SIHANOUK, KING OF BLOGS His Peculiar Majesty Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia has joined the blogosphere, opining regularly on current events on his own web site. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS) of the Central Intelligence Agency "first observed the blog in late February...," according to a FBIS report. "Since then it has evolved into a daily report on a range of current issues, including some with political content. So far, most of the postings appear without comment while others contain subtle wording, or use question and exclamation marks, to convey Sihanouk's views-- frequently as veiled tangents-- on given issues." See "Sihanouk Launches 'News From Cambodia' Blog," FBIS Report, March 10, which gives several examples of the King's contributions: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/03/sihanouk.html The blog itself, which is mostly in French, may be found here (see "Royal Messages 2005"): http://www.norodomsihanouk.info/ _______________________________________________ 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 > Mar > Mar 14 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:57:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:36:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:10:28 EST >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>>>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>>Source: http://foia.fbi.gov/unusual.htm >>>>I'm sure this website has been posted before but, if not, it's >>>>only fair that those that peruse this List and our posts know >>>>what the U.S. Government has discovered and concluded about the >>>>unusual. >>>>UFOs, cattle mutilations, Majestic 12, Roswell, Project Blue >>>>Book. >>>>With the new wave of antagonistic journalism toward these >>>>subjects it's good to have in your own files what the official >>>>conclusions are. >>>>Fair is fair, and at least folks will have something official to >>>At this website you can find the FBI file on flying saucers, a >>>file that "didn't exist" (a la J. Edgar Hoover) until it was >>>released in 1977 as a result of my FOIA request. If you search >>>carefully through through the 1600 page file you will find that >>>top AF officials seriously considered the interplanetary >>>explanation way back in 1952. >>>But you can find the whole story in "The UFO FBI Connection" >>>(which also includes the CIA connection) and you can read >>>http://brumac.8k.com/1952YEAROFUFO/1952YEAROFUFO.html >>Please note that the FBI treatment of MJ-12 is based entirely on >>the false, baseless claims of Air Force Colonel Richard >>Weaver... whose specialty, not surprisingly, was Disinformation. >>The copy of the MJ-12 documents with the word BOGUS hand written >>on them, is from Weaver. It is identical to what Weaver sent >>Nick Redfern several years ago. >>When an FOIA request was sent separately by both myself and Nick >>for all memos, reports, documents of any kind to support his >>contention to a foreign national that the documents were bogus, >>Talk about research by proclamation. Weaver is featured >>prominently - he earned it - in my new paper "Government UFO >>Lies". >>Yes, he is the one who wrote the big fat MOGUL report with its >>false claims about MOGUL, Marcel, myself, etc ad nauseum >"Government UFO Lies"! >I'm making a bee-line to your website to order that one! Can we >order it there? Not yet. It has to be completed (written version) by May 1 for submission to MUFON Conference Proceedings. Doing some oral presentations first (to take the kinks out) with overheads and slides. My website: www.stantonfriedman.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 14 The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:53:53 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:38:57 -0500 Subject: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 10:35:23 -0600 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:19:7 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:42:01 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>You've pointed to a fact that many of us have known since >>>its release. Richard Hall's update to the classic UFO >>>Evidence I published originally >>>by NICAP is a must have for anyone who >>>is truly interested in this field of study. <snip> >>I have recently talked to several people who claimed they >>were UFO researchers for 5 to 10 years and hadn't >>heard of or never read either or both UFO Evidence >>Volume I or II. How tragic! I remember when Volume II >>came out there were complaints about >>the high cost. Hi Steven, Jan, Jerry et al Even with my rather pessimist views about the amount of reinvention of the wheel within ufology, I have difficulty in believing that many UFO researchers haven't heard of or read either volume of The UFO Evidence. Volume I of The UFO Evidence is referred to in quite a few significant UFO books and publications. Almost all of the discussions are admittedly rather short, but they are almost universally complimentary and/or stress the significance of The UFO Evidence. I've cut and paste below a list of relevant references from an incomplete draft of the chronology I've been working on. The comments of James E McDonald are fairly typical (in terms of length and content): "One of the outstanding UFO references (though little-known in scientific circles) is The UFO Evidence... It summarizes about 750 UFO cases in the NICAP flies up to about 1964. I have cross-checked a sufficiently large sample of cases from this reference to have confidence in its generally very high reliability." (Quite a few of the discussions of Volume I were extremely short and in the context of a discussion of Dick Hall. Many of these are only listed in the references to discussion of Dick himself.) Jacobs gives a bit more detail of the historical context of "The UFO Evidence", whilst the Klass reference is worthwhile highlighting since it is the longest discussion in the list below (at 38 pages) and also because it is (unless my memory is failing me) the only negative discussion. Despite his lengthy criticisms of Volume I, even Klass comments that it "is one of the better references available on a subject for which the Library of Congress lists more than seventy books". Some references for discussion of The UFO Evidence, Volume I: Binder, Otto in his "What we really know about Flying Saucers" (1967) at page 13 (in Chapter 1) of the Fawcett paperback edition. BUFORA in its "UFO Investigation" (1976) in Appendix 16, entry 29 of the spiral bound first edition. Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" (1998) at page 96 of the Visible Ink Press softcover edition 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 page 92 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition in an entry entitled "Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 1960-1979". Coomer, David in his "The UFO Investigator's Guide" (1999) at page 98 (in Chapter 7) of the Blandford softback edition. Dolan, Richard M in his "UFOs and the National Security State: Volume 1" (2000) at page 362 (in Chapter 7) of the Keyhole softcover edition, at page 273 of the 2002 revised Hampton Road softcover edition. Evans, Hilary in his "The Evidence for UFOs" (1983) at page 11 (in Chapter 1) of the Aquarian softcover edition. Fowler, Raymond E in his "Casebook of a UFO Investigator" (1981) at page 31 (in Chapter 3) of the Prentice-Hall hardback edition. Fowler, Raymond E in his "UFOs: Interplanetary Visitors" (1974) at pages 32-33 (in Chapter 3) of the Exposition Banner hardback edition, at pages 31-32 of the Bantam paperback edition. Hall, Richard in the 1997 Barnes & Noble reprint of NICAP's "The UFO Evidence" (1964) (edited by Richard Hall) in the unnumbered Foreword of the privately published paperbound edition. Hartmann, William K in "UFO's: A Scientific Debate" (1972) (edited by Carl Sagan and Thornton Page) at page 14 (in Chapter 2) of the Norton paperback edition. Jacobs, David in his "The UFO Controversy in America" (1975) at pages 187-188 (in Chapter 7, "The Battle for Congressional Hearings") of the Indiana hardback edition, page 166 of the Signet paperback edition. Klass, Philip J. in his "UFOs - Identified" (1968) at pages 59 (in Chapter 7), 72-81 (Chapter 9 generally, "Erratic Patterns"), 91 (in Chapter 10, "UFOs and Radar"), 93-100 (in Chapter 11, "Electromagenetic Effects"), 103-109 (in Chapter 12, "Colors and Silhouettes"), 118-119, 126-131 (in Chapter 13, "Intelligent Control?"), 133-135 (in Chapter 14, "A Picture is Worth.") of the Random House hardback edition. McDonald, James E in his prepared 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 pages 39-40 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 Randles, Jenny in her "The Little Giant Encyclopedia of UFOs" (2000) at page 60 (in Part 1, "A UFO Timeline") of the Sterling softcover edition. Rouley, Alfred in his "The Search for Intelligent Life in Outer Space" (1973) at page 81 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "A Challenge to Science") of the Berkley paperback edition. Salisbury, Frank in his "The Utah UFO Display: A Biologist's Report" (1974) at page 226 (in the Appendix entitled "The Literature of Ufology") of the Devin Adair hardback edition. Shuttlewood, Arthur in his "The Warminster Mystery" (1967) at page 42 (in Chapter 6) of the Tandem paperback edition. Stanton, L Jerome in his "Flying Saucers : Hoax or Reality?" (1966) at pages 104-105 (in Chapter 6) of the Belmont paperback edition. White, Dale in his "Is Something Up There?" (1968) at pages 45- 46 (in Chapter 4) of the Scholastic Book Services paperback edition. >>Get your library to order it then! I tend to use Volume I >>everyday, and it is now generally available at a low price. For those that haven't seen either volume of The UFO Evidence and don't understand what the fuss is about, the complete text of Volume I of The UFO Evidence (with most images) is available free on-line at: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/contents.htm If you haven't read it before, why not have a glance? As Jan has commented, Volume I can be bought quite cheaply. In the USA, second hand copies of the 1997 Barnes & Noble paperbound reprint can be bought for around 5 dollars, while the orginal privately published paperbound edition can be bought for about twice that price. (Those of us in the UK would be lucky to find either publication on sale in our shops - thank goodness for international shipping, the Internet, abebooks.com and Ebay!). Volume II is quite a bit more expensive, but you get quite a bit more data (which, of course, is much more up-to-date) plus several very interesting essays. >>The UFO Evidence Volume II is a highly valuable reference >>work and should be read by >>all who are seriously interested in the subject. >Allow me to add my voice to the choir. The UFO Evidence >volumes belong in everybody's library. They're among >the small handful of essential works in ufology, >surely on any serious list of the Top 10 >UFO books in the English language. Make that the Top 5. Hmm, a list of the Top 5 UFO books in the English language... Tricky one. The books that I'd rate in the Top 5 depends upon the precise topics I'm interested in, which varies from day to day. Some days I'm interested in the history of ufology, other days I'm more interested in research ideas, occasionally it's sociological issues or theories about the nature of UFOs. Few books would rate in the Top 5 on each of those days. Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly don't regret buying, Jerry's two volume UFO Encyclopedia (Second Edition) probably comes closest to a UFO book that would consistently remain on my Top 5 list. For those that would find the price prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it does to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. Alternatively, Jerry's "The UFO Book" is a far cheaper taster of his more expensive work. I've assumed that most members of this List are perfectly familiar with both these publications (particularly since Jerry occasionally refers to them himself in his emails on this List), but Jan's comment that some UFO researchers haven't heard of The UFO Evidence rather brings my assumption into question. Just in case, I'm including links below to both books on Amazon (which includes several reviews): http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0780800974/
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:46:26 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:39:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Miller >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:26:58 -0600 >Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:28:44 +0000 (GMT) >>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 03:33:08 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>>>To: UFO Updates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:23:07 +0000 (GMT) >>>>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal ><snip> >I was with you to there, myself, even if I didn't agree with >all of it... remembering there was still no explanation in >your conciliatory, inspiring, and sincere explication for the >slicky- boy torpedoes that honorable men had to suffer, >canted production values, and crass disinformation expulsion >from the mainstream... all of which is not being held to >account... shined on, as it were. There cannot be any reasonable explanation for the ignorant manner in which Stan (and others) were treated and the inexplicable action of completely deleting Dick Hall's contribution. But I would ask you to try this if you can. Put all the irritating detail and niggling annoyances to one side, and imagine for the moment that you are an American citizen of average intelligence with no particular interest in the subject before sitting down to watch the docu, as opposed, of course, to the highly intelligent, extremely articulate contributor to the field that you are. With that head on your shoulders, what would you have thought of it? I would venture to suggest that you would have come away from it thinking, "There's something to this. That Mr. Clark looks just like my bank manager and he seems to know what he's on about. That James McGaha seems a bit pompous and I wouldn't like to be standing next to Niel deGrasse Tyson when he loses his temper. But those witnesses looked like ordinary, sane people as did those folk who say they've been abducted. And anyway, how does sleep paralysis apply to those folk who've been abducted in their cars? Why didn't they crash?" etc. While I'm sure some would have turned the telly off thinking, "Crap", the majority would have been both disturbed and intrigued. Peter Jennings seemed to be, so if it's good enough for him..... <snip> >Besides, to paraphrase another of the "less than sober", >reach exceeds grasp or what is heaven for, Mr. Miller? What >is it that keeps the necessary bean counter, counting the >beans. The musician reaching for the tune, the legit >scientist in her tedious research, the Buddhist in prayer. And yet they play with you Alfred, they play with all of us. But they can only play for so long. Our time is due, maybe later
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Ufological Mess - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:42:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Randle >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST >>Subject: Ufological Mess >>Given what I have read here recently, and given the Peter >>Jennings Special, it seems to me that Ufology, as we call it, is >>in a mess. We agree on almost nothing, we get caught up in >>personal fights that don't advance the cause, and we spend half >>our time defending ourselves from assaults by our friends and >>foes. Worse still, we never seem to learn our lessons. We make >>the same mistakes over and over and then blame the government >>for being too clever for us. >>Take the recent debate between Michael Salla and Paul Kimball. >>While I find it refreshing because it hasn't descended into name >>calling, it does demonstrate part of the problem. Here, I fall >>on the side of Kimball. His opinions and information more >>closely follows my line of thinking about Lazar and other >>matters than does that of Salla. >>Let's look at this. At one point Salla uses the SOM 1-01 as >>proof that Lazar might be an authentic witness (Yes, I know >>proof is too strong a word here, but it makes a point.) Kimball >>suggests that using MJ-12 documents to bolster a point makes the >>argument weak since there is controversy around the authenticity >>of MJ-12 generally and the SOM 1-01 specifically. >>Salla points out that Robert Woods believes the document to be >>authentic - but doesn't mention that the man who received it, >>Don Berliner, believes it to be a hoax. In fact, a careful >>review of the SOM 1-01 by several prominent UFO researchers >>including Mark Rodeghier, and a review by former military men >>who worked with classified documents, also believe it to be a >>hoax. The anachronisms also suggest hoax. Reasonable people, I >>believe, can differ on their opinions about this. The one >>question that has not been satisfactorily answered is >>provenance. Just where did this document originate? >>We can ask the same, important question of the original MJ-12 >>documents. We know that Bill Moore "retyped" the Aquarius Telex >>because, according to him, the original was such a poor copy >>that he needed to do that for clarity. The problem is that we >>don't have an original to compare with the retyped version so we >>have a document that is without provenance and that even Moore >>now suggests is a hoax. Few researchers accept the Aquarius >>Telex as authentic. <snip> >I agree with much of what Kevin has said above. With regard to >MJ-12 documents, Peter Tytell and the ranks given in the EBE, I >would refer interested Listers to my two detailed articles on >my website at: >http://www.stantonfriedman.com It seems that Tytell's concerns are dismissed without sufficient discussion - and while we can discuss the dueling experts on the subject of the typeface, the bottom line, regardless of the Wood's discovery of Truman's autopen, the signature has been found on another document and it has apparently been altered for the memo attached to the Eisenhower Briefing document. This is evidence of fraud. >Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >Wisconsin. I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. >Perhaps I missed it, but has the identity of Deep Throat yet been >revealed? No, but the information did have a provenance and there were other ways to corroborate it. Documents coming from anonymous sources do little in the way of proving the authenticity of other documents from anonymous sources. Sometimes absence of evidence is, in fact, evidence of absence. Until there is some kind of independent corroboration for the MJ-12 documents, until we can establish provenance, then we should all remain skeptical of them. I might point out that Dan Rather got burned because all he had was photocopies of documents and not the originals. He ignored the advice of the questioned documents examiners he hired, and let his own bias persuade him that his documents were real. He didn't want evidence the documents were faked and ignored that. I think there is a lesson here for all of us. After twenty years of searching, you'd think we'd have more than
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:44:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:53:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Maccabee >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:53:00 -0600 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:31:11 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? <snip> >There absolutely have been several images from Mars which >intrigue me, and none quite so much as the "banyan tree" images >that captured Arthur Clark's attention. Seen here... >http://www.curiousnotions.com/mars/mars_plants.html ...the image >is convincing on many points and would constitute some truly >unusual mineral deposits, while trees would seem an obvious >solution were it not on Mars. More interesting though is the >fact that the rovers have found abundant evidence of mineral >salts, and it is these salts which could allow liquid water to >flow even in near-arctic conditions. The fact that banyan trees >here on earth also live long lives sprawling in briny water >seems more of a coincidence that comfort would allow. These strange "growths" make me think of dendritic growth of "chemical gardens" such as putting certain chemicals into waterglass (sodium silicate) so they can grow "trees". Perhaps these growths were in a highly salty (lots of different chemical salts) water lake at one time and, as the water evaporated, the concentration of salt increased to the point
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:31:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:03:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:38:58 EST >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:40:52 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:14:07 EST >>>Subject: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc ><snip> >>Please note that the FBI treatment of MJ-12 is based entirely on >>the false, baseless claims of Air Force Colonel Richard >>Weaver... whose specialty, not surprisingly, was Disinformation. >Stan: >Over the years you've claimed that Colonel Weaver's expertise >was disinformation. I've always been curious - upon what >information is that conclusion based? Is it simply because he >disagreed with you over MJ-12 and Roswell, or was do you have >evidence of his service record that he was a disinformation guy? I spoke with a former AFOSI guy who told me that Weaver's specialty was disinformation.. He certainly was guilty of substantial misreprsentation by making claims about the MJ-12 documents without being able to provide any documentation to back them up; by tabloidizing Jesse Marcel by falsely claiming that the story came to light first in the National Enquirer in 1978, and that I, a UFO Researcher, met with him in 1978 looking for other witnesses. The article was in 1980 by Bob Pratt whom I had given Jesse's contact info because Bill Moore and I had already talked to 62 witnesses and The Roswell Incident was due out. He disinformed by slectively quoting the FBI memohad _not_ borne out that the wreckage was like a balloon. He claimed to have talked to all the people who knew anything. He hadn't talked to Bill Brazel or Judd Roberts or Mr. Porter etc. He quoted from the July 9 Roswell paper leaving out the last comment from the Rancher that he was sure what he had recovered was not a weather balloon. He never noted that the stories of July 8 all said that the wreckage was recovered last week. Not noting that the Rancher had come in to town on July 6 and went out the same day and was brought back and reprogrammed on the 9th... to suggest mid June... there is more but I have an early plane to catch. >With respect to MJ-12, here are four questions I should have >asked while making my MJ-12 film, but didn't. Better late than >never, I guess: >1. Why has no in-depth investigation been conducted by MJ-12 >proponents into the second alleged crash referred to in the EBD, >the El Indio - Guerrero incident? In fact, why is that alleged >incident not discussed - at all - by you in either "Final Report >on Operation Majestic 12" or his later book Top Secret/Majic? >Investigators Tom Deuley and Dennis Stacy have offered a >decidedly terrestrial explanation for this incident (a 1944 >crash of a USAAF spotter plane in the same area). I'm not >convinced that their explanation is the right one, but I have >not seen any refutation of it by MJ-12 proponents, or even a >real discussion of it; Seems hard to buy a 1944 crash as an explanation for Dec. 6, 1950... I guess maybe time travel like the crash test dummies. There was very little to go on: no names, no specific location. Not much left as "what remained of the object had been almost totally incinerated. Such material as could be recovered was transported to the AEC facility at Sandia...". I have been to Sandia. Chances of getting anything out of them seemed miniscule. We had witnesses for Corona and Plains of San Augustin. Bruce and others have determined that there was a high level security alert on Dec. 6, 1950. Frank Feschino Jr. and I have been gathering loads of info about battles between US interceptors and UFOs. Conceivably a plane really did crash as a result of its pursuit. We know that in 1952 there were orders to shoot at UFOs if they didn't land when told to - odd as that might sound. Makes a great cover story. There were certainly loads of inteceptors that crashed or disappeared. >2. Why is no mention made of the rapid decline of Vannevar >Bush's role in government after World War II, and the >unlikelihood that he would have been appointed to such a super >secret project as MJ- 12 by President Truman. I don't think there was a rapid decline in Bush's role in the years immediately following WWII. Bush was asked, according to his notes on the Sept. 24, 1947 - meeting with Forrestal and Truman - to accept the position of chairman of R and D. Bd. He agreed to accept the role as heading the "Research and Development Board" but with the proviso that he be let off after a year. He said... "if there was an impression that I did not have his confidence he felt that that impression would soon be corrected by future relations." He was active on other boards though having some health problems and was on the War Council. Seemed to be on good terms with Hoyt Vandenberg, etc. >3. Why is there no mention in the MJ-12 documents of a second >crash on the Plains of San Augustin, which Stan Friedman >maintains happened (see Crash at Corona)? How can this >inconsistency be reconciled? The argument that this was a >preliminary briefing, and that San Augustin would not need to be mentioned (the only explanation I have heard), makes no logical >sense, particularly as the author of the EBD saw fit to mention >the alleged El Indio crash. For proponents of both MJ-12 and the >Aztec incident, such as William Steinman, the same question must >be asked and answered. I don't think I have ever pretended to be psychic. Remember this was indeed a "preliminary briefing". Roswell had had lots of publicity. The Plains crash had had none. It involved an almost intact craft... more important and more detailed and more classified than the stuff on the Brazel ranch. There may have been loads of data in the attachments which were listed and not provided. I see no point in speculating. It would be an entirely different ball game to deal with a vehicle as opposed to small pieces. >4. James Forrestal suffered his mental breakdown and resigned as >Secretary of Defence in late March, 1949. Yet, according to the >EBD, he remained a member of MJ-12 until his death on 22 May, >1949. Why would he not have been immediately replaced, as he no >longer held the President's confidence, he was no longer >Secretary of Defence, and, most important, he was >psychologically unbalanced? If not then, why was he not >immediately replaced after his death? This was the most >important subject in the United States, after all, and yet, here >was MJ-12, down to MJ-11, for well over a year, until the >supposed appointment of new CIA director Walter B. Smith on 1 >August, 1950. Being the most classified subject doesn't mean it was the most important. The cold war was certainl of great concern along with theKorean war, the build up of Russian capability to build and deliver nuclear weapons.etc. >Why not just replace Forrestal with his successor >at Defence, Louis Johnson, a man Truman trusted (he had served >as his chief fundraiser in the 1948 election) and who had a >solid background in government (Roosevelt's representative to >India in 1942, Assistant Secretary of War 1937 - 1940). These are hardly great qualifications for MJ-12 membership... any intelligence background? Remember that Truman replaced him with Marshall as Sec. of Defense >Or why >not replace him with Secretary of the Air Force Stuart >Symington, a logical choice considering the Air Force was >supposedly on the front-lines of the UFO problem? Symington as you will recall was very much a politician .. none of the others were. He was also quite ill in June of 1947. Besides, how can anybody answer such ultraspeculative questions from this distance? >Could it be >that a hoaxer used Smith because he/she/they could use the >date 1 August 1950, the only time in a several month period that >Smith met Truman, which, If a researcher discovered it, would >seem to authenticate the document? Which makes more sense? >MJ-11 for well over a year, for no reason, or Smith getting the >nod in August 1950? There are many presumptions in the above. Remember that the phrase used was: "Smith was designated as permanent replacement". Since he shortly thereafter was named DCI joining the first three DCIs on MJ-12, Truman may have wanted to wait for permanent status for Smith (meanwhile he might well have been temporary) until he had decided Smith would replace Hillenkoetter as DCI. If somebody else had been designated DCI, than probably he would have pemanently replaced Forrestal. I am a physicist not a psychoanalyst who never met the patients. I also have no idea how many angels can fit on the head of a pin or who will win the world series in 2005. By the way, I had asked the Truman archivist if anybody else had asked for the dates of the meetings of Smith with Truman. The
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 'Time Machine' For Sale On eBay From: John. W. Auchettl - PRA <praufo.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:17:38 +1100 (EST) Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:13:51 -0500 Subject: 'Time Machine' For Sale On eBay Phenomena Research Australia Melbourne Hi Errol & List, This item, right out of Charles Fort's world=85 A great laugh... but this item has been very popular just under 90,000 site hits. Yet for an inquisitive mind, the whole set up looks fascinating. Mind you, some of the items for sale on eBay these days are sometime from the "grey borderland of Forts world". Never-the- less, would love to have a deeper ogle into the 'hows & whys'. ----- http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D5563490518 TIME MACHINE ! For Time Travel? very low reserve Item number: 5563490518 US $647.59 Ended: Mar-12-05 19:34:43 PST Start time: Mar-05-05 19:34:43 PST History: 45 bids (US $22.39 starting bid) Turlock, California "Hello, I am selling what I believe to be a time machine that was built in the year 2239 by Dr. J. S. Strauss. I found the machine under my house when I was remodeling the bathroom. The machine was hidden in a old rotten wood chest along with some other findings that I believe to be related to the machine like old pictures, letters, etc. I don't know too much about time machines or electronics, but from my observations I believe that the machine might have caught on fire, at some time or another from the looks of the inside, and is now in a non-working condition. It also looks like there might be some parts missing on the inside, but I don't know. The time machine itself is not too heavy - it weighs 20 pounds and it is 18" high by 23" wide and 11" depth. =46rom what I put together from all of the findings is that Dr. J. S. Strauss who built the machine in 2239 went into the past to the early 1900's and the time machine broke down or caught on fire or something. =46rom the pictures and letters it looks like he was living in southern California for a while, it looks like he also met some friends and a girlfriend there. I found the time machine in December of 2004 and I have tried to get it to work but cannot, I even called my best friend who has worked on cars, even he could not get it to work. I know this time machine might be one of the most important discoveries of all time, but if I can't get the time machine to work, then its not worth that much to me, so that is why I'm selling it on eBay. Also I figured I could get a little extra money so I could finish remodeling my bathroom. Here is a list of things you will get: 1 - the time machine 2 - a letter dated july 3, 1930 by J.S. 3 - a poem that seems to relate to time travel. 4 - a check dated dec 23, 1926 with J.S. signiture 5 - a photograph of mal, floyd, reuben dated march 16, 1930 6 - a photograph of who I think to be Dr. J.S. Strauss dated Jan. 1926 7 - a small key for some kind of suitcase 8 - two small bottles 9 - a blank book of matches 10 - a book of electronic inventions with the name Glenn Thompson written in it (who I think to be a guy who had the machine for awhile in the 1970's.) Question from Mr.Rice: There is a J. Strauss who died in Orange County, CA on 23 MAR 1992. He had a Social Security number: 547- 03-9163. In order to get the SS#, he said he was born on 25 APR 1906. But of course, he could have fabricated this birthdate to get the SS card. Could this be the JS Strauss that built your time machine?" ----- Before it goes away... a note just for the record. Best Regards John. W. Auchettl
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 UFO Based Entertainment That Makes One Think From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 04:02:53 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:39:35 -0500 Subject: UFO Based Entertainment That Makes One Think Growing up in the 60's there was a show called, The Outer Limits. Recently it was revived. The original was in black and white, an hour long and focused on sci-fi. Great stories, awesome acting, still marvelous special effects. Recently I snagged a copy of the show on DVD as I hadn't seen all the episodes yet. One episode jumped out at me and made me laugh. It starred Robert Culp and is called, Merchants of Fear. The premise was that scientists in an attempt to bring mankind together would create an 'alien' emissary who would scare humanity into mutual compliance. I won't spoil it for you folks who've not seen it, but it's worth a look-see.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:41:29 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:53:53 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly don't >regret buying, Jerry's two volume UFO Encyclopedia (Second >Edition) probably comes closest to a UFO book that would >consistently remain on my Top 5 list. For those that would find >the price prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it does >to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate to their central library, we'd all be happy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Oberg From: Jim Oberg <joberg.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:33:20 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:35:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Oberg [Non-Subscriber Post] >From: Dave Haith <visions.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:33:32 -0000 >Subject: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/mar/m11-006.shtml >The Rover has two mounted cameras on it. One camera was mounted >on the left front and one on the right rear. As the object came >into view of the right rear, that camera picked up the object >and continued tracking it as it circled, very slowly around the >Rover. It finally came to the point where the right rear camera >could no longer follow it, so the left front camera picked up >the image again and followed it to where it was once more above >where the Astronauts were in Hadley's Rille. As you can see in the drawing at: http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect19/originals/fig19_194.jpg the lunar rovers only had a single television camera, as also seen in any images sent back - e.g.: http://icb.nasa.gov/2003_Annual_Report/lunar_rover_II.jpg or http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/as15-85-11471.jpg Any google image search of 'Apollo lunar rover' will confirm this.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Chupacabras: Closer than We Thought? From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 09:37:02 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:43:24 -0500 Subject: Chupacabras: Closer than We Thought? INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 15, 2005 Source: http://www.diariollanquihue.cl/ - Puerto Montt, Chile Date: March 13, 2005 The Chupacabras: Closer than We Thought? by Pedro Soto Palma Expert says terrifying attacks will begin from March onward Juan Acuna will never forget that night at the edge of midnight when he returned home seriously injured, bearing the weight of fear on his shoulders. He remained submerged under the restless waters of the canal for 15 minutes trying to think of the sordid image that his eyes had seen while two creatures regarded him with impunity... The Chupacabras had attacked again. This was the first round. What is it? What is its shape? Where does it come from? These are perhaps the most essential questions that come to our minds when we hear the fearsome "Chupacabras" mentioned. According to the Biblical Book of Isaiah, reference is made to a female monster (Lilith) that has been translated in certain versions of the Holy Word as "Goatsucker". According to Rev. 34- 11, "The pelican and the urchin took over her (Earth) and the owl (Goatsucker or Lilith) and the raven shall dwell on her." Cause for worry... or not? Specialist and compiler of articles related to the subject, Liliana Nunez, aid that the first recorded case in Chile in the year 2000 did not occur in Calama - as collective memory suggests - but closer to Puerto Montt that one would think. Very few know this. In the town of Antihue, some 50 km from Valdivia, a local planter killed the alleged "Chupacabras" with a shotgun blast. If the collapse of the Twin Towers was a triumph for terrorism, the skull of the unknown animal became the standard of victory for the local planter. Months later, learning of the events appearing in the media, he decided to approach "El Diario El Austral" of Valdivia to tell his story. Days later, the rest of the country was stalked by a strange animal known as "Chupacabras" After four months of intense investigation, scientists with the Universidad Austral determined that "Chilean fauna is sufficiently well-known; the discovery of new species in the year 2000 is unlikely." Specialist analyzing the case determined that they had been "unable to establish the animal in question" according to the newspaper article. Scientist Milton Gallardo, who analyzed the skull, said it had 6 incisors, 2 canines, 6 premolars and 6 molars in the upper jaw as well as in the lower jaw. A total of 40 teeth. Truth or fiction? No cause for alarm...or is it? [The creatures that attacked Juan Acuna] had two "yellow suns" under their forehead. One of them was 60 centimeters tall and the other stood over one meter tall. They were winged and covered in black fur. If the Hiroshima bombing was torture, how did Acuna feel about his experience on July 11, 2004 near El Parral? Marcelo Catrilef, a veterinarian from Puerto Montt, stated that there is still no clear explanation to the attacks recorded by the press since the Year 2000. "It is very clear that the phenomenon is little known. We cannot think that it is an animal, but there are many unexplained things, such as the behavior of the attacked animals. Hens will not crow. We are witnessing strange behavior on the part of the attacker as well as the attacked," he emphasized. Alberto Urquiza, a panelist with the "La Ley de la Selva" show, a ufologist and specialist in the subject, said that the attacks take place in a stealthy manner. "The wound inflicted is a single one and is characteristic to all cases. It's about the size of a finger seen head-on, not very large, which can be two to four centimeters deep. There is no blood to be found around the attacked animal; their hairs and feathers are bloodless and there is no blood to be found on the floor," he said. The unknown predator's victims range from alpacas, pigs and sheep to dogs, cats and most poultry. According to the hypotheses presented on the Chupacabras' origin, there are four on which investigators have come to rest their conclusions. Among them is the one set forth by psychiatrist and paranormal researcher Mario Dussuel, who stated that the first theory is that [the creature] is an experiment belonging to one of the great powers, such as the U.S.. The case that occurred in the northern part of the country - at the Radomiro Tomic mine, where a creature was captured - coincided with the presence of U.S. aircraft, intuiting that Americans would be directly responsible for the genetic experiments with the feared "Chupacabras". The profile [of this hypothesis] was lowered after some time. The second hypothesis is that the strange being has always existed on Earth. "It is an intelligent being that has known how to hide, which is why its remains have never been found," he added. The third is based on the fact that our habitat contains an intraterrestrial environment complete with caves and underground shelters. "At a given time there was an intense burst of ultraviolet radiation that killed all of the dominant species at the time. Then came a civilization that hid under the earth to shelter itself," suggested the investigator. The fourth hypothesis is related to UFOs, because flying objects have been seen coincidentally where the aforementioned creatures are reported. According to this line of thought, these specimens would have been left behind by ETs to study human reactions. It is very hard to embrace any single one of these postures, believes Mario Dussuel, since their feasibility has yet to be established. This expert believes that the creature has existed always. Researcher Liliana Nunez dismisses altogether that the creature is related in any way to the UFO phenomenon. "The UFO phenomenon in Chile has nothing to do with animal slayings. It would suffice to compile the published articles, which are in excess of 1500 worldwide. UFOs are not related in the least to these cases."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Ufological Mess - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:08:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:55:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Clark >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:52:17 EST >>>Subject: Ufological Mess >point out that Dan Rather got burned because all he had >was photocopies of documents and not the originals. He ignored >the advice of the questioned documents examiners he hired, and >let his own bias persuade him that his documents were real. He >didn't want evidence the documents were faked and ignored that. >I think there is a lesson here for all of us. Kevin, this is a highly dubious - and, if I may so, grossly biased - account of what actually happened. It is particularly discouraging coming in the middle of a line of argument with which otherwise I had mostly been agreeing, though maybe I'm going to have to reconsider now. From every fair-minded account, Rather got sandbagged on this because he was busy on another assignment (a storm in Florida, if memory serves) and paying insufficient attention to what the production team was giving him regarding George W. Bush's curious Vietnam-era ANG history. No serious - that is, ideology disinterested - outside observer familiar with the details of the affair has assigned malign motives to Rather's error in judgment. The only "bias" involved was CBS News' desire - shared by all news outlets always are - to score a big, exclusive story. Moreover, there is no evidence that the "documents were faked" (much less that Rather "didn't want evidence" to that effect, which is a baseless slander if I ever heard one; having been at the receiving end of that line of attack in other contexts [as, I might add, have you], I can certainly feel for Rather, as I have felt for you when reckless comparable accusations were thrown your way). The commission that looked into the controversy concluded not that the documents were faked - it couldn't make a judgment on either side, it stated clearly - but that without certain knowledge of their authenticity, CBS News ought not to have run with them. I think anybody can agree with that criticism, but the rest of what you say is simply false. The provenance and genuineness (or otherwise) of the documents remain an open question, to which one hopes conscientious and unintimidated journalists are now seeking an answer.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Ufological Mess - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:08:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:57:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Kaeser >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess <snip> >>Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >>Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >>of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >>Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >>Wisconsin. >I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole >town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person >someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what >is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. Stan, LaCrosse, WI was on the postage strip of the package that was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:14:30 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:59:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal - Lehmberg >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:46:26 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:26:58 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Belated Jennings Appraisal >>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:28:44 +0000 (GMT) >>>Subject: Belated Jennings Appraisal <snip> >>I was with you to there, myself, even if I didn't agree with >>all of it... remembering there was still no explanation in >>your conciliatory, inspiring, and sincere explication for the >>slicky- boy torpedoes that honorable men had to suffer, >>canted production values, and crass disinformation expulsion >>from the mainstream... all of which is not being held to >>account... shined on, as it were. >There cannot be any reasonable explanation for the ignorant >manner in which Stan (and others) were treated and the >inexplicable action of completely deleting Dick Hall's >contribution. Right to here is enough to discredit the entire affair... >But I would ask you to try this if you can. Put >all the irritating detail and niggling annoyances to one side, Which would be a lot easier to do if it had not discount exactly who is best in ufology, or invalidated some of the best thinking on it. Jerry Clark didn't fare that well, imo, and he was in the first, likely loss leading, half of the puke-umentary. >and imagine for the moment that you are an American citizen of >average intelligence with no particular interest in the subject >before sitting down to watch the docu, as opposed, of course, >to the highly intelligent, extremely articulate contributor to >the field that you are. Oooo Mr. Stuart, let's have a civil union and adopt children! <lol> Nope, not even close. I did that _first_ thing. Forgetting no one really sits on the fence... it's varying degrees acceptable ideas and unacceptable ideas, the forward leaning were discouraged with the state of ufological art as portrayed, and it was very fraudulently portrayed, while the backward leaning were encouraged that there was still plausible deniability left to insulate them from their discomfiture regarding and ET reality... >With that head on your shoulders, what would >you have thought of it? That it was a lackluster wet blanket apology for the stupidity of man... made necessary by the dumb misled, the criminal misleader, and the mentally ill... regarding a ufological potentiality more unlikely than a three headed calf. Let's have some cheesy poops and 3.2 beer. >I would venture to suggest that you would have come away from it >thinking, "There's something to this. That Mr. Clark looks just >like my bank manager and he seems to know what he's on about. Mr. Clark was able to transcend, slightly, the unflattering camera employment and barely allowed to make his point. I think I remember that you could almost count the hairs in his nose. >That James McGaha seems a bit pompous and I wouldn't like to be >standing next to Niel deGrasse Tyson when he loses his temper. He had his own observatory, was sold as an astronomer (which he is not), and the visible telescope controls in one of the shots suggested that he was the very measure of state of the art science. Tyson got similar treatment and his qualifications also highlighted. >But those witnesses looked like ordinary, sane people as did >those folk who say they've been abducted. All in side shots and unusual camera angles, hatted, sunglassed and made otherwise bizarre and every one of them using the word "believe". >And anyway, how does >sleep paralysis apply to those folk who've been abducted in >their cars? Why didn't they crash?" etc. SP was only one of the "plausible deniers" used, and no mention was made, I recall, of wide awake abductions or folks who remembered abductions without hypnosis... >While I'm sure some would have turned the telly off thinking, >"Crap", the majority would have been both disturbed and >intrigued. Peter Jennings seemed to be, so if it's good enough >for him..... ><snip> I don't think so, man. It _wasn't_ good enough for him... >>Besides, to paraphrase another of the "less than sober", >>reach exceeds grasp or what is heaven for, Mr. Miller? What >>is it that keeps the necessary bean counter, counting the >>beans. The musician reaching for the tune, the legit >>scientist in her tedious research, the Buddhist in prayer. >And yet they play with you Alfred, they play with all of us. But >they can only play for so long. Our time is due, maybe later >than sooner, but it will happen. Be sure.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 15 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:18:26 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:02:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Ledger >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:44:27 -0500 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? <snip> >These strange "growths" make me think of dendritic growth of >"chemical gardens" such as putting certain chemicals into >waterglass (sodium silicate) so they can grow "trees". >Perhaps these growths were in a highly salty (lots of different >chemical salts) water lake at one time and, as the water >evaporated, the concentration of salt increased to the point >where it began to precipitate around a number of supersaturated >solution areas within the evaporating lake. >However, the size of these supposed Martian "chemical garden >trees" greatly exceed anything found on earth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 11 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:15:40 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:09:32 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 11 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 11 March 16, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinagan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ ROOFTOP MADMAN STRIKES AGAIN IN SANTA FE, ARGENTINA The weird entity which the Argentinian media has dubbed El Loco de los Techos (Spanish for Rooftop Madman-- J.T.) has been sighted repeatedly in the barrio San Lorenzo (district) on the south side of Santa Fe, a large city in northwestern Argentina. "Residents of barrio San Lorenzo remain frightened and agitated by the apparitions of the ghostly character called the Rooftop Madman. Given the prevailing state of nervous tension, two psychologists began meeting with the population through the health assistance needs center located in the area." "As part of the plan, periodic meetings have been held with local residents. The next one is slated for Thursday afternoon, March 10, 2005, at 1 p.m. Interested parties have been invited--by means of handbills--to reach individual interviews with the national health specialists." "Meanwhile, the ghostly character's 'visits' continue taking place, according to the numerous stories that are heard daily in the streets of San Lorenzo." "This morning, (Friday, March 11, 2005) a 60-year-old man told El Litoral that he saw the Madman in a hallway of his own house, while another woman from the 4000 block of Calle Entre Rios (street) saw the phantom on top of an old pine tree." "'My 11-year-old son fainted,' said the woman." Santa Fe, capital of the province of the same name, is located 400 kilometers (250 miles) northwest of Buenos Aires, the national capital. (See the Argentinian newspaper El Litoral for March 10, 2005, "The Rooftop Madman is still at large." Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Proyecto Catent por este articulo de diario.) ANOTHER BLACK-CLAD ENTITY APPEARS IN ARGENTINA "Since January (2005), residents of La Playosa, a small city in Cordoba province" in western Argentina, "are restless over the presence of a man who could be the legendary Lobizon, thought to break into homes while issuing powerful howls." (Editor's Note: In the folklore of Argentina, El Lobizon is the seventh son of a seventh son who turns into a werewolf when the moon is full.) "Several women have brought complaints to the local sheriff's office and the fire department, but until now it has been impossible to apprehend the strange character who has kept the town up in arms." "'Generally speaking, it attacks dwellings in which no man is present or happens to be away for various reasons. It tries to break in through backyards and alleyways, knowing that only women and children happen to be present. Fortunately, it has been unable to break into homes because the doors are locked,' explained Ana, one of the women attacked by the Lobizon, to the Cordoba newspaper La Manana." "The woman's eyewitness account coincides with others who are able to see through their windows. 'It's a young person, thin and tall. Its eyes are bloodshot, and it's clad in black--I suppose with the intention of frightening the familes of the homes it's trying to break into.'" (Editor's Comment: This one sounds like a cousin of the entity in Santa Fe.) "Investigators believe that the Lobizon of La Playosa could be a deranged young man trying to break into the house of a woman he has studied previously and who, for some reason or another, has caused him to develop an interest or attraction. In any event, the town's peace has been disrupted, and no one dares sleep with open windows, or leave their doors unlocked as used to be the custom." Cordoba, capital of the province of the same name, is located 425 kilometers (265 miles) west-northwest of Buenos Aires. (See the Argentinian newspaper La Manana for March 10, 2005. Muchas gracias a Scott Corrales y Proyecto Catent por este articulo de diario.) RED UFO SIGHTED OVER AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, at 1 a.m., Paul W. "noticed a bright red object in the sky" over Auckland, a large city on the North Island of New Zealand. "The object was entirely lit red and was circular," Paul reported, "It made no noise at all. And, if it had been an aircraft, I would have definitely heard the engine from the distance I observed it from at first. It was decreasing its altitude as it was flying away but not dramatically. When the object was 20 kilometers (12 miles) away from me, it suddenly changed its direction and started flying to my right at the same altitude. Not flying at a super-high speed but definitely than the aircraft that fly over my area." "I would say it was about 5 kilometers (3 miles) away from me when I first noticed the object. I have a pet dog who was inside all the time. I really didn't notice any barking from him or from any other animal within the area. It was a fine and clear sky, only a few clouds. The object actually flew through one of these clouds during the sighting." Paul called out to his mother to come and see the UFO "but by the time she made it outside, the object had changed direction to my right. She could see only a red object briefly before a neighbouring house blocked the view. The object was visible for one to two minutes. I have always had an interest in UFOs. After this experience, I know they exist. I can totally say seeing is believing." (Many thanks to Canadian ufologist Brian Vike for this report.) TRIO SPOT A HOVERING UFO IN SWITZERLAND On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, the male eyewitness reported, "I went to Parc de Mystere (French for Mystery Park--J.T.) with two friends. Ending the visit, we headed back to Geneva at 3:30 p.m. We were on the highway not far from Bern (Switzerland's capital--J.T.) when I suddenly saw, in the daylight sky, a light that appeared to be immobile. Still, I told myself, it could be a star. I told my friends to look at the light, but it went faster for a second, then disappeared." "We looked at each other amazed, and they kept looking at the sky. Suddenly, one of my friends told me, 'It's back!'" "It had appeared once again, and it was the same light at the same place. This (same sequence of events) occurred four times" as they drove along, "and then we couldn't see the light any more because trees blocked our view for a while. We knew it was a UFO. We had never seen anything like that previously." (Merci beaucoup a Robert Fischer pour cettes nouvelles.) FAMILY SEES A TRIANGULAR UFO IN DUBBO, N.S.W. "A black triangular object made a number of motions and then sped off right behind some trees" on Sunday, March 6, 2005 in Dubbo, New South Wales, Australia. "That's how police have described the footage claimed to be of an unidentified flying object by a Dubbo family last Sunday night." "'I've never seen anything like it,' Suzanne Fuller said, 'It was hovering over there by five trees and was completely silent.'" "The police arrived at the scene and 8 p.m., viewed the footage and filed an official report with Air Services Australia (ASA), a federal airways monitoring bureau." "'It looked like a bird, but much larger, the size of a car, with a flat top and a deeper shape at the bottom.'" "Mrs. Fuller has put in a call to UFO Researchers Independent Network and described what she had seen to Moira McGhee." "'The object looked about 40 to 50 miles (64 to 80 kilometers) away to the southeast,' she said." (Editor's Note: That would put the UFO in the area of the Burrendong Reservoir, a notorious UFO hotspot according to Australian researcher Rex Gilroy.) "She said the family saw something between 7 p.m. and 8:15 p.m. At first, a male member of the family saw what he described to Moira McGhee as 'something that looked like a stationary chopper.'" "'Now remember, it was still daylight at 7 p.m.,' she said. (Editor's Note: Australia, like the other countries of the southern hemisphere, is just wrapping up its summer. Their autumn begins on March 21.) "Mrs. Fuller said that, together with her husband and her three daughters, they continued watching until after 11 p.m." "'Once the sun set, there was a light like from a lighthouse, flashing on and off every couple of seconds,' she said." "'The police were here, and they said they had never seen anything like it before. Every now and then, it would move to the left again...and then back to the same position again.'" "Duty Officer Inspector Alan Cusick commended the family for reporting the incident." "'We take these calls on their merit,' he said, 'The family was genuine in their concern, they called the police and they did the right thing. We have proceeded in investigating the matter by referring the incident to the ASA and sending them the videotape for inspection.'" "The sighting is not the first in Dubbo. In 2002, a man reported seeing an object 'as large as a house' hovering in the sky only 500 feet (150 meters) off the ground and allegedly mixing and changing colours." "Mrs. McGhee said a similar sighting 10 years ago had a number of people in Dubbo report seeing an object 'as big as a supermarket' in the sky." Dubbo, N.S.W. is located on the Macquarie River about 320 miles (532 kilometers) northwest of Sydney, Australia's largest city. (See the Australian newspaper The Liberal for March 9, 2005, "Black UFO hovers silently for 5 hours over OZ town." Many thanks to Todd and Kristin Rogan for this newspaper article.) ORANGE, EGG-SHAPED UFO SEEN IN LAKESIDE, CALIF. On Sunday, March 6, 2005, at 2 a.m., Joann Van Horn spotted a UFO approaching from the southeast at her home in Lakeside, California (population 19,560). "A large, bright orange, egg-shaped craft (appeared to be a commercial airliner approaching Gillespie Field engulfed in flames--J.V.H.) stopped and split into three smaller craft that flew in a synchronized formation, firing off what appeared to be tracers. They joined back together approximately 15 minutes later, forming a triangular shape and flew off toward the southwest." "There was a Lakeside Fire Department truck parked across the street, and the firefighters were watching it at the same time as myself and my son. Approximately a half-hour later, the bright orange craft flew from a southeasterly direction at an extremely high rate of speed at a lower altitude and stopped directly in front of me, then slowly flew off to the southwest again." "It was about the size of a commercial airliner approaching for a landing at Gillespie Field or at San Diego International Airport." "I called Channel 9 News several times, spoke with a newsperson and a photographer. Lakeside Fire Department told the station that it was a balloon that had gotten away and offered no other explanation." Lakeside, Cal. is on Highway 67 about 15 miles (25 kilometers) northeast of San Diego. (Email Form Report) MAN VIDEOTAPES A UFO IN NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA "Whether it's actually a speck of cottonwood fluff or a small bug darting around in the sun or an alien ship coming to inspect life in Fort St. John," British Columbia (population 15,021), one local man is certain that, for now, he has pictures of an unidentified flying object." "Mark Mann has been taking video footage of the sky for a couple of years now and has come up with some remarkable images by pointing his camera at a brightly-lit area of the sky, where the sun has just tucked behind a building and leaving a backlit area just to the side of it." "'There's hundreds of these things; they're just everywhere,' said Mann of the radical object he's seen floating across his video scenes. While he also studies the tape frame by frame, Mann can spot the 'spinning turnips' in this kind of radiant light." "Mann has sent the footage to a UFO group in New York that estimated the object's speed across the sky as up to 18,000 miles per hour (28,800 kilometers per hour) and its size as 15 to 25 feet (4.5 to 7.5 meters) in diameter." "'These things were highly polished and moving very fast,' he said, 'I don't know exactly what they are, but they're solid and silent.'" "'The definition of UFO is an unidentified object--I can't begin to imagine where they're from, but they're not ours. I've seen too many different shapes, and too many people have seen them in different places.'" "Mann has also been in touch with Brian Vike, a UFO enthusiast who collects reports of sightings" throughout western Canada. "Vike, who lives in Houston, B.C.(population 3,934), is a member of several national and international astronomical societies and appears regularly on radio programs in Okanagan, Alberta and the USA." "Vike has seen Mann's mysterious footage and originally thought it could be a bright star. But when the object disappeared after two days, he wasn't so sure. 'It stands out in the sky like a sore thumb...if it was a star, it should have shown up again after two days.'" "Vike said many sky observers have used a technique similar to Mann's, of daytime shots that reveal 'little blobs flying around' that could be anything from cottonwood fluff to dandelion pollen or, quite possibly, to UFOs." "Environment Canada spokesman Bill Miller said they used to receive several UFO reports from the Peace region that were attributable to the lights of a weather balloon or aircraft. But, as for Mark's sighting, Miller doesn't want to hazard a guess." "'Some could be bugs,' Vike offered, 'With the sun behind the building, if something crosses between the camera and the sun, it will look very bright. In Mark's footage, it looks like a giant hamburger, so I don't know what it was.'" "Graham Conway heads up a group called UFO-B.C. And while he figures the bug explanation sounds reasonable, he doesn't quite buy it." "'Depending on the time of year, say, when it's colder in the fall and winter months, the insect theory doesn't stand up.'" "Vike has heard reports of sightings in the North Peace region from the 1970s but said this seems to be a lull right now, most likely because people are afraid of ridicule from friends and family." "Mann's had his share of naysayers but is adamant about what he's seen." "'I've had friends who say no way, but seeing is believing. There's nothing I can do to convince people until they see it for themselves.'" "Vike can't say for sure what's in Mann's photos, but he's not ruling out some extraterrestrial visitors." "'We can't be the only form of life in this universe,' he said, 'There's a lot more questions and not enough answers, but we can't be the only life form in this vastness.'" (See the newspaper Alaska Highway News for March 3, 2005, "Local man claims UFO sighting." Many thanks to "Sourdough Pete and Cheechako" for this newspaper article.) APPEARS NEAR BERLIN "Passengers on planes descending into Berlin's Tegel Airport were greeted by the sight of a huge swastika squeezed out of snow on a frozen lake little more than a kilometer (0.6 miles) from the runway, police said Thursday," March 3, 2005. "The Nazi symbol, which is banned in Germany, was visible from planes arriving from all over Europe for most of Monday morning," February 28, 2005, "before the Water Police, having tested the ice thickness, could venture out to erase it." "Alerted after a pilot told the airport control tower, police in a squad car went to the lake but failed to see anything from the shore. A police helicopter later spotted the 8 by 5 meter (26 by 16 feet) swastika and sent out the Water Police team." "The suspected neo-Nazi stunt recalls an affair five years ago (2000) when a 60 by 60 meter (200 by 200 feet) swastika, visible only from the air, was observed in a forest 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of Berlin." "A devoted Hitler follower had planted russet-colored larch trees in 1938 which stood out each autumn and spring as the leaves changed color." (See the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel for March 8, 2005, "Giant swastika carved near airport." Many thanks to Anton Meibauer for this newspaper article.) From the UFO Files... 1976: BIGFOOT MARCH March of 1976 proved to be a big month for Bigfoot sightings in the USA. On March 14, 1976, strange footprints were found in Alcorn County, Mississippi, near Corinth (population 14,054). According to the Richmond, Va. News-Leader, "Something is leaving giant footprints 15 inches (37 centimeters) long by six-and-a-half inches (16 centimeters) wide in the hills of Alcorn County, near Corinth." "They were first spotted on March 14 near Smith Bridge Road, north of U.S. (Route) 72. Since then, other tracks have been found within 5 miles (8 kilometers) of Hatchie Chapel." "Joe McKewen, a local naturalist, reckons the tracks indicate a creature 8 feet (2.4 meters) tall weighing 400 to 500 pounds." McKewen "said a 'big hairy creature' was seen by two boys about two years ago (i.e. in 1974--J.T.), knocking down the door of their cabin and scaring them before they ran away, and a farmer (also) saw" the creature. Nine days later, on March 23, 1976, a Bigfoot that "screeched horribly and walked upright, left a disemboweled and mangled deer carcass at Mill Valley, California (population 13,600)," about 7 miles (11 kilometers) north of San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge, "on Mount Tamalpais." "Just after midnight on March 23 (1976), Caroline Morris, 26, reported to the police a frightening 'screaming, screeching and growling' in a ravine below her hillside home. Two patrolmen also heard the noise when they arrived. They searched the wooded slopes by flashlight and heard something moving through the underbrush, breathing heavily." "One of them thought he glimpsed 'a large, dark- colored thing trying to climb over an 8-foot (2.4-meter) retaining wall.' In the morning, they returned to the scene to follow a trail of blood to the deer." "Experts thought the deer had been killed by a mountain lion." March 1976 also saw an appearance by Florida's elusive creature, the Skunk Ape. "Two brothers were driving along a dirt road near North Fort Myers (population 40,214) when they saw an ape-like creature in a clump of pine trees about 10 yards (9 meters) from the road." The creature was described as being "'about 6 feet (1.8 meters) tall with long black hair.' The area was searched, and samples of lice-ridden hair, thought to be from the Bigfoot, were found on a barbed-wire fence. They were sent to Dr. J. Mason Valentine, anthropologist and Atlantis-hunter, at the University of Miami for identification." In addition to the Bigfoot sightings, other Fortean phenomena during March of 1976 included: March 5, 1976: "Plague of millions of rats in Senegal, 'displacing or affecting 150,000 people." The rodents were "thriving despite poisons and flamethrowers" deployed by the Senegalese Army. March 14, 1976: "Vast numbers of cockroaches invade office building of Sutton Community Health Office, South London, UK." March 14, 1976: "Many girls in South African TV company in Natal," South Africa, "convulse, dance, stare, make weird noises" for a week. The girls were "believed to be possessed by devils." March 14, 1976: "A wild boar, supposedly extinct in Scotland since the Eighteenth Century, is killed by vehicle on the estate of the Earl of Cawdor, near Nairn." March 19, 1976: "Chimps in Tarzana, California pelt 24 policemen with sticks and cabbage stalks." (Editor's Note: Originally called Runnymede, Tarzana was reincorporated in the 1920s by a local committee, which included the town's most famous resident, Edgar Rice Burroughs (1875-1950). The town was renamed for Tarzan of the Apes, Burroughs' most famous literary creation. Curiously, this "chimpanzee riot" took place close to the 26th anniversary of the author's death. Was this "the Mother of all Dum-Dums?") March 21, 1976: A very large block of ice falls from the sky in Bridgwater, Somerset, UK. (Editor's Comment: Yes, that's the same Bridgwater, Somerset, UK where Mike Taylor and his eight-year-old son saw the "silvery object with a hint of blue-green" on Sunday, February 20, 2005. For more, see UFO Roundup, volume 10, number 9 for March 2, 2005, "Daylight discs trigger major flap in UK," page 1.) March 25, 1976: "Quake at Hopkinsville, Kentucky during a showing of the (1974) film Earthquake," which starred Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner. March 27, 1976: "A witchdoctor hired to keep rain off the Malaysian Open golf tournament in Kuala Lumpur," the capital of Malaysia, was so successful that "other parts of the city were deluged with torrential rains." (See the Richmond, Va. News-Leader for March 24, 1976; the Los Angeles Times for April 26, 1976; the Atlanta, Ga. Constitution for June 11, 1976; and Fortean Times No. 18 for 1976, pages 11 and 12.) Well, that's it for this week. Join us in seven days for more UFO, Fortean and paranormal news from around the planet Earth, 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 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 > Mar > Mar 16 Magonia Supplement No. 55 From: John Harney <magonia.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:54:25 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:10:28 -0500 Subject: Magonia Supplement No. 55 Magonia Supplement No. 55 is a special issue devoted to a long article by M.J. Graeber about his investigations of an alleged UFO crash at Carbondale, Pennsylvania on 9 November 1974. The html edition is now available at
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:44 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:16:34 -0500 Subject: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' List: Like Dracula, no matter how many times one drives a stake through the Aztec case, it seems to rise again a few years later to run amok amongst ufology. Over the past few years, as most of you know, Scott Ramsey and others have been researching the case yet again. Scott's research is given the documentary treatment in my film "Aztec 1948". He published a short article about his work in the August 2004 MUFON Journal, and is working on a book. You can also check out Frank Warren's blog at: www.frankwarren.blogspot.com There you'll find an ongoing series of posts by Scott about his research and conclusions. But, where there's a yin... there has to be a yang. Scott's and I are friends. What I most respect about him is that he always encouraged me to come to my own conclusions about Aztec, even if they differed from his own. Alas, I did, and they do. My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com My take on the 'secret' radar bases can be found under "Aztec and the Radar Bases" My take on Frank Scully can be found under "Being Frank about Frank... Scully, that is..." Related pieces on Scully can be found under "Frank Scully's 'Barilko' Moment" and "Aztec and Inconvenient Facts" My take on Dr. Gee can be found under "The Aztec Incident & The Mysterious Dr. Gee" Finally (for now), my take on the Smith memo, Robert Sarbacher et al, which relates to Aztec, can be found under "Oh Canada - Wilbert Smith & UFOs" The implications of the Aztec case are profound. If it is a real crashed saucer incident, as Scott and others (Linda Moulton Howe, Stan Friedman) seem to believe, then... well, what more needs be said. It's a huge story. For my part, I consider it a modern Grimm's fairy tale, with two very important morals to which Frank Scully should have paid more heed: a) always check your facts; and b) if someone tells you a story that seems too good to be true, it probably is, particularly in ufology. Like 'Dracula', however, the Aztec story, while (almost certainly - cya moment) not real, is entertaining. Perhaps Gary Oldman can play Silas Newton in the movie version, with Anthony Hopkins hamming it up as Frank Scully.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 1st Extraterrestrial Home Loan From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:02:01 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:18:51 -0500 Subject: 1st Extraterrestrial Home Loan Source: PR Newswire http://tinyurl.com/6dh7g LoanPros.com is Giving a $1 Million Prize for 1st Extraterrestrial Home Loan HUNTINGTON BEACH, Calif., March 15 /PRNewswire/ - In a place where reality meets science fiction, LoanPros.com is offering a new $1 Million Prize Promotion for the 1st Extraterrestrial home loan. After the ABC News documentary "The UFO Phenomenon - Seeing Is Believing," hosted by Peter Jennings on Feb. 25, the idea started to germinate in the head of LoanPros.com president, Wayne R. Goldman. LoanPros.com is offering a $1 million prize to the first person who can bring in a certified extraterrestrial being for a home loan. When asked why LoanPros.com would make such an outrageous offer, company president Wayne R. Goldman said, "We believe the existence of extraterrestrials is real and we want to do whatever we can to promote government disclosure, but it's also a good promotional idea. The prize is real and we will stand behind it, if someone does actually bring in an Alien to us, and we don't mean someone from another country. "As far as what qualifies as a real extraterrestrial is subject to our interpretation, and criteria. There would have to be some signs that this person is a real extraterrestrial, a clear difference in the physiological make up, oh, and the alien must be able to sign its name on the new home loan. "If the person meets those standards, then the person bringing in the extraterrestrial would, indeed, receive a $1 million prize from us." LoanPros.com is a highly successful mortgage company located in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Private Spaceport From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:41:01 +0200 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:22:20 -0500 Subject: Private Spaceport Source: CNN.Com http://tinyurl.com/5z9rw 03-15-05 Space venture has West Texas county abuzz Amazon.com founder to build commercial spaceport VAN HORN, Texas (AP) - Even skeptical locals, who've become wary over the years of city slickers with big ideas for their town, perked up when Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos made his pitch - a spaceport for commercial travel into the beyond. Bezos flew into this West Texas town a few weeks ago to tell key leaders how he planned to use his newly acquired 165,000 acres of desolate ranch land. He also gave his only interview so far on the spaceport to the Van Horn Advocate, the weekly newspaper Larry Simpson runs from the back of his Radio Shack store. "He walked in and said: 'Hi, I'm Jeff Bezos,' and sat down right in that chair there," Simpson said, pointing to spot in his small cluttered office. Over the next 30 to 40 minutes, Simpson said Bezos told him the goal of his venture - known as Blue Origin - was to send a spaceship into orbit that launches and lands vertically, like a rocket. "He told me their first spacecraft is going to carry three people up to the edge of space and back," Simpson said. "But ultimately, his thing is space colonization." Bezos, 41, was accompanied by Rob Meyerson, Blue Origin's program manager, whose history includes stints as a manager on the space shuttle emergency return vehicle project and lead aerodynamics engineer developing the shuttle's parachute landing system. Bezos said Blue Origin would first build basic structures at the Texas site, such as an engine test stand, fuel and water tanks and an office building, then begin flight tests in six to seven years, Simpson said. He said most of its initial research and development would be done in Seattle, where Bezos and his companies are based. Bezos has said nothing else publicly about his project, and did not grant an interview request made by The Associated Press. A Houston-based spokesman for Blue Origin, which was incorporated in September 2000 in Washington state, said there was "not much to see or tell" and that the project "won't go anywhere any time soon." The spokesman, Bruce Hicks, provided a short news release and a company fact sheet, which included Blue Origin's mission statement: to "facilitate an enduring human presence in space." Bezos isn't the only tech industry billionaire with stars in his eyes and ties to Texas, where Bezos attended elementary school for three years in Houston while his stepfather was an engineer at Exxon. SpaceX, started by PayPal founder Elon Musk, plans to launch and deploy a military satellite this year using a rocket. The California-based company has conducted much of its testing in McGregor, Texas, near the Fort Hood military base. John Carmack, who made a fortune on "Doom" and "Quake" through his video game company ID Software, owns Armadillo Aerospace based in suburban Dallas. The venture also hopes to launch its own brand of space rockets. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen spent $20 million to fund the SpaceShipOne rocket plane that last fall successfully reached the edge of space and returned. It was dropped from beneath a flying craft and landed like a plane. (The NASA space shuttle, which takes off vertically, also lands like a plane.) Winning the space race takes talented people, and Blue Origin's Web site lists several job ads for engineers - "highly qualified and dedicated individuals ... among the most technically gifted in his or her field." That's a tall order for the 3,000 or so residents of Van Horn, many of whom believe the biggest thing to happen in recent years was construction of a new truck stop on Interstate 10. About 120 miles east of El Paso, Van Horn primarily is a rest stop for travelers along I-10, the nation's southernmost cross- country highway. About 50 miles to the north is Guadalupe Mountains National Park, which contains many of the highest mountains in Texas, including the signature 8,085-foot El Capitan. It can be seen from a distance on Bezos' property amid desert and cattle-grazing terrain and salt lake beds. Broadway, Van Horn's main street which parallels the freeway, is dotted with long-abandoned businesses, many of them flat-roofed adobe-style buildings, and two vehicles waiting at the street's lone stop light constitute a traffic jam. Bill Talley, whose Van Horn Pharmacy is the only place to get a prescription filled within a 90-mile radius, said he was surprised by Bezos' project but was withholding judgment until he knew more. His wife, Mary, was more blunt. "We're used to it," she said of "exploiters" who have raised residents' hopes and then fled. More than a decade ago, some businessmen touted a mica mining venture that created a buzz but went nowhere. Fields along I-10 heading east toward Midland and Odessa are littered with rusting oil field equipment, monuments to the oil industry crash of the 1980s. "We've had gentlemen come in here to change the world," said John Conoly, 76, the Culberson County judge for the past 30 years. "And nothing ever came of it." But Bezos is different, Conoly said. "After meeting and visiting with him, I have every confidence in the world he will do what he says he will do," the judge said. "I know he's going to have some of the best minds for this project. He doesn't do things halfway or second class." Bezos also told the Van Horn group that he wanted to give his family the opportunity to enjoy life on a ranch just as he did as a child. The Internet retailer chief executive spent summers at his grandfather's spread in Cotulla in South Texas. While Bezos' spaceship plans were a surprise, his presence in Van Horn wasn't. His private jet had been seen a number of times in the past year at the local airstrip as he scouted the area and purchased three ranches. On Bezos' new property, the only noticeable change, residents say, are the new "No Trespassing" signs posted every mile or so on the rusty barbed wire cattle fences bordering Texas Highway 54. Conoly said people aren't real excited yet, but that could change once construction begins. For Spanish-speaking residents like Manuel Baeaza, 47, who works at a marble mine in the mountains that adjoin Bezos' property, the project known as "El Estacion" or "the station," brings promise. "More jobs, it would be a blessing," said Baeaza, who's lived in the area for 14 years. Ricky Hutson, who works at used bookstore and resale shop where he also lives, was a bit more philosophical. "With (Bezos) coming out here, this is going to force this town
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Mars Colonies Coming Soon? From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:26:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:26:57 -0500 Subject: Mars Colonies Coming Soon? Source: National Geographic News http://tinyurl.com/5ez6g 03-15-05 Mars Colonies Coming Soon? John Roach for National Geographic News As rovers and orbiters continue to scour Mars for more signs of water and the potential for extraterrestrial life, space scientists and enthusiasts are champing at the bit to put humans on the red planet. In recent months, spacecraft roaming and orbiting Earth's closest neighbor have identified regions where large supplies of water may be accessible from the surface. They have also located areas where gases such as methane could support oxygen-producing bacterial life. Such discoveries are raising the possibility that life lives on Mars today, did so in the past, and with the help of humans, could do so in the future. To find out for sure, space scientists and enthusiasts say humans need to travel to Mars. "There's no question we'll ultimately go there. It's a matter of when, not if," said Lynn Rothschild, an astrobiologist at the NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. (Astrobiology is a branch of biology that searches for extraterrestrial life-forms.) Robert Zubrin is the president of the Mars Society, a Colorado- based organization that promotes human exploration and settlement of the red planet. He said the technology exists to put humans on Mars within a decade. "We are much closer to being able to send humans to Mars today than we were to being able to send men to the moon in 1961, when [United States President John F. Kennedy] started the Apollo program," Zubrin said. Under the leadership of Kennedy, humans first set foot on the moon July 20, 1969. Given similar visionary leadership, Zubrin said, humans can walk on Mars within the decade and begin the process of colonization. Mars Colony The surface temperature of Mars is =9681deg. Fahrenheit (=9663deg. Celsius). The planet is bombarded by ultraviolet radiation, and its atmosphere is about 95 percent carbon dioxide. While such conditions are less than ideal for Earthlings, there's "nothing about Mars today except [ultraviolet] radiation on the surface that would preclude life from surviving there," Rothschild, the NASA astrobiologist, said. Any life would need to be shielded from the high levels of ultraviolet radiation on the surface and presumed oxidants, she added. Rothschild noted that surviving is different from thriving, multiplying, and spreading. For humans to thrive on Mars and to have a continued presence there, they will need to transform the atmosphere and climate to suit human needs: The atmosphere needs to be full of breathable oxygen and the climate warm enough for liquid water. Many scientists believe that billions of years ago, Mars was a warm, wet place. Such conditions may have been more hospitable to life. Scientists also believe that the red planet can be transformed to support life again, including human colonies. The process of transforming a planet to make it hospitable for humans is known as terraforming. NASA scientists, groups such as the Mars Society, and Internet-based communities such as Red Colony continually discuss how to colonize and terraform Mars. While no single method or process is considered best, Rothschild said the common goal is breathable air and drinkable water. "If you get oxygen and liquid water, you can do a whole lot," she said. Risky Exploration Rothschild's major concern about human exploration of Mars is that the mere presence of humans will contaminate the planet and potentially compromise any life that may be there. "If you're trying to look for indigenous life and you contaminate the area, it will be difficult to prove it's not just something you brought along with you," she said. Zubrin said not to worry. Modern biological techniques allow scientists to determine the genetic identity of any microorganism. By way of example, Zubrin pointed to the anthrax attacks in Washington, D.C., and New York City in the fall of 2001. "Scientists were able to determine that the microbes in question were not only anthrax, but that the anthrax stock in question originated from a lab in Ames, Iowa and, furthermore, that the [anthrax] had been taken from the Ames lab in 1987," he said. Zubrin said scientists, using similar techniques, could determine if microbes potentially found on Mars are from a space-launch site on Earth, from material ejected during an asteroid impact millions of years ago, or truly Martian life- forms. Rothschild, meanwhile, pointed out the potential political risks of endorsing Mars colonization. She said human lives may be lost
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Crop Circles Under The Spotlight From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:32:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:32:20 -0500 Subject: Crop Circles Under The Spotlight Source: Phenomena Magazine http://tinyurl.com/5vh5y 03-16-05 Leading Crop Circle Researchers Ed & Kris Sherwood Crop Circles Under The Spotlight Dateline: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 By: Nick Redfern Phenomena Magazine Co-Editor Nick Redfern speaks with Ed & Kris Sherwood, two of the most well-known and respected researchers of the Crop Circle mystery. --- NR: "How and when did you first both become involved in Crop Circle research?" ES: "I first read about Crop Circles in the mid-1970s, after seeing Close Encounters of the Third Kind, a series of UFO sightings, and a UFO book given to me under mysterious circumstances, stimulated me to read all I could about the subject, especially cases involving physical and biophysical evidence. "In early 1984, I began to study Crop Circles further by subscribing to =91Flying Saucer Review' (FSR), a long established and respected UFO journal that published Crop Circle reports. Impelled by an increasing feeling that something very important, of a physical and psycho-spiritual nature, associated with UFOs, was going to happen worldwide during the last decade of the last millennium, I started to keep a very watchful eye on Crop Circle reports. "I was anticipating an increase in UFO sightings, Crop Circle reports, and natural and supernatural occurrences worldwide; an end of the millennium decade of =91signs' and =91wonders' in the Cosmos and on the Earth, affirming the actuality of =91God', and the fact that we are not alone; the fulfillment of ancient prophecies; signs of the =91Second Coming'; and visible =91preparations' and indications of a global physical =91mass landing' and exposure of Extraterrestrial civilizations, with benevolent intentions, concerns, and means to help the Earth and Humanity - an event I think is still to happen (Ref.1 & 2). "For the next six years I continued to investigate the phenomenon from a distance, noting circle physiology, and the reported number, timing, and placing of formations each year. Like other researchers at the time, I observed the exponential increase in the number of formations throughout the 1980s, and their =91clustering' near the major ancient sacred sites of Southern England, as two very auspicious signs. I saw =91prophecies' being fulfilled. UFOs and Crop Circles were increasingly becoming more =91visible', and =91accessible', through the other. "As the 1980s drew to a close, I felt =91contact' with the circles, the =91origin' was imminent and something many people, including myself, would experience in some form. I watched the phenomenon unfold, until late July 1990, when news and images of an enormous Crop Circle =91Pictogram' found near Alton Priors, in Wiltshire, stirred me to begin onsite research in earnest (Ref. 3). "Bratton Camp, near Westbury in Wiltshire, was the first Crop Circle site I visited in 1990. At its =91foot' was a hoaxed pictogram made to discredit the phenomenon and its researchers. However, Bratton Camp was also the location of a multi-national Crop Circle surveillance project organized by Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews that summer called =91Operation Blackbird'. Many different countries' television and newspaper media were there too, as well as security guards, military personnel, and a small group of dedicated UFO =91experiencers', including Rita Gould (an Internationally known and respected psychic), and other participants and witnesses of the first eventful sophisticated Crop Circle surveillance project, held the previous June, near Cheesefoot Head in Hampshire, named Operation =91White Crow', also organized by Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews. "With Rita and a friend, in July and August of 1990, I investigated Crop Circle formations in Wiltshire, Leicestershire, and Lincolnshire. I saw convincing evidence of both non-manmade Crop Circle creation, and deceptive human circle making. I also saw positive and negative =91signs' of things to come. Hoaxing for example, first became a major problem in 1990. In late July, after a personal encounter with a mysterious =91sound' recorded inside a Crop Circle, I began to =91decipher' non-manmade Crop Circle pictograms, starting with a formation that symbolized (amongst other things) the =91interference' effect of =91sound waves' (Ref. 4). A few months later, I decoded the 1990 formation that first stirred me to begin onsite research, and to revise =91who', and =91what' I thought was creating most non-manmade formations." KS: "I've had a lifelong interest in psychic and unusual phenomenon, and have experienced precognitive dreams for as long as I can remember (including one two days before John Lennon's assassination that contained eerie details of that event). I had a peripheral awareness of Crop Circles before 1991. But by the end of that year, in which the fantastic Mandelbrot and Barbury Castle Crop Circle formations had appeared in England, I had become totally enraptured by the beauty and mystery of the phenomenon. A coworker at the time had brought a videotape of the film Undeniable Evidence to work for a lunchtime screening (Thank you Allen Stovall!); and, upon seeing it, I was completely stunned. I immediately began a focused effort to learn all I could about the subject; becoming actively involved in research and attempts to bring public awareness to the phenomenon, which eventually led me to England and to Ed. I helped facilitate some TV productions that were reporting on the subject, also helping organize some Crop Circle events, including a few talks by Circles' videographer Peter Sorenson (1992-4) and also initiating a proposal to IMAX film producers in early 1995 to interest them in producing an IMAX film on the phenomenon." NR: "What sort of phenomenal events have you experienced while conducting Crop Circle research?" ES: "I have witnessed what is behind the creation of many non- manmade Crop Circle formations. Phenomenal events have included, numerous =91interactive' psychokinetic events, the most impressive being the materialization of many non-manmade Crop Circle =91Pictograms' since 1990 (Ref. 3); the appearance of =91balls' (Ref. 5) and =91beams of light' (Ref. 6); unusual Sounds (Ref. 7, 8, 9 & 4); Magnetic (Ref. 3); and ion effects; and biophysical anomalies (Ref. 9 & 10). I have also experienced Extraterrestrial =91Close Encounters', of the =91First' to the =91Fifth Kind', while conducting Crop Circle and related phenomena research (Ref. 11)." "Before meeting Kris in 1995, and since, I have experienced many non-manmade Crop Circle formations appear in =91response' to what I, we, and/or other people have privately thought, said, written, drawn, given attention to, researched, questioned, and done, before, during, and after, an event (Ref. 8). "For example, on the night of July 22nd 1992, I participated in a spontaneous group meditation involving visualizing, for approximately twenty minutes, a new Crop Circle symbol for the genuine circle creating intelligence, or intelligences, to make. Held after sunset, on Woodborough Hill, near the village of Alton Barnes in Wiltshire, it was a discrete experiment initiated by Dr Steven Greer, and supported by the late Shari Adamiak, Colin Andrews, Maria Ward, Linda Howe, Ron Russell, Lynn Gladwyn, George Wingfield, and myself. A few minutes before meditating Dr Greer asked the group to silently intuit a possible design. After a couple of minutes, he then asked everyone in turn what they thought. Interestingly, seven out of nine people, including myself, all thought of the same thing; three equally sized and spaced apart circles, arranged in an equilateral triangle, each connected by a narrow single straight pathway towards their centers. This symbol was then visualized, and =91transmitted' into the Cosmos by the group mind. Amazingly, hours later, a few miles away, for the first time anywhere, the exact Crop Circle sign was discovered in a wheat field near the village of =91Roundway'. (Ref. 8) Kris recently discovered what the formation could be referencing and this will be included in a forthcoming work." "The following month, I privately described to a Crop Circle researcher, =91who' and =91what' I thought was creating most non- manmade formations, including the physics of their creation, and the meaning of certain non-manmade Crop Circle pictograms that had appeared up to that point. Again, a few hours later, less than thirty miles away, next to a major ancient sacred site, a massive formation was found =91mirroring' exactly what I had said, and the order in which I had described my findings, including the previously =91deciphered' pictogram symbols I had referenced (Ref. 8)!! "Late February 1996 I emigrated to California thinking I wouldn't be able to conduct Crop Circle research in England that summer due to a lack of funds after emigrating. It would be the first summer since 1990 that I couldn't travel to Wiltshire to conduct research where the phenomenon has occurred the most worldwide. However, two weeks later the first non-manmade Crop Circle pictogram (later authenticated through biophysical analysis by W.C. Levengood), in the Northern Hemisphere, appeared just fifty miles South of LA at Laguna Canyon, allowing Kris and I to conduct a detailed onsite investigation (Ref. 10). "We were the first Crop Circle researchers to arrive at the Canyon pictogram, and what we saw and documented, before it was damaged by further visitation, was =91undeniable evidence' of non- manmade pictogram creation. Phenomenal biophysical effects included selective plant bending. On a hillside seeded with many mixed plant species, only two were bent 90 degrees, in addition to the natural bend of the plant, without a crease or a break, characteristic of a non-manmade Crop Circle formation, and they were both English plants! The plants looked as if they had been =91steamed into position (Ref. 10). Shortly after investigating the pictogram we decoded the symbols it was comprised of and wrote an extensive report and a widely published article on our findings. "We grew seeds from another non-manmade Crop Circle formation that appeared near Litchfield, England, in 1995, and instead of a single wheat stem producing one wheat head, a stem produced up to six additional stems and heads! The implications of this are profound, no? (Ref. 9) "Apart from Crop Circle =91materializations', I have also witnessed more than a hundred =91UFOs' while conducting Crop Circle and related phenomena research. UFO sightings have been of two distinct types: a form of atmospheric =91ball plasma', and Extraterrestrial technology. On one occasion, in July 1992, I saw an =91amber-orange' colored =91ball of light' precede the creation of a non-manmade Crop Circle Formation (Ref. 13). "On August 3rd 2003 I witnessed and filmed several large balls light, in the same general area and identical to what I observed descend into a wheat field and precede non-manmade Crop Circle creation in 1992. One of the luminosities also demonstrated on camera how mind =91interactive' apparent ball plasma can be, when it =91responded' to three spoken requests that I made, while =91hovering' approximately four and a half miles away! (Ref. 12). "In July 1992 I came within thirty feet of a hovering =91Extraterrestrial craft', a few minutes after walking out of a non-manmade Crop Circle. The aerial object was also observed by approximately eight other people (including Dr Steven Greer and a US/UK CSETI =91team'), who signaled to the UFO with a torch and received the same =91response' back. A more recent =91Close Encounter' occurred while Kris and I were conducting a =91Psychic Photography' experiment inside a non-manmade Crop Circle formation, in Wiltshire in July 2000. The sighting included two silent =91unknowns', and an intercepting military helicopter, and four other witnesses at two different locations. A second half of this sighting I was also able to film. "Another phenomenon I have witnessed almost every day since July 22nd 1992, as a direct result of conducting an =91interactive' and =91psychic' approach to Crop Circle research, are =91balls of light' (BOLs), not visible in an =91ordinary' state of consciousness, but visible in a =91super-conscious' state of awareness, and to photographic equipment sensitive to infrared frequencies. The BOLs are usually brilliant =91white', but can also appear in wide range of colors, and sizes, from as small as a brightly lit pin head to more than a hundred feet in diameter! (Ref. 5) "On the night of July 26th 1992, at approximately 11pm, inside a genuine Crop Circle formation near Alton Priors (Wiltshire), I observed the same bright white balls, and also =91flashes' of light (invisible to other people present), appear, disappear, and reappear above a hedge and a group of trees about a third of a mile away. Moments later, the =91lights' suddenly multiplied in number tremendously, and then all at once vanished. They were immediately replaced by a large, roughly 20-30 foot diameter =91amber-orange' colored ball plasma, which after holding a stationary position for about a minute and a half, and swaying from side to side, quickly descended into a wheat field and preceded the creation of a non-manmade Crop Circle formation near Draycott Fitz Payne (a ringed circle and a single circle). "When I visited the site soon afterwards I saw some of the most impressive biophysical evidence of the non-manmade phenomenon to date, including plants swirled at the center of the formation having multiple stem =91nodes' bent at 90 degrees, without a break or a crease! "I have observed the =91process' of ordinarily invisible balls of light transforming into =91physical' ball plasma and that lead to non-manmade Crop Circle creation only once. However, I have also observed the subtle energy light balls become ball plasma many times. "Another phenomenon associated with non-manmade Crop Circle creation, rarely seen, is atmospheric =91beam plasma'. I have experienced it on two occasions, once in 1992 (Ref. 6), and more recently. In July 2003, only two days before Kris and I gave our main Crop Circle presentation in England, at Glastonbury, presenting evidence of the =91light beam' phenomenon to a UK audience for the first time, we witnessed it! "In 2003, I sensed clairvoyantly that Kris and I should go to a certain discreet location in the Wiltshire landscape, if we wished to witness something directly associated with non-manmade Crop Circle creation. Within a few minutes of arriving at the site we witnessed, above Golden Ball Hill, a little more than two miles away, near Huish, a tremendous atmospheric light =91discharge', including two brilliant light beams, that shot down to the hill from low clouds. "Six years previously, Kris and I were investigating a Crop Circle pictogram near Roundway that had been clairvoyantly =91dreamed' of by Kris, when I took this photo of the formation from an adjacent hill, including what appears to be a light beam between myself and Kris, who's sitting at the bottom of the hill. It was invisible to us at the time." KS: "There have been so many phenomenal events I can only summarize a few here. In nearly incomprehensible ongoing synchronicities demonstrating the interconnectedness of life and consciousness, Ed was the first person I met upon arriving in Wiltshire; within 24 hours of meeting Ed I had photographed a UFO over Roundway Hill =96 the characteristics and location of I actually had dreamed of before traveling to England. An even more phenomenal event associated with the Roundway location is related to a clairvoyant dream I experienced years earlier that culminated a couple of years later, in 1997, in the appearance of a non-manmade Crop Circle pictogram, and a direct and unmistakable =91response' from the =91Primary' Crop Circle creating intelligence (Ref. 8). "Upon returning to California after first meeting Ed, while driving to work on the freeway, I photographed an anomalous =91cloud ring' (Ref. 11), synchronously portentous of Ed's and my imminent wedding plans. After Ed fully emigrated to America a few months later in early 1996, a non-manmade Crop Circle formation appeared in Laguna Canyon, California, an hours' drive from our home. We did our first mutual research report on that formation, deciphering it as a Native American petroglyph message stated in the traditional symbolic language of the indigenous Tongva Tribe of the Los Angeles area. Our report was published widely, and is available on our website (Ref. 10). "Some of the most dramatic and significant phenomenal events we've experienced during the course of our research have been in the astonishing cases of direct and personal interaction with the Crop Circle phenomenon itself that we have observed in some of the formations that we have decoded and documented. We have seen amazing non-manmade formations appear in direct response to what we were doing, thinking, visualizing, or even dreaming at the time. Others also have had similar interactive experiences. "Together we have witnessed many varied and utterly phenomenal occurrences. We have together, and individually also discovered and decoded information and layers of meaning contained in many non-manmade pictograms, that to us provides irrefutable proof of an omnisciently aware =91higher intelligence' interacting with human consciousness." NR: "Who do you think has been creating the worldwide Crop Circle phenomenon?" ES: "This is the =91holy grail' of Crop Circle research, is it not? In early 1991 I reached the conclusion that there were basically three =91Sources' behind the worldwide Crop Circle phenomenon: The =91Infinite Intelligence' and Consciousness of =91God'; Extraterrestrial Civilizations; and human circle makers. Beyond these were many more. For example, there is more than one source, force and energy, natural and supernatural, involved in Crop Circle creation by =91God'. More than one Extraterrestrial Civilization has left behind evidence of its =91presence' also, and more than one deceptive human circle maker, and group, has manually constructed formations (some groups every year since 1990), using applied geometry and simple mechanical means. "In my view, Crop Circle formations =91Created' by what could be called God, are also =91co-created' by more than one =91element' of God, explaining why there are natural and supernatural, cosmic and terrestrial, physical and non-physical energies and forces, including the psychokinetic energy of Human Collective Consciousness, involved in non-manmade Crop Circle creation (Ref. 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13)." NR: "Why do you think there is more than one source creating Crop Circles?" KS: "All the evidence supports that fact. As Ed says, =91There are three sources': Clearly people have made many, many Circles over the years, and others have been documented in relation to UFO events. The source we call the =91Primary Source', and that is the focus of our work, is by far the most profound and we feel is of the Highest Source; the one all ET Civilizations also ultimately answer to. The phenomenon itself has continually given us clues and symbols to define the physical mechanisms of its source, and has repeated its Divine =91Name' numerously in its astounding patterns over the years (Ref. 4)." NR: "What effect do you think human circle making has had on the phenomenon?" ES: "Human circle making, for whatever reason or motivation, has obscured the truth of what has been unfolding in the fields for more than ten years. Many people around the world, as a consequence of Doug and Dave's deception, and many =91imitators' since, turned way from the whole subject, or never looked into it, soon after it became world news, believing the Crop Circles (particularly =91Pictograms') to be nothing more than a manmade phenomenon. Deceptive human circle making is responsible for having caused a great deal of damage, conflict, division, doubt, distrust, and discrediting of the phenomenon. It has wasted a lot of people's time, energy, money, and lives. It has alienated many farmers to the needs of the researcher and public. Farmers have destroyed modern day biblical =91miracles' in the fields believing them to be simple acts of human vandalism. Deceptive human circle makers have in essence, through ego and deception, supported by a willing media, fearful =91powers that be', and financial =91sponsors', helped to =91crucify' the non-manmade Crop Circle phenomenon, by widely discrediting it and its =91researchers. It is one thing to be skeptical, and to conduct open, honest =91experiments', and another to sneak into fields deceptively (over and over again), to flatten down crop illegally to make your own =91statement' believing you are the phenomenon." KS: "The biggest effect it has had has been a very damaging and harmful one; incalculably so. Deceptive human circle making, mostly done without permission and as acts of criminal vandalism of private property, has created widespread doubt and skepticism about the very existence of the non-manmade Crop Circle phenomenon. Similar to the mean spirited motivations of computer hackers who =91sociopathically' destroy, importune, and waste others' work, resources, and property, human circle makers have done their best to damage and discredit the Crop Circle phenomenon with their contrived imitations. It's an unconscionable deception they have perpetrated because there is a profoundly spiritual purpose and message to be found in the genuine Circles that is being confused and made largely unrecognizable by the proliferation of hoaxing. The film Signs in 2002 had the effect of opening the closet doors on hoaxing activity, and helped =91legitimize' the hoaxers, many of whom were featured in various documentaries where they implied they were responsible for the entire phenomenon. Some have gone on to generate lucrative work making commissioned company logos in the fields, while laughing at the general strife they have created in their wake, especially among the Crop Circle =91research community'. They have, as a retired physicist once said to Ed, "scribbled their graffiti over messages from God". Any way you look at it, that's not a good thing. Funds are pathetically scarce to research the genuine formations, to spend them on hoaxed ones is an additional waste." NR: "Are non-manmade Crop Circle Pictograms =91Messages', and if so, what do they mean?" ES: "Non-manmade Crop Circle pictograms are =91Messages' and often convey more than one meaning. For example: In August 1990, I began to investigate =91Sonic energy', and its effects, for clues about how non-manmade crop circle formations might be formed and, while checking an old physics book in my collection, found a diagram symbolizing =91The Interference of Sound Waves' from a =91tuning fork', reflected in a Crop Circle pictogram, discovered two months earlier, near Chilcomb in Hampshire. "At the center of the diagram, A, are two bars B and C, representing a vibrating tuning fork with its associated sound waves, as viewed from above. D, E, F, and G represent =91lines of minimum sound intensity' created by the interference effects of two sets of sound waves, leaving one set half a wavelength in advance of the other. Where they almost coincide a listener positioned along these lines would experience almost complete silence. "As if to doubly affirm the role that sound plays in the physics of non-manmade crop circle creation, the Chilcomb pictogram, symbolizing the effects of sonic energy, formed in wheat, on June 6th 1990, only a few fields from where the first sophisticated Crop Circle surveillance operation (Operation =91White Crow') was held the previous June, and where a mysterious =91trilling' sound was heard and recorded in association with the appearance of a non-manmade Crop Circle formation (Ref 4, 7, & 8)! "Amazingly, the Chilcomb formation depicted both the audible and inaudible aspect of the interference of sound waves, and by its inference the two types of sounds recorded inside certain Crop Circle formations. It also beautifully symbolized =91The Word' (Ref. 1, =91In the beginning was the Word', and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' John 1:1), by combining in the form of a simple graphic one of the oldest sacred symbols used by ancient cultures around the world to represent the Sun and God (=91The Creator', or =91Creator God'); a circle with a =91dot' at its center, represented in the Crop Circle pictogram by the outer ring and the central circle, with four =91ring arcs' or sound waves to symbolize The Word, and Creation (in this case, non- manmade Crop Circle creation by The Word). "The Chilcomb Crop Circle formation opened my eyes to the metaphorical language of Crop Circle design symbolism, and was the first pictogram I =91deciphered'. The following year I learned that professor Gerald S Hawkins had discovered =91musical ratios' reflected in the mathematics and geometry of certain Crop Circle formations, including the Chilcomb KS: "They definitely are and do contain =91messages'. As I touched on in an earlier question: varied cultures and beliefs worldwide have told of prophesied signs that would appear to herald important changes for humanity and sound a call to a greater spiritual awareness of our responsibility to each other and our planet's well being in an extremely critical time in its history, when it's dominant predatory species (us) finally has within its grasp for the first time the ability to actually destroy the planet's environment and ecosystems, and is well on the way to doing so. To put it simply, the greater message can be said to be: =91We are not alone' physically or spiritually in the universe, and our responsibility is to realize this and behave appropriately and humanely with the future in mind, to co-create a more livable reality." NR: "How can someone interested in Crop Circles learn more about your research?" ES: "The best way to find out more about our research is to visit our website at: www.CropCircleAnswers.com. We have several main pages: For announcements of new Articles, Reports, Sightings, Psychic Photography Experiments, Radio, Television, Video, and Talk Archive updates, visit: News. For a portion of our published articles archive, including Crop Circle Pictogram decoding information, relating to 60 non-manmade formations, and more, visit: Articles. For a sample of our individual Crop Circle formation reports and Crop Circle =91Field Report Highlights', visit: Reports. To view stills from actual UFO video footage, photographs, illustrations and diagrams of some of our documented sightings, including unidentified aerial objects witnessed while conducting a =91psychic' and =91interactive' approach Crop Circle research, visit: Sightings. For a small selection of our =91Psychic Photography' research, photographing a psycho-interactive and psychokinetic luminous energy phenomenon associated with Crop Circle Creation, visit: Psychic Photography Gallery. To hear some of our past radio interviews, and to view our TV and Video Archives, where filmed Conference presentations, and documentaries referencing our research, can be ordered, visit: Radio, TV & Video Archives. New Articles, Reports, Sightings, and Psychic Photography Experiments are being prepared for posting in early 2005. Another way to find out more about our research is to watch for CCA =91NEWS' announcements of our forthcoming BOOK about the Crop Circle Phenomenon." References: CropCircleAnswers.com (CCA) 1) The Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth, By Stuart Holroyd, Corgi, 1979. http://www. theonlyplanetofchoice.com/ 2) The Only Planet of Choice, Phyllis V. Schlemmer, Gateway Books, 1994. http://www.theonlyplanetofchoice.com/ 3) CCA =96 Articles =96 Let Us Remember Dragons: A Meteorological Connection in Crop Circles, By Ed Sherwood, June 1997. 4) CCA =96 Reports =96 Chilcomb 1990 Crop Circle Formation, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, 1990. 5) CCA =96 Psychic Photography Gallery, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, December 2001. 6) CCA =96 Articles =96 Non-Manmade Crop Circles As a "Vacuum Domain" Phenomenon, By Kris Sherwood, Millennium Research, April 2002. 7) The Word Is Nine: Crop Circle Metaphors of 1997 (Part One), By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, June 1998. Also published (though heavily edited) in =91The Circular' magazine (Issue 32 September 1998). 8) CCA =96 Articles =96 Crop Circle Co-Creation 2001, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, March 2002. 9) CCA =96 Reports =96 Litchfield Crop Circle Formation, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, 1995. 10) CCA =96 Articles =96 The Laguna Canyon Crop Circle Formation, By Ed & Kris Sherwood, Millennium Research, April 1996. 11) CCA =96 Sightings, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, December 2001. 12) CCA =96 Sightings =96 Engaging A Dragon, By Ed Sherwood, Millennium Research, September 2003.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:50:18 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 10:00:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Smith >From: Dave Haith <visions.nul> >To: <UFOUpdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:33:32 -0000 >Subject: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission >Discussion of "UFO" pictures in a guarded conference room at NASA. Regarding the UFO pictures in the NASA conference room. I suggest that it is unlikely that such pictures would just be "on the wall". If such pictures existed and were of real UFOs, then don't you think it would be more likely that they were locked up? The only explanation I can see is that because the witness is not educated in space technology/hardware then the images were simply pictures of advanced US (or Soviet) space hardware and artist renderings of such. >Just prior to their entering the viewing room, Jim and I noticed >that the Technicians in the MOCR had gotten up and left the >room. Now, that isn't unusual during a normal EVA, but the >Astronauts were in Hadley's Rille. They couldn't be seen because >they were over the edge, down in the Rille itself. The Lunar >Rover was about thirty, maybe forty or more yards from the edge, >and had the left front camera on the spot where the Astronauts >had disappeared. This implies it is Apollo 15. >Jim and I then paid close attention to what was on the screen. >There was an object above the spot where the Astronauts were >supposed to be in Hadley's Rille, just hovering. I am totally >positive as to it being an object; it was round, it had a shiny >side with a shadow side, with the shadow side matching the >shadows on the moon, and though all the video shots coming from >the moon looked black and white, they could actually have been >in color. The harsh lighting was probably responsible for the >illusion of black and white. >Anyway, The object started a slow move from screen left to >screen right. The camera on the left front of the Rover followed >the object as it moved screen right. Soon it was apparent that >it actually wasn't moving screen right, but was circling the >Rover. There was no video camera on the left front of the Rover, it was on the right front (driver's right). >The Rover has two mounted cameras on it. One camera was mounted >on the left front and one on the right rear. As the object came >into view of the right rear, that camera picked up the object >and continued tracking it as it circled, very slowly around the >Rover. It finally came to the point where the right rear camera >could no longer follow it, so the left front camera picked up >the image again and followed it to where it was once more above >where the Astronauts were in Hadley's Rille. Wrong, the remote controlled (from Earth) video camera was on the right front. Behind and a little above it on the right was a 16 mm data acquisition camera (not remote controllable). There was only 1 video camera on the surface of the Moon. The DAC was a film camera, so could not transmit its image to Earth. As to why the fellow thought there were two cameras, I can guess was that perhaps the projector frame size was too small for the video image, so it was shown on two projector screens? Or perhaps these were playbacks of recordings, one monitor for one segment and another for another segment. I have noticed some NASA Apollo images are processed the wrong direction (left is right and right is left). Maybe that made him think it on the wrong side. >"I mean it was a drop of oil on the camera lens at the >back of that screen." To which he pointed. Okay, it was a good >place to shut up and get out of the viewing room, but.. Once >more I said something because as I have previously stated, I'm >not stupid! >"There's no way that drop of oil is on any one of those lenses >at the back of the screen, because of the temperature." >"The heat is high enough back there to set the drop of oil on >fire." I can't judge whether its possible to have dust or oil or something (a bug, spider, asbestos, etc) fall on the lens of the projector on Earth. Who can know? The Apollo 15 science report and it said alot of dust was falling on items and they had to dust the lens very frequently. If you read the transcripts from the Apollo 15 Surface Journal, you can see this was a problem. Viewing some of the video at that site also shows dust and lens flare as possible "UFOs". I ask the witness to examine the footage and transcript at the web site and pick out the part he saw so a more detailed assessment can be made of his report. Or, since the witness has a written document of the date and time of the event, that would go a long way in helping to pinpoint the video. If the video can be found but has no object like he saw, then it adds credence to the projector/oil theory (although you could always still say the NSA or NASA erased the UFO from the video). If a UFO is there, then perhaps we may try to explain it. At least in some of the footage I saw, dust lingered/flickered on the video camera lens. Here is the NASA Apollo 15 website: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15j.html http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/a15.rille.html http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/video15.html
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:58:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:16:59 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Sandow >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the >next two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy >beckon) I am always rather alarmed when people suggest >ordering expensive books from the local library, especially >ones ordered from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder >if this is necessarily the best use of public libraries' >increasingly limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) John, Are you being forced into unemployment? I'm sorry to hear that. And I hope it's just temporary.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:05:41 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:08:45 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' - Warren >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:44 EST >Subject: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' Good Day Paul, Et Al, >Like Dracula, no matter how many times one drives a stake >through the Aztec case, it seems to rise again a few years later >to run amok amongst ufology. Interesting analogy... like Dracula, one has to "drive the stake" through his heart to kill it, and that hasn't happened with Aztec; in fact, quite the opposite. >Over the past few years, as most of you know, Scott Ramsey and >others have been researching the case yet again. Scott's >research is given the documentary treatment in my film "Aztec >1948". He published a short article about his work in the August >2004 MUFON Journal, and is working on a book. You can also check >out Frank Warren's blog at: >www.frankwarren.blogspot.com Scott has been researching/investigating the Aztec case for "15 years"; He has traveled to 28 states, spent hundreds of hours in various archives, interviewed over 60 credible witnesses tied to the event; he has incurred over $200,000 dollars in expenditures during this ongoing investigation. >There you'll find an ongoing series of posts by Scott about his >research and conclusions. >But, where there's a yin... there has to be a yang. >Scott's and I are friends. What I most respect about him is that >he always encouraged me to come to my own conclusions about >Aztec, even if they differed from his own. Alas, I did, and they >do. >My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: >www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com <snip> This is an all too familiar path you're on Paul; if I may, I would suggest taking Scully, Newton and Gebauer out of the picture for the moment - look at the other 60 direct and indirect witnesses that have validated the Aztec Incident. Surely, you don't think they were all part of some grandiose con-game while fighting the precipitates of old age?!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:13:37 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:10:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission - Ledger >From: Jim Oberg <joberg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:33:20 -0600 >Subject: Re: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission >[Non-Subscriber Post] >>From: Dave Haith <visions.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:33:32 -0000 >>Subject: Moon UFO On Lunar TV Transmission >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/mar/m11-006.shtml <snip> >How this witness - whose physical description of the Bldg 30 >facilities appears spot on - can remember seeing images from a >second camera that never existed is beyond my understanding. The witness also mentions your office as being in the same structure as the MOCR. Do you recall the CR being cleared or any
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kaeser From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:21:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:12:16 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kaeser >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:53:53 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >>Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly don't >>regret buying, Jerry's two volume UFO Encyclopedia (Second >>Edition) probably comes closest to a UFO book that would >>consistently remain on my Top 5 list. For those that would find >>the price prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >>your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it does >Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >to their central library, we'd all be happy. Hi John, Most public libraries on this side of the big pond (at least in Maryland) tend to purchase books based on public demand, derived from best seller lists and public requests. My regional libraries will note any requests and after a certain number of inquiries the book is added to a list to be purchased. We also have a very strong inter-library loan system, which allows some libraries to obtain books from remote institutions on request, but that is usually reserved for expensive and rarely requested texts. Let me add that I don't believe that in the U.S. UFO texts are automatically given a status equal to that of tabloid newspapers and magazines, which seems to be the implication in wanting UFO groups to foot the bill. The most prominent technical bookstore near George Washington University and Georgetown University, which carries no fiction, has the two-volume UFO Encyclopedia set included among its technical offering. I would also note that it was classified with the Astronomy section, as opposed to the Historical/Mythological section. I would not be opposed to an effort to provide copies where needed, but that would be marketing. If a text is deemed inappropriate for distribution through the public library system
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:27:22 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:14:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? - Ledger >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:18:26 -0400 >Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:44:27 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Strip Mining On Mars? ><snip> >>These strange "growths" make me think of dendritic growth of >>"chemical gardens" such as putting certain chemicals into >>waterglass (sodium silicate) so they can grow "trees". >>Perhaps these growths were in a highly salty (lots of >>different chemical salts) water lake at one time and, as the >>water evaporated, the concentration of salt increased to the >>point where it began to precipitate around a number of >>supersaturated solution areas within the evaporating lake. >>However, the size of these supposed Martian "chemical garden >>trees" greatly exceed anything found on earth. >Perhaps these growth are similar to coral growth in our oceans. >Since we don't really know anything about organic strutures that >"might" occur on Mars, your imagination is the limit. See some >examples of similar shapes in our oceans. Errol must still be suffering from the after effects of his flu. from past experiences I've had flu symptoms that have dragged on for weeks. Get well soon Eebee. This was sent-in error-before I'd finished it. I tried to head it off by sending Errol a message mentioning my faux pas but it must have slipped by. This URL was supposed to be included: http://www.corallibrary.info/showphoto.php?photo=482 Its shows a similar type of coral organic growth, and there are others that seems to come close in appearance as well. I'm _not_ suggesting that the images on Mars are coral but perhaps some organism that reproduces in a similar fashion then vacates the hardened shell once it dies or moves on. It's anybody's guess what organism's would do on Mars though recent discoveries of methane have given rise to debate about similar occurrences of micro organisms, in acid like environments, in caves here on Earth.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Ufological Mess - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:56:40 -0500 (EST) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:34:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Friedman >From: Steven Kaeser >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:08:30 -0500 >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Kevin Randle >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>From: Stanton Friedman >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >>>Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >>>of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >>>Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >>>Wisconsin. >>I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole >>town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person >>someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what >>is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. >LaCrosse, WI was on the postage strip of the package that was >received, according to Don (who originally got the SOM-101). Is >there anything more known about the source than that? Steve
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:36:11 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:53:53 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >>Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly don't >>regret buying, Jerry's two volume UFO Encyclopedia (Second >>Edition) probably comes closest to a UFO book that would >>consistently remain on my Top 5 list. For those that would find >>the price prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >>your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it does >>to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. >Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >to their central library, we'd all be happy. How silly! A new high (or is it low) in silliness Don't listen to this rubbish! If you want a book, go to the library and request it. Most book publishers give libraries a discount on books. And then there are, of course, interlibrary loans. What exactly was your position at the library, John? Janitor? I am quite sure by your demonstrated ignorance it didn't have anything to do with lending books. Practising public librarian indeed! Perhaps, in fact, you have never been to a library. During my research for Project 1947, I borrowed dozens of books and magazines and several hundred newspaper microfilms through inter-library loan. Sources were from all over the United States and Canada included the Library of Congress; University of Texas, El Paso; University of New Mexico, Yale University; University of Maine; Chicago Public Library; Washington State Library; Center for Research Libraries, etc., etc. Don't pay any attention to this twiddle! If you want to read a book go to the library and request it. If they don't have the funds to purchase it, a knowledgeable librarian can probably inform you on how a copy might be obtained by loan or other arrangements.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:04:45 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:36:37 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Smith >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >>two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >>I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >>expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >>to their central library, we'd all be happy. >How silly! A new high (or is it low) in silliness Don't listen >to this rubbish! If you want a book, go to the library and >request it. How unsympathetic! Do you understand how the funding of libraries is performed? Do you think an endless supply of money is flowing into it? How do you think the budget is allocated between staff and book/magazine/DVD/video purchases and interlibrary loans (including mailing fees)? If the tax base is not growing or maxed out like Britain, you will only be able to accommodate so many requests. Given enough pressure for more books, they might cut back staff to pay for them. >What exactly was your position at the library, John? Janitor? I >am quite sure by your demonstrated ignorance it didn't have >anything to do with lending books. Practising public librarian >indeed! Tsk. >Perhaps, in fact, you have never been to a library. Tsk. Tsk. >During my research for Project 1947, I borrowed dozens of books >and magazines and several hundred newspaper microfilms through >inter-library loan. Sources were from all over the United States >and Canada included the Library of Congress; University of >Texas, El Paso; University of New Mexico, Yale University; >University of Maine; Chicago Public Library; Washington State >Library; Center for Research Libraries, etc., etc. All "free" I am sure. Well, I suppose you should thank the rest of us for your researches because I assure you my money has gone (by force of law) into funding libraries and other publicly "free" systems. Have you ever calculated the cost of your researches that are being subsidized by us innocent tax payers? Perhaps we should limit the largesse we are spending on you. Well, that wouldn't be nice! >Don't pay any attention to this twiddle! If you want to read a >book go to the library and request it. If they don't have the >funds to purchase it, a knowledgeable librarian can probably >inform you on how a copy might be obtained by loan or other >arrangements. Libraries are an excellent resource of knowledge that have been kindly provided "free" by society. But resources are limited and budgetary pressures influence the reapportionment of funds, sometimes by removing staff in favor of other items
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:09:30 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:38:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:31:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:38:58 EST >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>Stan: >>Over the years you've claimed that Colonel Weaver's expertise >>was disinformation. I've always been curious - upon what >>information is that conclusion based? Is it simply because he >>disagreed with you over MJ-12 and Roswell, or was do you have >>evidence of his service record that he was a disinformation guy? >I spoke with a former AFOSI guy who told me that Weaver's >specialty was disinformation.. He certainly was guilty of >substantial misreprsentation by making claims about the MJ-12 >documents without being able to provide any documentation to >back them up; by tabloidizing Jesse Marcel by falsely claiming >that the story came to light first in the National Enquirer in >1978, and that I, a UFO Researcher, met with him in 1978 looking >for other witnesses. >The article was in 1980 by Bob Pratt whom I had given Jesse's >contact info because Bill Moore and I had already talked to 62 >witnesses and The Roswell Incident was due out. >He disinformed by slectively quoting the FBI memohad _not_ >borne out that the wreckage was like a balloon. He claimed to >have talked to all the people who knew anything. Weaver was a bit lax with some of his facts, but this in no way shows he was guilty of disinformation in the Roswell report. You conveniently omit mention of the GAO report, which also labelled MJ-12 a forgery. And don't forget the GAO were commissioned to check and produce all documentation relevant to Roswell. They found precisely zilch, i.e. nothing apart from two scraps of paper that were already public knowledge. Are the GAO also guilty of disinformation? The reason Weaver and the GAO did not produce 'documentation' to back up their fraud claim is, I imagine, that they both assumed the American public (i.e. the great majority) was smart enough to realise the events described in the MJ-12 papers never took place, and that it was up to people like STan Friedman to demonstrate that they did take place. He has not done so yet, despite writing the allegedly definitive book. >He hadn't talked to Bill Brazel or Judd Roberts or Mr. Porter >etc. He quoted from the July 9 Roswell paper leaving out the >last comment from the Rancher that he was sure what he had >recovered was not a weather balloon. >He never noted that the stories of July 8 all said that the >wreckage was recovered last week. Not noting that the Rancher >had come in to town on July 6 and went out the same day and was >brought back and reprogrammed on the 9th... to suggest mid >June... there is more but I have an early plane to catch. Strange that Brazel was "reprogrammed" to give an exact false date for the discovery whilst Marcel (at Ft Worth) was also "reprogrammed", by different people, to give "three weeks earlier" (by some press reports) and "a few days earlier" (by other reports). In fact Marcel only knew the date second-hand. Stranger still that after this "reprogramming" (which was to support the balloon explanation given at Ft Worth) Brazel got his act wrong and ended up saying he was certain the object was NOT a balloon, i.e. the exact opposite of what Ramey said at Ft Worth! STF simply cannot or will not admit the obvious: there was no reprogramming, there were no threats, there was no duress. The true date of discovery was June 14, and the reason some press reports of July 9 give the "found last week" version is that they had confused the recovery date with the discovery date, as I have pointed out before. There is no precise date for the discovery in any press report except the June 14 date. All the ones that differ from this merely quote vagaries like "three weeks before" or "a few days before" or "sometime last week". Haut's original release was based on incomplete information. He had not spoken to Brazel, but mentions a "landing last week" when nobody saw anything land at all. I repeat: nobody saw any landing, nobody saw any crash. Brazel merely reported when he first discovered the debris (June 14) and when he began to retrieve some of it (July 4). He had never heard of flying discs until going into Corona on July 5. It is all there, in black & white. The "reprogramming" of Brazel is pure fiction, an invention of 1979-80. You cannot even offer a motive for either Brazel or Marcel being told to falsify their dates, even supposing the UFO was an alien spaceship. >>3. Why is there no mention in the MJ-12 documents of a second >>crash on the Plains of San Augustin, which Stan Friedman >>maintains happened (see Crash at Corona)? How can this >>inconsistency be reconciled? The argument that this was a >>preliminary briefing, and that San Augustin would not need to be > mentioned (the only explanation I have heard), makes no logical >>sense, particularly as the author of the EBD saw fit to mention >>the alleged El Indio crash. For proponents of both MJ-12 and the >>Aztec incident, such as William Steinman, the same question must >>be asked and answered. >I don't think I have ever pretended to be psychic. Remember this >was indeed a "preliminary briefing". Roswell had had lots of >publicity. The Plains crash had had none. It involved an almost >intact craft... more important and more detailed and more >classified than the stuff on the Brazel ranch. Superb logic indeed. Since it was not included in MJ-12, the second crash must have been more classified than Roswell, too classified for Ike to know about! Another, more reasonable, answer is that the San Augustin crash never happened. The forger, a Roswell crash promoter, was obviously not a San Augustin crash believer. >>Could it be >>that a hoaxer used Smith because he/she/they could use the >>date 1 August 1950, the only time in a several month period that >>Smith met Truman, which, If a researcher discovered it, would >>seem to authenticate the document? Which makes more sense? >>MJ-11 for well over a year, for no reason, or Smith getting the >>nod in August 1950? >There are many presumptions in the above. Remember that the >phrase used was: "Smith was designated as permanent >replacement". >Since he shortly thereafter was named DCI joining the first >three DCIs on MJ-12, Truman may have wanted to wait for >permanent status for Smith (meanwhile he might well have been >temporary) until he had decided Smith would replace >Hillenkoetter as DCI. >If somebody else had been designated DCI, than probably he would >have pemanently replaced Forrestal. >I am a physicist not a psychoanalyst who never met the patients. >I also have no idea how many angels can fit on the head of a pin >or who will win the world series in 2005. >By the way, I had asked the Truman archivist if anybody else had >asked for the dates of the meetings of Smith with Truman. The >answer was no. A previous researcher - i.e. someone who visited the T library before you - would have discovered this critical August 1 date for himself. I am not saying he would have found it quickly & easily, but undoubtedly he could have, and did, obtain it, paying maybe several visits to the library. Of course, if he was planning a forgery he would not be so foolish as to mention giveaway dates which staff might remember, should a later
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 16 Re: Ufological Mess - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:20:46 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:24:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:56:40 -0500 (EST) >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Steven Kaeser >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:08:30 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>From: Kevin Randle >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST >>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>From: Stanton Friedman >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >>>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >>>>Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >>>>of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >>>>Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >>>>Wisconsin. >>>I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole >>>town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person >>>someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what >>>is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. >>LaCrosse, WI was on the postage strip of the package that was >>received, according to Don (who originally got the SOM-101). Is >>there anything more known about the source than that? >There was also a number for the postage meter. The person >involved has been identified. My papers also deal with the claims >by Kevin about Peter Tytell and the use of generic ranks Why has this person not been identified? Why don't you tell us who it is? Could it possibly be our favorite muckraking
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:58:59 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:53:03 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:05:41 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:44 EST >>Subject: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' <snip> >>Like Dracula, no matter how many times one drives a stake >>through the Aztec case, it seems to rise again a few years later >>to run amok amongst ufology. >Interesting analogy... like Dracula, one has to "drive the >stake" through his heart to kill it, and that hasn't happened >with Aztec; in fact, quite the opposite. Frank: To extend the analogy even further, I would suggest that, yes indeed, the stake has been driven - repeatedly - into the Aztec "vampire" by a host of ufological Van Helsings, but each time some well-meaning person wanders along and pulls it out without realising what they're doing. As a result, the monster wanders around for a bit, killing some innocents (ie. the reputations of a few UFO researchers), before another group of ufological Van Helsings wanders in and stakes it again. Maybe we should remember to cut off its head this time! >>Over the past few years, as most of you know, Scott Ramsey and >>others have been researching the case yet again. Scott's >>research is given the documentary treatment in my film "Aztec >>1948". He published a short article about his work in the August >>2004 MUFON Journal, and is working on a book. You can also check >>out Frank Warren's blog at: >>www.frankwarren.blogspot.com >Scott has been researching/investigating the Aztec case for "15 >years"; He has traveled to 28 states, spent hundreds of hours in >various archives, interviewed over 60 credible witnesses tied to >the event; he has incurred over $200,000 dollars in expenditures >during this ongoing investigation. Yes, no question Scott has done a lot of work. He's a good guy, and I have a great deal of respect for his tenacity. But... where are the 60 credible witnesses, remembering that the term witness should be reserved for someone who actually saw something? Ken Farley and Doug Nolan are the two, to my knowledge, that have been made public so far. I do not totally discount their stories, although there are plausible explanations for them. Scott also talks about over a thousand pages of documents. I've seen a lot of them - I have yet to see any that are truly relevant to Aztec, or prove that it was anything other than a con. <snip> >>My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: >>www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com <snip> >This is an all too familiar path you're on Paul; if I may, I >would suggest taking Scully, Newton and Gebauer out of the >picture for the moment - look at the other 60 direct and >indirect witnesses that have validated the Aztec Incident. To discount Scully, Newton and Gebauer is to make the fatal error of pulling the stake from the corpse. Aztec researchers make it over and over again. There would be no Aztec story without Scully, Newton and Gebauer. Therefore, the investigation hinges upon their credibility. >Surely, you don't think they were all part of some grandiose >con-game while fighting the precipitates of old age?! No, although one should never discount the possibility that people are either pulling your leg, or telling you what you want to hear, or simply agreeing with leading questions... Until some solid evidence can be brought forward that indicates Aztec was anything other than a hoax, a couple of "eyewitnesses" are not enough to counterbalance the clear evidence that it was all a con. I'd love to see a detailed response to my critiques of various critical elements of the Aztec case. So far, nothing. And there's the fundamental problem with the Aztec proponents - like Mina, they believe there is good in Dracula, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and even though everyone else can see him for what he is - a monster.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: Official US Conclusions on UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:00:57 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:56:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions on UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:31:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:38:58 EST >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc <snip> >>Stan: >>Over the years you've claimed that Colonel Weaver's expertise >>was disinformation. I've always been curious - upon what >>information is that conclusion based? Is it simply because he >>disagreed with you over MJ-12 and Roswell, or was do you have >>evidence of his service record that he was a disinformation guy? >I spoke with a former AFOSI guy who told me that Weaver's >specialty was disinformation.. He certainly was guilty of >substantial misreprsentation by making claims about the MJ-12 >documents without being able to provide any documentation to >back them up; by tabloidizing Jesse Marcel by falsely claiming >that the story came to light first in the National Enquirer in >1978, and that I, a UFO Researcher, met with him in 1978 looking >for other witnesses. Stan: Thanks for the response. An anonymous AFOSI guy (or even one who is not anonymous) is hardly a source of information that I'd take to the bank. As for the rest, it sounds like you disagree with Weaver et al, and may indeed have good reasons for doing so, but that doesn't make him a disinformation guy. I disagree with Michael Salla a lot; I don't claim that he's involved in disinformation. I even disagree with you (on occasion), but that doesn't mean I think you're a disinformation expert. <snip> >He disinformed by slectively quoting the FBI memohad _not_ >borne out that the wreckage was like a balloon. By that measure, the selective quotation by many ufologists of the famous Twining memorandum could be termed disinformation. For example, in your book Crash at Corona, you discuss the memorandum at pp. 23 - 26, and use it to buttress your case that Roswell was the crash of an alien spacecraft, but make no mention of the fact that the memorandum to Brigadier General Schulgen also includes the following statement from General Twining: "Due consideration must be given the following... The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovery exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these objects." To be fair, you did mention this part in your follow-up book Top Secret / Majic, but if one had only ever read Crash at Corona, and then saw the entire memorandum, they could claim that you had "disinformed" them, by selective quotation - just as I'm doing in this post as I snip your comments :-) My point is that "disinformation guy" is a pretty serious charge (or should be), and should have some real evidence to back it up. I haven't seen it, and would therefore characterise Weaver as someone who offered an alternate explanation for Roswell. Then, if you disagree with that explanation (as many do, perhaps with good reason), attack the data he used without resort to calling him a "disinformation guy." <snip> >>1. Why has no in-depth investigation been conducted by MJ-12 >>proponents into the second alleged crash referred to in the EBD, >>the El Indio - Guerrero incident? In fact, why is that alleged >>incident not discussed - at all - by you in either "Final Report >>on Operation Majestic 12" or his later book Top Secret/Majic? >>Investigators Tom Deuley and Dennis Stacy have offered a >>decidedly terrestrial explanation for this incident (a 1944 >>crash of a USAAF spotter plane in the same area). I'm not >>convinced that their explanation is the right one, but I have >>not seen any refutation of it by MJ-12 proponents, or even a >>real discussion of it; >Seems hard to buy a 1944 crash as an explanation for Dec. 6, >1950... I guess maybe time travel like the crash test dummies. I agree that their explanation is not all that convincing, although I have yet to hear an alternate explanation. But my point was that it was not referenced in either your MJ-12 paper for FUFOR, or your book. No mention, not even a "we don't know what happened, but there it is." Again, selective use of data cuts both ways. >There was very little to go on: no names, no specific location. >Not much left as "what remained of the object had been almost >totally incinerated. Such material as could be recovered was >transported to the AEC facility at Sandia...". >I have been to Sandia. Chances of getting anything out of them >seemed miniscule. That's never stopped you before. It seems to me that the first avenue of exploration would be to assess the validity of the El Indio incident. If none could be established, one way or another, even more reason to treat the documents with extreme caution. >We had witnesses for Corona and Plains of San Augustin. Bruce >and others have determined that there was a high level security >alert on Dec. 6, 1950. >Frank Feschino Jr. and I have been gathering loads of info about >battles between US interceptors and UFOs. >Conceivably a plane really did crash as a result of its pursuit. Here you're speculating, which is exactly what you refuse to do with other matters, below. Hard to have it both ways. <snip> >>2. Why is no mention made of the rapid decline of Vannevar >>Bush's role in government after World War II, and the >>unlikelihood that he would have been appointed to such a super >>secret project as MJ- 12 by President Truman. >I don't think there was a rapid decline in Bush's role in the >years immediately following WWII. Bush was asked, according to >his notes on the Sept. 24, 1947 - meeting with Forrestal and >Truman - to accept the position of chairman of R and D. Bd. He >agreed to accept the role as heading the "Research and >Development Board" but with the proviso that he be let off after >a year. He said... "if there was an impression that I did not >have his confidence he felt that that impression would soon be >corrected by future relations." He was active on other boards >though having some health problems and was on the War Council. >Seemed to be on good terms with Hoyt Vandenberg, etc. To save everyone a trip to my blog: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com here is the other side of the Bush story, from "Oh Canada - Wilbert Smith & UFOs": Given that the flying saucer incidents did not become a serious concern to the United States government until 1947, well into the Truman administration, it is unlikely Bush would have played a role in such a group at that time. Bush's role in government was on the wane, and Truman did not consider him a close advisor. There were a number of reasons for this, the first being an inherent distrust of any holdover from the Roosevelt administration who had been close to the President, particularly those, like Bush, who had kept him in the dark about the development of the atomic bomb. For Bush, notes historian Pascal Zachary, Roosevelt's death was a "professional catastrophe" which dealt a "huge blow to his plans for the postwar period" and "reduced his influence on atomic policy." Beyond this, however, was the fundamental difference between the two men's personalities and styles - Truman was a skilled politician, proud of his ordinariness and skeptical of "experts"; Bush could mix it up in the back room if he had to, but he was, at his core, an elitist intellectual. He fit much better with Roosevelt than Truman. Evidence of this diminishment of Bush's role abounds, but it can perhaps best be seen in Truman's rejection of Bush's "Endless Frontier" report in 1945, a major blow to Bush. As Zachary notes, "while not quite a rift, the non-endorsement signalled stormier times to come." The policy differences between the two were profound. Instead of Bush, in 1946 Truman chose John Steelman, a man Bush disliked, as Chairman of the Scientific Research Board, one of the goals of which was to further blunt Bush's influence on civilian science policy. Bush was passed over for the position of the first Secretary of Defense in 1947, which he wanted "in the worst way" and had to settle for the position of Chairman of the newly formed Research and Development Board (RBD), against the better judgement of some of Truman's closest advisors, who were wary of Bush's ambition. Bush hoped that he would still be able to influence policy while with the RBD, but these hopes quickly proved illusory. As Zachary observes, the "RBD post was like a slow-motion train wreck. Bush saw the crash coming but was helpless to stop it." The problem was with the charter of the RBD, which left it without real power. The Board could advise the Secretary of Defence, James Forrestal, on "major policy" , but could not direct or control the internal research and development activities of the various military services, which left it powerless to affect change. This resulted in constant battles between Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which Bush lost time and again. In 1948 he resigned, citing the disregard the Joint Chiefs had for his Board. He wrote to Forrestal, "There is now a general impression that, since the Joint Chiefs can invade the affairs of the Board without notice, the latter is in some manner secondary or subsidiary. I find my ability to serve you in connection with the responsibilities you have placed in my hands seriously impaired." By 1950, Bush was, by his own admission to William Golden, finished as a force in Washington. Given this reality, there is no reason to believe that Truman would have tapped Bush for any role related to flying saucers. And yet, to those who were not Washington insiders in the late 1940s, unaware of his rapidly diminishing stature within the administration and his battles with the Joint Chiefs (or, one might add, to UFO researchers similarly unaware of these events decades later), Bush would seem to be a logical choice based on their knowledge of his wartime record and influence. Accordingly, his was the perfect name to use in a disinformation campaign. Just food for thought. <snip> >>3. Why is there no mention in the MJ-12 documents of a second >>crash on the Plains of San Augustin, which Stan Friedman >>maintains happened (see Crash at Corona)? How can this >>inconsistency be reconciled? The argument that this was a >>preliminary briefing, and that San Augustin would not need to be >>mentioned (the only explanation I have heard), makes no logical >>sense, particularly as the author of the EBD saw fit to mention >>the alleged El Indio crash. For proponents of both MJ-12 and the >>Aztec incident, such as William Steinman, the same question must >>be asked and answered. >I don't think I have ever pretended to be psychic. Remember this >was indeed a "preliminary briefing". Roswell had had lots of >publicity. The Plains crash had had none. It involved an almost >intact craft... more important and more detailed and more >classified than the stuff on the Brazel ranch. >There may have been loads of data in the attachments which were >listed and not provided. I see no point in speculating. It would >be an entirely different ball game to deal with a vehicle as >opposed to small pieces. I'm not talking about the attachments, none of which (other than the TF Memo) were included with the EBD. I'm talking about the failure to reference San Augustin (or Aztec, for that matter) in the EBD itself. If it was a better incident, in terms of what was recovered, all the more reason to note it for Eisenhower. You don't need to be psychic to see that. <snip> >>4. James Forrestal suffered his mental breakdown and resigned as >>Secretary of Defence in late March, 1949. Yet, according to the >>EBD, he remained a member of MJ-12 until his death on 22 May, >>1949. Why would he not have been immediately replaced, as he no >>longer held the President's confidence, he was no longer >>Secretary of Defence, and, most important, he was >>psychologically unbalanced? If not then, why was he not >>immediately replaced after his death? This was the most >>important subject in the United States, after all, and yet, here >>was MJ-12, down to MJ-11, for well over a year, until the >>supposed appointment of new CIA director Walter B. Smith on 1 >>August, 1950. >Being the most classified subject doesn't mean it was the most >important. The cold war was certainl of great concern along with >the Korean war, the build up of Russian capability to build and >deliver nuclear weapons.etc. Yes, quite so, but it's not like it wasn't important at all. Surely Truman would have found someone to take Forrestal's place, immediately (or pretty close to it). In 1949, no-one could have predicted that Smith would wind up as DCI over a year later. Truman's psychic powers must have been pretty good if he could peer a year into the future, and say, "Gee, Smith will be DCI then, and he'd be perfect for MJ-12, so I'll wait until then to appoint a replacement for poor Jimmy." Sorry, that just doesn't make any logical sense. >>Why not just replace Forrestal with his successor >>at Defence, Louis Johnson, a man Truman trusted (he had served >>as his chief fundraiser in the 1948 election) and who had a >>solid background in government (Roosevelt's representative to >>India in 1942, Assistant Secretary of War 1937 - 1940). >These are hardly great qualifications for MJ-12 membership... any >intelligence background? Remember that Truman replaced him with >Marshall as Sec. of Defense So you're saying that just because he had no specific background in intelligence work, he wouldn't have been qualified? Seems to me he was plenty qualified, both as a chum of Truman and as the guy who was running the Defence Department, where, unless he was truly out of the loop (which, when you look at the record of his tenure there, is impossible to accept), he would have had top security clearances for just about everything. >>Or why not replace him with Secretary of the Air Force Stuart >>Symington, a logical choice considering the Air Force was >>supposedly on the front-lines of the UFO problem? >Symington as you will recall was very much a politician .. none >of the others were. He was also quite ill in June of 1947. >Besides, how can anybody answer such ultraspeculative questions >from this distance? I don't think being a politician would be a disqualifying factor - after all, Truman was nothing more than a poltician, with no intel background (unless the smoky backrooms of Missouri politics counts). Why not just hide the whole thing from him, too? Still, I agree that Symington would not have been the best choice. Still, what about Marshall, or someone else? Again, why wait for over a year? Yes, this would be speculation (which, as I note above, you're not adverse to engaging in given the right circumstances). More important, however, it points out a big flaw in the supposed logic underpinning the MJ-12 documents. >>Could it be that a hoaxer used Smith because he/she/they could use >>the date 1 August 1950, the only time in a several month period that >>Smith met Truman, which, If a researcher discovered it, would >>seem to authenticate the document? Which makes more sense? >>MJ-11 for well over a year, for no reason, or Smith getting the >>nod in August 1950? >There are many presumptions in the above. Remember that the >phrase used was: "Smith was designated as permanent >replacement". >Since he shortly thereafter was named DCI joining the first >three DCIs on MJ-12, Truman may have wanted to wait for >permanent status for Smith (meanwhile he might well have been >temporary) until he had decided Smith would replace >Hillenkoetter as DCI. This doesn't answer the question of why he waited over a year to begin with. >If somebody else had been designated DCI, than probably he would >have pemanently replaced Forrestal. Why? I thought the whole point about the MJ-12 group was that they were an All-Star case, appointed regardless of the positions they held, and that they would retain their spot on the committee even after they left the jobs they held in 1947 (like Hillenkoeter leaving the CIA, or Gray and Souers returning to the private sector). Indeed, in Top Secret / Majic, at p. 124, you write: "A much more intensive investigation of the people involved and the Washington scene leads to the notion that the members would have been chosen for their skills, competence, background and demonstrated capabilities, not for transitory titles. I have read many recommnedations for government positions, including some from the MJ-12 people. The focus was always on capabilities, not job titles." I agree. But now you're suggesting that Smith was appointed specifically because he was about to named DCI, and that is "someone else had been named DCI, he probably would have been appointed to replace Forrestal." Which is it? It's hard to have it both ways. >I am a physicist not a psychoanalyst who never met the patients. >I also have no idea how many angels can fit on the head of a pin >or who will win the world series in 2005. The Boston Red Sox, in 6, over whatever group of slugs make it out of the National League. >By the way, I had asked the Truman archivist if anybody else had >asked for the dates of the meetings of Smith with Truman. The >answer was no. Alas, this proves nothing, other than that the hoaxers, whoever they were, did not obtain that information from the Truman archivist. If they were, oh, say, AFOSI agents, however, surely they could have accessed it from another source, or even surreptitiously through the Archives. Of course, that would just be speculation. Alas, with MJ-12, it seems that speculation is the order of the day. Best regards,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:32:33 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:02:31 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly don't >>>regret buying, Jerry's two volume UFO Encyclopedia (Second >>>Edition) probably comes closest to a UFO book that would >>>consistently remain on my Top 5 list. For those that would find >>>the price prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >>>your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it does >>>to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. >>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >>two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >>I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >>expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >>to their central library, we'd all be happy. >How silly! A new high (or is it low) in silliness Don't listen >to this rubbish! If you want a book, go to the library and >request it. >Most book publishers give libraries a discount on books. And >then there are, of course, interlibrary loans. >What exactly was your position at the library, John? Janitor? I >am quite sure by your demonstrated ignorance it didn't have >anything to do with lending books. Practising public librarian >indeed!Perhaps, in fact, you have never been to a library. >During my research for Project 1947, I borrowed dozens of books >and magazines and several hundred newspaper microfilms through >inter-library loan. Sources were from all over the United States >and Canada included the Library of Congress; University of >Texas, El Paso; University of New Mexico, Yale University; >University of Maine; Chicago Public Library; Washington State >Library; Center for Research Libraries, etc., etc. Of course, I was just a janitor, publishers give libraries huge discounts and it cost nothing to run national and international library interlending services. How silly of me.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:40:03 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:04:02 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:21:46 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >>two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >>I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >>expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >>to their central library, we'd all be happy. >Hi John, >Most public libraries on this side of the big pond (at least in >Maryland) tend to purchase books based on public demand, derived >from best seller lists and public requests. My regional >libraries will note any requests and after a certain number of >inquiries the book is added to a list to be purchased. We also >have a very strong inter-library loan system, which allows some >libraries to obtain books from remote institutions on request, >but that is usually reserved for expensive and rarely requested >texts. >Let me add that I don't believe that in the U.S. UFO texts are >automatically given a status equal to that of tabloid newspapers >and magazines, which seems to be the implication in wanting UFO >groups to foot the bill. The most prominent technical bookstore >near George Washington University and Georgetown University, >which carries no fiction, has the two-volume UFO Encyclopedia >set included among its technical offering. I would also note >that it was classified with the Astronomy section, as opposed to >the Historical/Mythological section. >I would not be opposed to an effort to provide copies where >needed, but that would be marketing. If a text is deemed >inappropriate for distribution through the public library system >it doesn't matter what the source of the funding is, it just >wouldn't be included on the shelves. OK, I wasn't being entirely serious, but I have felt a little embittered of late. The library where I work/worked had for a time policy of only buying books which had been requested by users (you get fewer angry letters and political flack that way). This meant that many books which I felt should have been added to stock for the benefit of a great number of people were ignored, and some remarkably obscure books were bought for individuals. I just think that it might be a good idea if people checked out on their local library's book selection and book ordering policies (and their financial situation) before slamming in requests for expensive books with limited appeal.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:00:53 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:05:50 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >To: ufoupdates.nul >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:53:53 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >>Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly >>don't regret buying, Jerry's two volume >>UFO Encyclopedia (SecondEdition) probably comes >>closest to a UFO book that would consistently remain >>on my Top 5 list. For those that would find the price >>prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >>your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it >>does to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. >Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the >next two months, after which the green pastures >of redundancy beckon) I am always >rather alarmed when people suggest ordering expensive >books from the local library, especially ones ordered >from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) Hi John, I'm sorry to hear about your forthcoming redundancy. Just to clarify, I had in mind ordering books via a library's inter-library loan scheme as I discussed in Section D of my email last summer on buying UFO books: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/aug/m27-016.shtml Personally, despite my view about the considerable utility of Jerry's Encyclopedia, I don't think it is necessary to go to the extreme recommended by one magazine's reviewer that the Encyclopedia "should be bought by every serious reference library". Given the somewhat one-dimensional views occasionally expressed about the relevant reviewer and magazine, some readers of this List might be surprised to note this remark at the end of the (generally complimentary) review at: http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/clark.html An extremist bunch, you Magonians! By the way, you may be interested in the following summary of an article from 1955 criticising public librarians for spending any tax dollars on UFO books: "Flick, David. Tripe for the public. Library Journal, v. 80, Feb. 1, 1955: 202, 204 : Commenting on the "though processes and the strange logic" employed by librarians responsible for book selection, the author says that no amount of rationalising about "future historical importance," "balanced conditions", and "public demand" can justify their expenditure of tax dollars for books about flying saucer "whose purpose seems to satisfy a bad taste for the bizarre and the sensational". " (Summary quoted from Marcia S Smith's "Extraterrestrial Intelligence: A selected, annotated bibliography : Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, UG 633, 76-35 SP" (1976) at page 25 (in Part 2) of the Congressional Research Service stapled edition.) >Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to >donate to their central library, we'd all be happy. This suggestion prompts the thought that if I ever get around to preparing a more comprehensive email on obtaining UFO books, I really should cover the availability of books from the libraries of some UFO groups. For example, in England BUFORA has a fairly extensive library, albeit somewhat light on books by skeptics. Most of BUFORA's library is available on loan to members, or at least this was the position the last time I checked (which admittedly was a few years ago).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: Magonia Supplement No. 55 - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:47:11 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:25:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Magonia Supplement No. 55 - Hatch >From: John Harney <magonia.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:54:25 -0000 >Subject: Magonia Supplement No. 55 >Magonia Supplement No. 55 is a special issue devoted to a long >article by M.J. Graeber about his investigations of an alleged >UFO crash at Carbondale, Pennsylvania on 9 November 1974. The >html edition is now available at >http://magonia.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ms55.htm Ah yes, Carbondale, PA 1974. Graeber is credited in the entry below, which comes from my page of discredited UFO sightings: http://www.larryhatch.net/DISCRED.html 1974/11/09 CARBONDALE, PA 44-hour fiasco with wide coverage. Fireball falls into lake? Rumored to maneuver under water. Diver recovers 6-volt railroad lantern. Big UFO retrieval and coverup claimed. Boy confesses tossing lantern into lake. 10 copycat websites move events from PA to New Jersey. Credit: Matt Graeber. Ufology is well aware of Carbondale, at least my little corner of it. By all means see the Magonia page for more. I wouldn't call this "a gleaming facet of contemporary ufological folklore" unless we are talking about the Aztec, NM types, festival promoters and coffee-mug & tee shirt vendors. Carbondale has been on my sh** list for several months now at least. The funny thing for me is not so much that it was a patently bogus case, but that the 'scraper' websites (as copycats are called here) all seem to have copied some idiot who got the whole _state_ wrong, placing events in New Jersey. Google for Carbondale, NJ UFO 1974 and you will see what I mean. That's a fast way of identifying crap UFO sites BTW. This is a very good piece of work by Matt Graeber regardless.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Filer's Files #12 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 10:18:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:36:07 -0500 Subject: Filer's Files #12 - 2005 Filer=92s Files #12 =96 2005, Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern Vice President of Skywatch International March 16, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com Webmaster: C E Warren www.cewarren.com http://groups.aol.com/filersfiles? Midair Collision with UFO 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. I personally chased one over England as directed by London Control. NASA employee saw UFO during Apollo 15 mission and ham radio operators support the sighting. UFOs were seen over California, Airborne over Carolinas, District of Columbia, Idaho, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington. Sightings were also reported in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom. NASA Fireman Saw UFO during Apollo 15 Mission Eileen Nesbitt - UFO Casebook, Investigator writes, "Below is an excerpt from the retired NASA fireman who was taking a smoke break with another fireman while seated in an unoccupied viewing room at the Manned Spacecraft Center August 6, 1971, during Apollo 15 mission.=94 "We entered the viewing room at the end of our patrol, and as was our want, sat at the back of the room to enjoy a pipe. We both smoked a pipe, and the viewing room allowed smokers. We had been there for no longer than fifteen minutes, it may have been longer, but I doubt it, when the stage left door opened and in walked several, at least five of the upper echelon administrators of Johnson Space Center. Uh, it actually wasn't called Johnson Space Center at that time; rather the name was Manned Spacecraft Center. Anyway, I do know that one of the people was definitely Chrome Dome, as we were irreverently known to call Dr. Gilruth." "Jim and I then paid close attention to what was on the screen. There was an object above the spot where the Astronauts were supposed to be in Hadley's Rille, just hovering. I am totally positive as to it being an object; it was round, it had a shiny side with a shadow side, with the shadow side matching the shadows on the moon, and though all the video shots coming from the moon looked black and white, they could actually have been in color. The harsh lighting was probably responsible for the illusion of black and white. Please go to: http://www.ufocasebook.com/formernasa.htmlv for the entire story, and information on multitudes of UFO pictures in a crypto room at NASA. Thanks to Eileen Nesbitt UFO Casebook, Investigator http://www.ufocasebook.com/ Editor=92s Note: There have been many similar stories from NASA astronauts including radio intercepts. During Apollo 15 David Scott, Alfred Worden, James Irwin; visited the Appenine Mountains of the Moon, from July 26 to Aug. 7, 1971. Hundreds of Ham radio operators picked up this conversation about discovering strange =91tracks=92 on the Moon.=94 Astronaut David Scott: "Arrowhead really runs east to west=94. Mission Control: Roger, we copy. Astronaut Irwin: "Tracks here as we go down slope.=94 Mission Control: Just follow the tracks, huh? Astronaut Irwin: Right we're (garble). We know that's a fairly good run. We're bearing 320, hitting range for 413 ... I can't get over those lineations, that layering on Mt. Hadley. Astronaut Scott: I can't either. That's really spectacular. Astronaut Irwin: They sure look beautiful. Astronaut Scott: Talk about organization! Astronaut Irwin: That's the most *organized structure I've ever seen*! Astronaut Scott: It's (garble) so uniform in width. Astronaut Irwin: Nothing we've seen before this has shown such uniform thickness from the top of the tracks to the bottom. We can speculate that a code was in effect. Could the astronauts been describing a UFO called =91tracks or lineations=92? Perhaps the beautiful structure with uniform width and thickness describe a UFO that landed and left tracks on the ground? Several astronauts have mentioned many areas on the Moon appear to be mined and UFOs were seen. California =96 Craft Breaks Apart and Reconstitutes LAKESIDE -- John Hayes at UFOINFO reports a witness had an amazing sighting of a bright orange egg-shaped craft that separated into three parts, then came back together again on March 6, 2005 at 2:35 AM. A group of firemen on one of their trucks also saw the craft. The witness contacted the media and police departments looking for anyone else who may have witnessed this event Thanks to Brian Vike HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 218 SONORA -- Mark A. Olson, D.M. writes, "At 6:28 PM on March 9, 2005, a huge glowing object appeared directly overhead, traveling to the Northeast very slowly. The object passed behind the trees about 100 yards or so away from my back balcony. It was an awesome sighting (still shot below). The video clip is posted at www.sonorasightings.com . It's a rather large clip at 22Mb, but it is definitely worth seeing! Thanks to Mark A. Olson, D.M. drmarkolson.nul Carolina=92s =96 Witness Spots Two UFOs during Flight FLORIDA TO PENNSYLVANIA =96Agnes reports, "On March 13, 2005, around 1 PM, I was looking out the window of a commercial aircraft and spotted a small black shiny triangular metallic craft emerge out of a large thick cloud. After a few seconds of traveling very quickly south it totally vanished into thin air. There was no sound. We were flying at 30,000 feet. A half hour later I saw what looked like a regular white commercial flight going south, but I saw lots of planes pass us and this thing was moving extremely fast in comparison. It left; quickly disappearing in the jet stream, then suddenly began angling downwards as if to descend for landing. The witness states, "Then it angled straight down, nose pointed to the Earth and jet stream shooting straight up in the air, and did a total flip around to face the other way! Then the thing turned from a plane into a very long thin line of yellowish light that stayed in one place for about a minute. It then faded and disappeared, too! Thanks to Agnes=92 E-mail report. US Capitol =96 UFO Over Restricted Airspace District of Columbia. -- Will Allen writes,=94 These images were taken July 16, 2002, from the US Capital. This is P-51 Restricted Airspace and nothing should be in the air, anywhere near or around any Government buildings or Monuments. Because this is restricted airspace, an image like this should not exist, yet it does. These are not just =91lights in the sky,=92 lens flares, or any other conclusive assessment made by the "experts" on UFO's. Lead object consisted of 4 orbs, two green and two modulating amber, red, green. I question those that say to me that what I saw and photographed were of Earthly origin.=94 Close up of green lights above building taken from Lower US Senate Park: This is Restricted Airspace P-51 (No Fly Zone) Thanks to Will Allen for his report. Florida =96 Multiple UFO Reports ROYAL PALM BEACH -- We saw a silver spinning football shaped object going across the sky on February 23, 2005, at 6 PM. I thought it was a large Mylar football balloon at first, but it was moving horizontally and spinning in a clockwise direction. My daughter saw a light flashing on it, but it looked to me like the sun reflecting as it spun pretty quickly. It was silver in color and flew across the sky and then up. Strangely about 20 minutes later there were two helicopters in sight out the same window. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director, www.nuforc.org/ AUBURNDALE =96 The witness was driving west on SR/CR 92 and saw jets in the sky with contrails contrasting with the bright golden/pink remaining skylight from the sunset on March 3, 2005, about 6:45 PM. He states, "As I watched some jets, a closer and brighter object tumbled in place approximately 1000 feet up.=94 I say tumbled because the object appeared pear shaped only if you took a knife and cut the very top of the pair off giving it a flat top. The bottom half of the object was an extremely bright reddish orange glow that I only saw on its bottom end as it tumbled. I pulled the car over and watched it almost disappear except for a faint visual of the object in its position until its wider brighter part rotated into view. It was stationary in the sky as it tumbled. The body of the object appeared very dark and if I held a dime up an arm=92s length it would just have barely covered the object. It vanished with a single flashbulb effect and absolutely NO sound the entire time. Thanks to Brian Vike http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews =3Darticle =3D2482 CLEARWATER =96 The witness reports that on Saturday, March 12, 2005, around 9:30 PM, he saw two very large off-white circular lights, gliding rather slowly overhead. The lights rotated around one another in a figure 8, about four times, and then faded out completely into the perfectly clear night. Their height was about 1500 feet, and they made no sound. Later about 10 PM, a large orange/amber light, with a diffuse border and an irregular shape that changed constantly like fire was seen. It was moving in the same direction, at the same height, and with the same speed as the two lights half an hour before it. It also faded out and disappeared. Again, there was no sound. E-mail report Idaho - Long Orange Bent String Shaped Object RUPERT =96 On March 11, 2005, at 7:40 PM, two witnesses spotted a long string like object with an orange glow. My neighbor asked as he looked to the northern sky, "Whoa what's that?" I then looked in that direction and saw what appeared to be a long bent string shaped object flying relatively high, it had an orange glow about it. The object traveled in front of numerous stars showing that it did have some width to it and it then traveled just in front of the Big Dipper constellation then just faded into nothing. We stood there in awe for a while, and then went home. We both again were out looking in the sky tonight waiting to see it again to no avail. Thanks to Brian Vike Missouri =96 Web cam Images Analyzed ST.LOUIS =96 MUFON analyst Dr. Donald Burleson writes: "I tried some further image processing on the UFOs taken by the webcam over the city. Attached is an enhancement I did of the lower- left of the two St. Louis objects, which clearly is disk-shaped. The upper-right object shows up as essentially a disk too but seems to be a bit too blurred to come out as clear as the first object. The objects have an enhancement which, if crude, does show that the object, like its companion, appears to be disk- shaped. =96 Thanks to Dr. Don Burleson Also see last weeks Filer=92s Files #11. www.nationalufocenter.com New Jersey =96 Disk WOODBRIGE =96 Reverend Barna reports his son took pictures of a UFO circling the area. New Mexico =96 Roswell Crash We have not heard much about the crash of a UFO generally referred to as Roswell. Don Burleson directed me to his article at www.cufos.com that speculates that the UFO crashed 12 to 21 miles from the debris site near Corona, NM. In my explorations of the area it seemed that the UFO debris field was laid out in a NW to SE pattern indicating the craft was heading in one of these two directions. I visited Corona and talked to some of the old timers who remembered the crash in 1947, and told me there was Army trucks all over Corona. I asked where were they headed? They stated, "Some were heading NW and some SE." The debris field is SE of Corona. I tried to investigate NW of town and the area was fenced off and belonged to the government. When I attempted to get onto the fenced land, I was stopped by two men in a truck, who told me I was trespassing, that I could not proceed. See Roswell Trajectory Feasibility: http://www.cufos.org/Roswell_fs1.html Ohio =96 Midair Collision with UFO COLUMBUS -- On a clear blue 83 degree summer Sunday, July, 1985, at about 3 PM, I was flying my camouflaged Grumman Yankee TR-2 (N1650R) from Detroit to Columbus. While under Port Columbus International airport civilian radar approach control at 15 miles out and descending through 8,000 feet I was given permission to vector 30 degrees right to investigate what appeared to be a 2nd sun (sphere UFO) about 2/3 the size of a football field parked on the back side of a large cumulous cloud at about 4,000 feet and 5 miles NNW of the airport. There was nothing on radar anywhere near that location. Approaching the UFO at 4,000 feet level and 200 yards, it never lost its brilliance - just like staring into the sun only now hundreds of times larger than the real sun still clearly visible above. At this point I was completely overwhelmed with curiosity as this enormous sphere was still not showing on radar only 5 miles away and that same radar had never lost contact with my aircraft. As U. S. Navy trained in radar I knew that this was just not possible. Anything that huge that could create or reflect light that bright and was that close to the radar should have 'blipped' like the Graf Zeppelin blimp with a full metal jacket, and yet, I was still on radar even though this sphere was now directly between me and the radar - just NOT possible! This means that the sphere did not absorb or reflect the radar pulses - it was totally transparent to them. This alone should give us a clue as to what the UFO's physical composition was NOT. Given that I'm no more or less brave than any other pilot would have been in this situation, I did have one major 'courage' advantage over most - I was wearing a parachute. So, with burning curiosity and squinting through sun glasses, I started a slow left turn into the UFO for a closer look. It was at this point that I became truly apprehensive (scared out of my wits to be honest) of what I was about to do. Half way through the turn all that bright light from the UFO instantly switched off revealing a huge medium grey sphere made up of millions of clearly visible perfectly flawless identical pentagon shaped translucent/opaque crystals about 6 inches long with pointed ends and all spaced identically about 1 foot apart and NOT moving. Once I saw that the UFO was NOT solid, I made the decision (with parachute) to penetrate it with my left wing in an attempt to knock as many crystals off as possible hoping to later find on the ground for analysis. In a hard right turn the outer third of my left wing sliced through the UFO's crystals with the sound of an intense hale storm on a tin roof. The hundreds of contacted crystals broke cleanly over the leading edge of my wing (strange but no fragments) and I could clearly see that the severed surfaces were of a light smooth frosty texture. At this time I could see approximately 40 to 50 feet deep into the crystals (UFO) where it became totally dense and black with nothing but the crystals. I also noticed that those crystals my wing did NOT contact were NOT effected by the turbulence of my wing - they never moved or even quavered - another observation that was "not possible". The illustration of the crystals below is exactly what I saw on that day. The sound and the drag created by my wings collision with the crystals was consistent with the solid weight of ice (or the like) and caused my aircraft to cartwheel which caused a 60 degree CCW roll. I remember this because I became instantly concerned about gyro damage and then just as instantly realized how insignificant that was considering what had just happened. As for investigations, this was on a Sunday and GATO was closed. The only evidence would be any recordings where radar approach states that they see nothing on radar (no evidence) and all the paint and fiberglass missing from the leading edge of my outer port wing (still no evidence). I examined thoroughly looking for fragments of the UFO's crystals imbedded in the wing but found nothing. I didn't think until much later that there might have been microscopic evidence in the fiberglass. I've been kicking myself for that ever since then. The good news is that the wing was repaired and repainted so it is possible that microscopic fragments still exist imbedded underneath the new paint. I recently checked the "N" number and the plane is still flying and in California. I'm seriously thinking about buying it back for this reason. Name withheld. Thanks to InventorGrissom Pennsylvania =96 Cylinder Low Over City PHILADELPHIA =96 John Schuessler MUFON Director has obtained the following report: I contacted Michael Greene who lives in New Jersey. He and his eleven year old son were driving down Spruce Street after hockey practice when a very silvery cylinder shaped object caught my eye. It was a beautiful bright sunny Saturday morning at 10:30 PM, on March 5, 2005, so there's no mistaking exactly what I saw. Mike is a teacher and coach and states, "It was moving slowly horizontally through the sky and was a very brilliant silver/metallic color. The sun was reflecting off it making it really, really shiny. I watched it for a good 15 to 20 seconds. I had to concentrate on the road. I told my son to look at it. He watched it longer than me. He told me that it was flying slowly and then it flew away fast. It was the height that a helicopter would fly in the sky only a few thousand feet up." This is his second sighting; he saw one near the Ben Franklin Bridge that was flying vertically. Thanks to MUFON www.mufon.com QUAKERTOWN/ZION HILL -- On February 24, 2005, a couple woke up to sounds of helicopters so they looked out to see them, but they were black and very hard to see. They saw two or three black helicopters, at a time, just circling the area. The witness stated, my husband who works until 1 AM, saw them all over the place. The few times we have seen them in the day, they were all black with some sort of tanks on the sides of them, looking very odd. In the morning we see what seem to be rainbows in the clouds. Small clouds full of a spectrum of color like a rainbow. Willow Grove Navy base is 25 miles east of here, but these aircraft are going west and not coming from that direction. We see these weird lights in the sky a lot even in the day time. My son and I saw a huge triangular shaped aircraft when we lived in Philadelphia, in 1994 Texas -- Excellent Video and Photos - UFO KAUFMAN COUNTY =96 The witness used his camcorder at 10 PM, on March 12, 2005, and noticed some jets and small airplanes. I started to get back in the pickup when I saw a weird colored glowing light toward the west coming at me. I started taping it and noticed it had another dim light behind the bright one. It headed toward the northeast.. As I was zooming in on it I noticed it had another dim light on the leading corner that made a perfect triangle. Photo courtesy of Mr. Lawwalk. It was moving about 100 mph or similar to a small plane. There was no noise at all coming from it. I want to say it was about 15000 feet up, but if it was a triangle, it could have been high up, but lower than the jets. Thanks to Brian Vike and =A9 Lawwalk 2005 Photos and video clip can be found at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews =3Darticle =3D2505 Virginia - Disk Spotted for Five minutes CHESTERFIELD -- The witness was watching the sky, and saw a green light zigzag around the sky on February 23, 2005, for five minutes. The object made a slight Humming noise. Thanks to Peter Davenport www.hbccufo.com Washington =96 Fire Ball and Power Outages SEATTLE --By Athima Chansanchai, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter. "Washington residents who looked up at the sky Saturday night saw a great ball of fire ignite the sky. When they went back inside their homes, some of them found only darkness -- and no power. Seattle utilities officials said it was just a coincidence. "The power outages that affected the Queen Anne and Magnolia areas had nothing to do with any other phenomena," Sharon Bennett, spokeswoman for Seattle City Light, said yesterday. Also, unrelated to the fireball was the small earthquake that struck the Olympia area Saturday night, experts said. Scientists said observers saw a fireball -- a large meteor -- streak through the sky across the western half of the Pacific Northwest shortly before 8 p.m. Saturday. The Federal Aviation Administration's regional office in Renton and local television stations reported calls from people from southern Oregon to Seattle. The object zoomed over the Pacific Ocean, traveling from south to north, and likely disintegrated before any fragments fell into the Pacific. Adding to the post-meteor buzz was another coincidence that lit up phone lines across the Northwest: A coal plant in Montana tripped off a power line at about the same time, causing lights in Seattle to flicker. As for the larger outage, Bennett said a cable from a Broad Street substation failed, causing electricity to go out on street lights, the Ballard Bridge and in Queen Anne, Magnolia, Westlake and 15th Avenue West. The outage lasted from about 8:10 to 9:30 p.m. and affected 3,000 customers. Meanwhile, a 3.3-magnitude quake occurred about 15 miles north of Olympia before 8 p.m. Saturday, seismologists said. Some Olympia residents suspected a connection to the fireball. Thanks to the Seattle Post- Intelligencer http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/215845_outage14.htm Canada - Large Black Disk Shaped Object COQUITLAM, B.C -- I was still awake this morning watching as it started to get light on March 13, 2005, and it was really clear with no pollution to be seen. Now, this happened so fast I'm not even sure if I saw it. I was looking towards Port Mann Bridge, when I saw a large black disk shaped object rise above the ridge just a little to the west of the bridge. It rose to about 1500 feet and then fell like a leaf with a drift towards the east and then back towards the west and down below the ridge. It was over 100 feet in diameter as it was much larger than the houses built on the south slope and it must have been a mile or so farther north, probably right over Coquitlam. I photographed one over the same spot in January 2004, where a valley cuts into the side of Burke Mountain at that point and they could easily slip into there and be behind the mountain in seconds. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research CATHARINES, ONTARIO =96 These ice circles were seen in January, 2005, but were not reported until February 26, 2005. Circular spots along with other more random shapes in ice and snow covered Welland Canal. While quite possibly simply areas where the ice has melted, the near-perfect circular shapes of many of them is interesting, including the sharply-defined edges. These were found just before the canal was drained. Ice Circular Phenomena -- There are also other types of "circular phenomena" which may or may not be related to the crop formations. The ice rings and circles are a now much-debated phenomenon themselves; most found in Canada and elsewhere in recent years have been on small ponds and lakes. Like crop circles, most have appeared overnight, although there are various theories as to how these may be natural in origin, involving underwater vents or currents affecting the surface ice, in particular those rings with diffused edges or "splash patterns." In some cases though, the rings have been almost perfect circles, cleanly incised into the ice with smooth, sharp edges, such as at Delta, Ontario in 2000. Most of these have been on thin surface ice, too thin for a person to have walked on. There are currently eleven known reports in Canada since the 1970s. Thanks to the Canadian Crop Circles Research Network: http://www.cccrn.ca/ CALABOGIE, ONTARIO -- My son woke up and thought he saw an airplane on March 8, 2005, at 11 PM. It moved really fast so he came out and told my husband and I so we looked out his window and saw a flashing light that would move backwards, then go back to its original place. We see planes all the time in the sky, but their lights are not as bright and they move slowly. So when we saw this, we knew it was not a regular plane. We kept watching it do nothing, but saw the flashing lights which were red and a bluish green. What amazed me is it would all of sudden move really fast and then slow down again, then a minute later it would move really fast and then do nothing. I called my brother who lives about 40 km away and he also saw the object. My brother got his gun scope out and looked through it and said it looked= cylinder shaped, narrow in the middle and that's where the red light was.= He also saw a bluish green aura around it. I was glad he got to see it= through his scope because we knew then it was not a plane. We talked= together on the phone during this time and we saw the object for about an= hour until it eventually went out of our sight because of the trees. Thanks= to Brian Vike Argentina -Climber Videos Huge UFO MONTE NEVADO =96 INEXPLICATA - The Journal of Hispanic Ufology has sent the photo of a saucer-shaped object of tremendous size that was photographed by mountain climber Guillermo Martin. The photo was taken in November 2004, at Las Pailas, an inhabited location halfway up to the summit at an elevation of 3,500 meters of Nevado de Cachi, one of the greatest challenges for South American climbers. Thanks to Scott Corrales, Institute of Hispanic Ufology. Brazil - Terrifying Cases of Light Rays Attacks Brazilian UFO Magazine claims foreign rays of light that wound and kill are being emitted by UFOs against human beings. These rays of light after hitting a person later may lead to their death. These are some of the more baffling aspects of the UFO phenomenon that are being reported from Brazil. There is also damage to vegetation and electric installations, as well as to animals and people. There is fear among the populace and the Brazilian Air Force is investigating. Considering that the simple presence of one of these ships can affect us direct and seriously. A series of registered cases has all that if deliberately relate to an openly hostile attitude by means of the use of light or rays. Thanks to http://www.ufo.com.br/ Japan - Scans Skies For Alien Life Mizusawa Astrogeodynamics Observatory --Two Japanese observatories have started a probe to find signs of extraterrestrial life using radio and optical telescopes, in Japan's first government-backed search for aliens. "I don't think it would be any wonder if life like us exists somewhere else as space is vast," Mitsumi Fujishita, radioastronomy professor at Kyushu Tokai University, said. The five-day search is being done jointly at the Nishi-Harima Astronomical Observatory, and the state-run Mizusawa Astrogeodynamics Observatory in northern Japan. The Mizusawa observatory is using a radio telescope with a diameter of 10 metres to try to find radio waves. Rhe Nishi-Harima observatory, with a two-metre reflector telescope, aims to detect light. They will focus on the area near the Hydra constellation where a US researcher detected radio waves in 1988. snip Japan is drafting an ambitious space program, with a goal of a manned station on the moon by 2025, after successfully sending a satellite into space last Saturday. - AFP Mexico =96 Large Blue Light ACAPULCO -- Deb Dryden Knoll reports that on February 23, 2004, we were sitting on our deck in Acapulco and saw a very large blue light surrounded by orange cross the sky. Do you know what it was? I have been trying to find something on the web, but I find nothing. I also watched the news in Mexico and there was no report of anything. Thanks to Deb e-mail report.. United Kingdom - Photos of UFO DORCHESTER, DORSET =96 On November, 14, 2004, in the country side a large rounded edged flying object was photographed. The object looks like it had two wings. It performed at high speed over the countryside. Thanks to www.ufoevidence.org Subscribe to Filer's Files to receive UFO CD So you won't miss a single breaking news story or the increased evidence for UFO and life in the universe. George A. Filer 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. Right now we need $300 to upgrade our website. Annual Membership is only $25 for 52 weekly intelligence reports. Don't miss the latest images of UFOs from Earth and Mars. Subscribe today and receive a free UFO Photo CD. Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ 08055. You can also Click: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. "UFOs Over California" A new book by MUFON field investigator Preston Dennett shows evidence of early Native American encounters with UFOs, the 1896 California Airship Mystery, the 1942 "Battle of Los Angeles=94 -- the first time the US military fired upon a UFO and hundreds of verified sightings, including cases with radar verification including sightings and landings at Edwards AFB, George AFB, Norton AFB, Hamilton Field and others. It has accounts of underwater UFOs and a possible undersea base off the California coast. Celebrity sightings, including Sammy Davis Jr., Cliff Robertson, Jill Ireland, Chad Everett, and Ronald Reagan The book can be ordered on-line or directly from www.amazon.com. ISBN: 0-7643-21489-8. with 224 Pages, 16 photographs, 21 illustrations for $14.95 www.prestondennett.com REAL ESTATE Relocation Help! Get your free report and learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent to help you relocate, 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 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
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:36:4 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:18:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich >From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:04:45 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II See my answer below. Thanks for join in the production twiddle! There is now enough to go half way round the world. >>>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >>>two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >>>I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >>>expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >>>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >>>to their central library, we'd all be happy. >>How silly! A new high (or is it low) in silliness Don't listen >>to this rubbish! If you want a book, go to the library and >>request it. >How unsympathetic! Do you understand how the funding of >libraries is performed? Do you think an endless supply of money >is flowing into it? Oh, please. The idea expressed was condencending and officious. We, the local peasants, should not approach the Lord High Librarian with our requests. After all don't we don't know that purse is nearly empty.... Well then, if the purse is empty, they can say so. BTW I support the local Friends of the Library. My sister was on the library board, and the local free library is now on a more business like basis and has better budget and in better facilities in part due to efforts of this household. >How do you think the budget is allocated between staff and >book/magazine/DVD/video purchases and interlibrary loans >(including mailing fees)? If the tax base is not growing or >maxed out like Britain, you will only be able to accommodate so >many requests. Given enough pressure for more books, they might >cut back staff to pay for them. They might do a lot of things including just saying, no, or possibly find other innovative ways to satisfy the request. >>What exactly was your position at the library, John? Janitor? I >>am quite sure by your demonstrated ignorance it didn't have >>anything to do with lending books. Practising public librarian >>indeed! >Tsk. Yes, tsk. Once again, there are discounts available so the situation was not as dire as portrayed. >>Perhaps, in fact, you have never been to a library. >Tsk. Tsk. >>During my research for Project 1947, I borrowed dozens of books >>and magazines and several hundred newspaper microfilms through >>inter-library loan. Sources were from all over the United States >>and Canada included the Library of Congress; University of >>Texas, El Paso; University of New Mexico, Yale University; >>University of Maine; Chicago Public Library; Washington State >>Library; Center for Research Libraries, etc., etc. >All "free" I am sure. Well, I suppose you should thank the rest >of us for your researches because I assure you my money has gone >(by force of law) into funding libraries and other publicly >"free" systems. Have you ever calculated the cost of your >researches that are being subsidized by us innocent tax payers? >Perhaps we should limit the largesse we are spending on you. >Well, that wouldn't be nice! Wah! Most condescending... libraries are there to be used, interlibrary loan is there to be used. Prior to the interlibrary loan, in my youth, I was able get access to some rare materials through the resourcefulness of the librarian. I too am a tax payer... but I figure it like this: if there is a ledger sheet concerning the amount of materials and services I have used in library services and research and the amount of surport I have given libraries, then the libraries are still in a very good position with positive in flow from me. My father's library consisted of about 1000 books and mine at its high water mark about 2000, I have donated a large portion of both to local libraries and universities. Here we are not talking of UFO books, but rather, history, science, art and politics. During my travels through the US and Canada for Project 1947, I stopped at some 200 institutions. Upon leaving, I donate copy cards and other items for students or researchers who lacked funds. At several libraries and archives I was able to donate material, mostly non-UFO, which added to unique collections or personal paper which they had. (Mostly these were news stories about or by-lined newspaper articles found during my research which concerned the persons who were subjects of special library or archive collections.) Other excess non-UFO materials such as newspaper microfilms and other materials have been donated to libraries as have a number of my own works. I have also copied items from my UFO files for various libraries and archives to the tune of several hundred dollars. The Archives of the Southwest at Texas Tech got the biggest bundle, my file on the Lubbock Lights. On the Sign Historical Group website are four full length books there for free. Dr. Roy Craig complained that the Condon Report was disappearing from library shelve, the implication that UFO believers were stealing them in some kind of book burning. Well, its back and for free, with the express consent of the University of Colorado. Also, Dr. Paul McCarthy's PhD dissertation which has been unavailable for years, was made available with special arrangements with Dr. McCarthy. I will try to do the same with Coi. Shaw's Masters Thesis once I make contact with him. See: http://www.project1947.com/shg/ >>Don't pay any attention to this twiddle! If you want to read a >>book go to the library and request it. If they don't have the >>funds to purchase it, a knowledgeable librarian can probably >>inform you on how a copy might be obtained by loan or other >>arrangements. >Libraries are an excellent resource of knowledge that have been >kindly provided "free" by society. But resources are limited and >budgetary pressures influence the reapportionment of funds, >sometimes by removing staff in favor of other items >(books/DVDs/videos, heating, buildings). >I am not a librarian, nor do I need to be to understand how the >world works. But come on and give John a break! I normally don't comment on what John has to say, however, his post was in direct challenge to what I wrote. I found his post was condescending, officious and his example was way out whack with the true situation concerning purchasing foreign books at this moment. The US dollar has taken a fall, libraries don't usually pay full price, and there are cheap, though slow, shipping options that don't necessarily break the bank. My main objection, however, is that there is a complete lack of resourcefullness demonstrated by the post. I take offense with his post and more so with yours which implies that by using public facilities, I have somehow defrauded innocent tax payers. I take offense with his posting and more so with yours which implies that by using public facilities, I have somehow defrauded innocent tax payers. I do understand that in many places libraries are under great strain, Great Britain, Canada, The People Republic of California to name just a few. However, that should not mean that people should refrain from making their requests. Jan Aldrich Project 1947
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:36:53 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:54:05 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:36:4 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:04:45 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>>>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the next >>>>two months, after which the green pastures of redundancy beckon) >>>>I am always rather alarmed when people suggest ordering >>>>expensive books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>>>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>>>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>>>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >>>>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to donate >>>>to their central library, we'd all be happy. John, Jan, James (hmm... that's a lot of "J's"): Here's how to solve the problem: 1. Arrange for someone to hoax a UFO crash in or near your town. Silas Newton is, alas, unavailable, but you might be able to get the MJ-12 types interested, or Ashton Kutcher; 2. Let it sit for a few years (like a fine wine, or good whiskey, crashed saucer stories have to age a bit); and 3. Resurrect the case, start a symposium/conference, and donate all the proceeds to the local library. It's worked for Aztec. Not enough to get old Si Newton out of that place with all the annoying little fellows and their pitchforks, but at least their is something of a silver lining in the Aztec case. Of course, the above works for legitimate crashed flying saucer incidents as well, if only the aliens could be persuaded to do it more often (ever?). Ahh... problem solved. Excellent. Now we can all be chums again!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:55:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:45:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc - >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:38:58 EST >Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:35:07 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Official US Conclusions On UFOs MJ 12 Etc >With respect to MJ-12, here are four questions I should have >asked while making my MJ-12 film, but didn't. Better late than >never, I guess: >1. Why has no in-depth investigation been conducted by MJ-12 >proponents into the second alleged crash referred to in the EBD, >the El Indio - Guerrero incident? In fact, why is that alleged >incident not discussed - at all - by you in either "Final Report >on Operation Majestic 12" or his later book Top Secret/Majic? >Investigators Tom Deuley and Dennis Stacy have offered a >decidedly terrestrial explanation for this incident (a 1944 >crash of a USAAF spotter plane in the same area). I'm not >convinced that their explanation is the right one, but I have >not seen any refutation of it by MJ-12 proponents, or even a >real discussion of it; The above mentioned alleged incident, that allegedly occurred on (or about) Dec. 6, 1950 may be related to actual documented
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:49:23 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:48:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Aldrich >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:32:33 +0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:23:17 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Of course, I was just a janitor, publishers give libraries huge >discounts and it cost nothing to run national and international >library interlending services. John, Please supply me with your library's address, and I will send them a copy of the UFO Evidence Volume II so that the library system there will not collapse under the weight of such a request from this hypothetical saucer-nut. It will also be a small part of my penitence for my sinful use of library facilities which Mr. Smith so ably pointed out on this forum. However, I don't think this donation will change your unfortunate situation. Certainly, you have every right to feel bitter, loosing one's employment is wrenching. However, the main reason for the retrenchment probably had something to do with changes, either wisely or otherwise, in the local government's budget. These were probably more to do with local priorities and the economic situation rather than the UFO rabble's unreasonable requests on library resources.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:03:29 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:50:51 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Smith >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:36:4 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:04:45 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Oh, please. The idea expressed was condencending and officious. >We, the local peasants, should not approach the Lord High >Librarian with our requests. After all don't we don't know that >purse is nearly empty.... >Well then, if the purse is empty, they can say so. All I am saying is to be more sympathetic. No one is saying _not_ to do it, but to be more sensitive that these services cost money. This is much like the FOIA requests that are made willy nilly by some little realizing the amount of effort and cost they are forcing upon the government. But its all "free"! Well, we all are footing the bill and I am not too pleased about needless frivolous added costs to the government/me. >BTW I support the local Friends of the Library. My sister >was on the library board, and the local free library is now >on a more business like basis and has better budget and in >better facilities in part due to efforts of this household. Nice of you, but how many are so progressive as you? >>How do you think the budget is allocated between staff and >>book/magazine/DVD/video purchases and interlibrary loans >>(including mailing fees)? If the tax base is not growing or >>maxed out like Britain, you will only be able to accommodate so >>many requests. Given enough pressure for more books, they might >>cut back staff to pay for them. >They might do a lot of things including just saying, no, or >possibly find other innovative ways to satisfy the request. Agreed. >>All "free" I am sure. Well, I suppose you should thank the rest >>of us for your researches because I assure you my money has gone >>(by force of law) into funding libraries and other publicly >>"free" systems. Have you ever calculated the cost of your >>researches that are being subsidized by us innocent tax payers? >>Perhaps we should limit the largesse we are spending on you. >>Well, that wouldn't be nice! >Wah! Most condescending... libraries are there to be used, >interlibrary loan is there to be used. Prior to the interlibrary >loan, in my youth, I was able get access to some rare materials >through the resourcefulness of the librarian. Yes, you _can_ access this stuff, but be sensitive to cost. Most think its all "free". >I too am a tax payer... but I figure it like this: if there is a >ledger sheet concerning the amount of materials and services I >have used in library services and research and the amount of >surport I have given libraries, then the libraries are still in >a very good position with positive in flow from me. Good! However, all the books you donate may not be the ones the public wants so the net effect on the library may be negligible. Still, your heart is in the right place. But how many are like you? I should say you are of a very rare breed! How many big users try to pay back? I think few. >I take offense with his post and more so with yours which >implies that by using public facilities, I have somehow >defrauded innocent tax payers. Your so-called defrauding of the public is a ludicrous interpretation of my comments. I simply want to make it clear that these resources are not free and the implications of using them are more complex than you want to think. There is no law against using the library to the utmost and I agree that the library itself should make it clear in some way the costs involved to the requestor rather than accept any request or turn down any request. However, budgetary pressures of many hgh priced requests and fixed library budget CAN push the reapportionment of budget to reduce staff, how can this be argued against? >I do understand that in many places libraries are under great strain, >Great Britain, Canada, The People Republic of California to name >just a few. However, that should not mean that people should
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 17 Secrecy News -- 03/17/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:11:43 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:53:51 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/17/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 24 March 17, 2005 ** THE AGE OF MISSING INFORMATION ** SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED: A POLICY ANALYSIS ** WAXMAN ON SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED ** RECALLING THE THOMAS BUTLER AFFAIR ** MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN THE AGE OF MISSING INFORMATION One of the most striking features of the government information landscape today is the continuing withdrawal of unclassified information from the public domain. More of a reflex than a policy, it has left gaping holes in the public record of government activity. The scope of the problem is surveyed in an article I wrote in Slate today. See "The Age of Missing Information": http://slate.msn.com/id/2114963/ SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED: A POLICY ANALYSIS The problem posed by unclassified information that is deemed a potential threat to security is the subject of an extended new policy analysis from the University of Maryland. Government controls on so-called sensitive but unclassified information have multiplied since September 11, 2001, in often arbitrary and conflicting ways. "Sometimes the potential danger is pretty clear and other times it's a difficult call," said Jacques Gansler, a former Under Secretary of Defense and co-author with William Lucyshyn of the new Maryland study. "Advanced biotechnology research is an area of particular concern where we probably need to increase oversight. In other cases, precautions can seem excessive or capricious." The study provides a useful analysis of the problem, which has numerous complicating features, such as the fact that much of the information in question is generated outside of government control or even internationally. Written with evident good will, the study will nevertheless leave many readers uneasy with its recommendation that the President establish a new class of restricted materials to be termed CUSI -- Controlled Unclassified Security Information. Some of the problems with the authors' proposal, in Secrecy News' view, include the following: ** The current Administration does not share the "bias in favor of openness" that the authors insist is needed to ensure the credibility and feasibility of any new system of control of unclassified information. (See "The Age of Missing Information" above.) Asking this Administration to impose new controls on unclassified information is inviting an addict to indulge his habit. ** The authors assign a lead role to the Department of Homeland Security in fleshing out and implementing their proposal. But when it comes to security policy, DHS has over-reached (e.g. by requiring non-disclosure agreements for unclassified information) and under-performed (e.g. by failing to produce procedures for protecting sensitive homeland security information more than two years after they were mandated to do so). It is doubtful that it is up to the task. ** Most fundamentally, the authors assume that the consequences of withholding or releasing particular types of unclassified information are knowable in advance, or can be established by consensus. In many cases, that is unlikely to be true. ** The authors commendably prescribe an appeals process in order to correct any misapplication of the new controls, but such processes do not function reliably today. Thus, for example, when the CIA says that the 1997 intelligence budget can be declassified but the 1957 or 1967 budget cannot be, all of the available appeal mechanisms -- the ISCAP, a federal judge, congressional intelligence committees (by their acquiescence) -- say that the CIA is correct. But it isn't. ** The authors occasionally lapse into prejudice, as when they glibly state that "seemingly benign information can be used easily to endanger the national security" (p.42). But the national security is not easily endangered. Anyway, this presumes what needs to be demonstrated. It is the characteristic defect of much security policy analysis that in the absence of validated threat data, analysts assume a ubiquitous and hyper- competent adversary. That is a poor foundation for public policy. The authors do deserve credit for tackling a difficult subject, and illuminating it, and perhaps initiating a conversation that has been long overdue. See "The Unintended Audience: Balancing Openness and Secrecy" by Jacques S. Gansler and William Lucyshyn, Center for Public Policy and Private Enterprise, University of Maryland, dated September 2004 but released last week and posted here: http://www.cpppe.umd.edu/Bookstore/Documents/UnintendedAudience_3.05.pdf WAXMAN ON SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED Burgeoning controls on "sensitive" information "are being invoked improperly to block the release of information that is not classified," wrote Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) in a March 1 letter reporting the findings of a staff study. "Some of the examples we reviewed involve absurd overreactions to vague security concerns. In other examples, the Administration appears to have invoked the [sensitive but unclassified] designations to cover up potentially embarrassing facts, rather than to protect legitimate security interests." Rep. Waxman identifies several of those examples in his 12 page letter, a copy of which is posted here (500 KB PDF file): http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/waxman030105.pdf RECALLING THE THOMAS BUTLER AFFAIR Thomas C. Butler is the distinguished expert on infectious diseases who was aggressively prosecuted by the government and convicted for improperly shipping plague samples and for contract violations. Credited with helping to save literally millions of lives through his medical research, Butler is now serving a two year jail term. The Butler case should be studied in government sponsored public workshops in order to "illustrate how rules and norms have been changed," Gansler and Lucyshyn suggest in their new University of Maryland study (p. 42). But many scientists and other observers reject the idea that the Butler case constitutes a new norm. Rather, they say, it is a miscarriage of justice that should be repudiated. In an open letter, Butler's supporters argue that "Incarcerating Dr. Butler has and will continue to adversely impact the national security." "Knowing that even a technical violation or disputing a university's claim to funds can result in criminal charges, [scientists] will decline to work on research critical to national security, such as plague or anthrax." "One author of this letter has already destroyed all plague samples held in his lab for exactly this reason." The letter calls for new efforts to free Butler on appeal. See a copy here: http://www.fas.org/butler/letter0305.pdf MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN When the U.S. Army started moving its online content behind a password-protected portal called Army Knowledge Online in 2001, untold thousands of Army records ceased to be publicly available online. One of those was a quarterly journal called Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin. A July 2004 Freedom of Information Act request to the Army for electronic copies of the unclassified journal was denied (although the Army noted that hardcopy subscriptions may be purchased through the Government Printing Office). But in response to an appeal, the Army this month conceded that it is legally obliged to provide the requested publication in softcopy format, and it did so. Back issues of Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin, a small token of the countless unclassified Army publications that have been withdrawn from online public access, are now once again available here: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/mipb/index.html _______________________________________________ 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 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 > Mar > Mar 17 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Gehrman From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:57:36 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Gehrman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:36:53 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >1. Arrange for someone to hoax a UFO crash in or near your town. >Silas Newton is, alas, unavailable, but you might be able to get >the MJ-12 types interested, or Ashton Kutcher; >2. Let it sit for a few years (like a fine wine, or good >whiskey, crashed saucer stories have to age a bit); and >3. Resurrect the case, start a symposium/conference, and donate >all the proceeds to the local library. Paul, I doubt that scheme would work. It's difficult, at best, to get folks to react to legitimate crash sites, let alone, hoaxed ones. For example, I've tried to get your attention several times but you've ignored me. I know how difficult it must be for someone skeptically inclined, like you seem to be, to accept the reality of the Alien Autopsy footage or anything connected to it. But if you open your mind, and visit the crash site with Wendy or me (or by yourself), you'll soon see why you should take another close look at the hypothesis I've been trying to promote. I'm a retired teacher; my only intention is to add quality information to the mix so we all can better understand our UFO
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:46:04 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:36:53 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>1. Arrange for someone to hoax a UFO crash in or near your town. >>Silas Newton is, alas, unavailable, but you might be able to get >>the MJ-12 types interested, or Ashton Kutcher; >>2. Let it sit for a few years (like a fine wine, or good >>whiskey, crashed saucer stories have to age a bit); and >>3. Resurrect the case, start a symposium/conference, and donate >>all the proceeds to the local library. >Paul, >I doubt that scheme would work. It's difficult, at best, to get >folks to react to legitimate crash sites, let alone, hoaxed >ones. For example, I've tried to get your attention several >times but you've ignored me. I know how difficult it must be for >someone skeptically inclined, like you seem to be, to accept the >reality of the Alien Autopsy footage or anything connected to >it. But if you open your mind, and visit the crash site with >Wendy or me (or by yourself), you'll soon see why you should >take another close look at the hypothesis I've been trying to >promote. Ed: I read you e-mail to me of 27 October, 2004 at the time, checked the website link you provided, and saw nothing there that would convince me that there was any crash site or that the alien autospy film was anything other than a hoax - and a bad one at that. I intended to write back letting you know, but we were in the middle of post production on a 13 episode television series, I was swamped, and frankly it just got lost in the shuffle. For that, I apologise - I wasn't ignoring you, at least not consciously. Of course I'm a skeptically inclined - we should all be skeptically inclined. Even "believers" should be skeptically inclined about particular incidents or testimony. And it isn't hard getting people interested in crash sites, whether hoaxes or not (note that my e-mail posited that both were possible). Good lord - look at Roswell! Or even Aztec. How about Shag Harbour? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Lots of interest. >I'm a retired teacher; my only intention is to add quality >information to the mix so we all can better understand our UFO >dilemma. I'm not trying to make money or go on the lecture >circuit but I would like to make a documentary about what we've >found and what it seems to mean. As I've said repeatedly, documentaries cost money to make - at least they do when that's what you do for a living, as I do, and want to do a good job of it. The first lousy documentary I make might be the last one. It's that kind of business. As well, I can only do so much - all documentary makers have to pick their projects carefully. At the moment I'm in pre- production for a film about animal mutilations in western Canada. We have other UFO-related (and non UFO-related) projects in development. There are any number of other cases of which I am aware (and no doubt many of which I am not aware) that we haven't even looked at, but that I find more immediately compelling than anything to do with the alien autopsy footage. But that's me. There may be another filmmaker out there who you could interest in your project. It just isn't me. A final note. At your website... www.thewhyfiles.net/gehrman.htm ... you write: "Our culture's systematic refusal to seriously consider this footage raises an urgent question: have we lost the ability to objectively examine important, history-altering evidence?'" Did it ever occur to you that the majority of the ufological community has objectively looked at the available evidence, and simply disagrees with you? Then you write: "The alien autopsy is a maddening example of how easy it is for the government-controlled media to discredit something by hiding it in plain sight." Sigh. Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. I work in the media. Neither I, nor anyone else I know, has seen any indication of the type of control you claim exists. No-one has ever stood over my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when they made Seeing is Believing. This doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but rather that there is no evidence, that I have seen, for such a broad, sweeping characterisation of the media, mainstream or otherwise. Besides, who is manipulating whom here? As Stan Friedman has stated, "Ray Santilli has managed to manipulate ufologists and the media, and make a load of money without solid backup for any of his stories." On this occasion, I couldn't agree with Stan more.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:31:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:57:34 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Ledger >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:00:53 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>>Talking of rather expensive UFO books which I certainly >>>don't regret buying, Jerry's two volume >>>UFO Encyclopedia (SecondEdition) probably comes >>>closest to a UFO book that would consistently remain >>>on my Top 5 list. For those that would find the price >>>prohibitive, the suggestion of ordering the book via >>>your library applies to Jerry's Encyclopedia as much as it >>>does to Volume II of The UFO Evidence. >>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the >>next two months, after which the green pastures >>of redundancy beckon) I am always >>rather alarmed when people suggest ordering expensive >>books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >I'm sorry to hear about your forthcoming redundancy. <snip> >By the way, you may be interested in the following summary of >an article from 1955 criticising public librarians for spending >any tax dollars on UFO books: >"Flick, David. Tripe for the public. Library Journal, v. 80, >Feb. 1, 1955: 202, 204 : Commenting on the "though processes and >the strange logic" employed by librarians responsible for book >selection, the author says that no amount of rationalising about >"future historical importance," "balanced conditions", and >"public demand" can justify their expenditure of tax dollars for >books about flying saucer "whose purpose seems to satisfy a bad >taste for the bizarre and the sensational". " (Summary quoted >from Marcia S Smith's "Extraterrestrial Intelligence: A >selected, annotated bibliography : Congressional Research >Service, Library of Congress, UG 633, 76-35 SP" (1976) at page >25 (in Part 2) of the Congressional Research Service stapled >edition.) >>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to >>donate to their central library, we'd all be happy. Naw, what the newspaper article suggests is nothing but censorship. We know better so this is what you should be reading. And this was at the end of the McCarthy era [1950 to 1954]mindset as well. You would think that this writer would have learned a little something from those 4 years. What's the purpose of having a reference section if it's going to be dedicated to what "big brother librarian" or the municipal board wants to read when it IS the public who's footing the bill. That's the bottom line here. But let's make a point here. Where it's Jerry's encylopedias or Dick's UFO Evidence II that are being picked on, bear in mind that libraries are the antithesis of book sales. Other than perhaps some small pleasure in seeing your book on the shelves of libraries, places which-if you are like myself-are some of the best places in the world to visit and browse around-seeing your book prominantly displayed means that the sale of the thing is suffering as a result. Why purchase when you can get it for free? But as an author you know that there is a certain segment of the population that either can't afford to purchase books or can only afford to purchase a few and are thereby limiting themselves to the amount of reading they can do. You accept that and move on, remembering your own history with libraries-if you are one who devours book. What goes around, comes around. Love libraries, don't like to see anyone lose their job, but do not like censorship by subject matter either.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: UFO Evidence II - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:49:19 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:59:33 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Evidence II - Connors It seems to me that anyone not willing to purchase reference materials, at the same time claiming status as a Ufologist, just doesn't make much sense. This whole argument is pure, unadulterated, bull feathers! Real researchers don't stop just because a public library can't afford the book. I'm willing to bet most on this List squander $50 (USD) every month. If you don't go to see two movies or buy three DVDs or suck down four cases of beer, you'd be able to put one of the best damn reference books on your shelf within a month. Stop yapping about the cost of the book and buy a copy. The bang for the buck is awesome and you'll soon be telling yourself, "Dang. I'm glad I bought it." Richard Hall gives the UFO community a humongous gift and people
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 20:55:50 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:37 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:36:4 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>How silly! A new high (or is it low) in silliness Don't listen >>>to this rubbish! If you want a book, go to the library and >>>request it. >Oh, please. The idea expressed was condencending and officious. >We, the local peasants, should not approach the Lord High >Librarian with our requests. After all don't we don't know that >purse is nearly empty.... Would that be more or less condescending than suggesting that I was the library janitor?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 20:51:27 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:22:13 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:00:53 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:09:06 +0000 >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Writing as a practicing public librarian (at least for the >>next two months, after which the green pastures >>of redundancy beckon) I am always >>rather alarmed when people suggest ordering expensive >>books from the local library, especially ones ordered >>from the USA and costing =A3100 or more! I wonder if this is >>necessarily the best use of public libraries' increasingly >>limited resources? (See forthcoming redundancy, above) >Hi John, >I'm sorry to hear about your forthcoming redundancy. >Just to clarify, I had in mind ordering books via a library's >inter-library loan scheme as I discussed in Section D of my >email last summer on buying UFO books: >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/aug/m27-016.shtml This seems to have gone through under my radar the first time Isaac posted it. What he said was: "Although not strictly within the remit of an email about buying UFO books, I should also at least mention obtaining books on loan via libraries. Although local public libraries in the UK tend to have limited numbers of books on UFOs, each such library allows readers to order books from other libraries in the UK via an inter-library loan scheme for a nominal charge. This is by far the cheapest way to read scarce UFO books. I used to use this scheme frequently a few years ago when I read science fiction books rather than UFO books. I found that if the book I requested via the inter-library loan scheme was in print and not easily available from another library, the local library that I placed my request with would often purchase a copy of the relevant book. The relatively small library in my home town consequently ended up with one of the best collections of science fiction books that I've seen in any library! I'm not sure whether libraries would be so quick to buy relatively expensive UFO books such as Dick Hall's UFO Evidence Volume II or Jerry Clark's Encyclopedia. Perhaps John Rimmer would know?" Sorry I missed that first time round. Isaac makes the point very well here that enthusiastic use of the book reservation system may lead to an unbalancing of the library stock, especially if the library operates what, at first sight, seems to be the very user-friendly policy of trying to buy every book that the readers ask for. A small library with an excellent SF collection may be fine for some of us, but is hardly fair to those who might prefer an excellent collection of contemporary fiction, crime or romance novels - all of whom pay as much tax as the SF reader! But as far as inter-library loans are concerned, I can provide some information which people may not realise. In Britain books are indeed loaned between library systems, but this costs the library far more than they charge the borrower. For instance, the authority I work for charges GBP 1.00 to reserve a book and will undertake to obtain a copy other than in the most exceptional circumstances, either by purchase or borrowing from elsewhere. If the book is obtained from a library in the same region (in my case Greater London and South East England) there is a charge of GBP 3.50 for each title obtained. If the book is brought from elsewhere in Britain the charge is GBP 7.00, and if it has to be borrowed from the British Library (our equivalent of the library of Congress) the charge is GBP 8.30. In the case of a specialist American book, it would almost certainly need to be borrowed from the B.L. These charges also apply to periodical articles and off-prints. So, as you can see, even borrowing books between libraries is not a cost-free option for the library service, as these charges are not passed on to the borrowr. >Personally, despite my view about the considerable utility of >Jerry's Encyclopedia, I don't think it is necessary to go to the >extreme recommended by one magazine's reviewer that the >Encyclopedia "should be bought by every serious reference >library". >Given the somewhat one-dimensional views occasionally expressed >about the relevant reviewer and magazine, some readers of this >List might be surprised to note this remark at the end of the >(generally complimentary) review at: >http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/clark.html >An extremist bunch, you Magonians! Touche, but Harney is a meteorologist, not a librarian! >By the way, you may be interested in the following summary of >an article from 1955 criticising public librarians for spending >any tax dollars on UFO books: >"Flick, David. Tripe for the public. Library Journal, v. 80, >Feb. 1, 1955: 202, 204 : Commenting on the "though processes and >the strange logic" employed by librarians responsible for book >selection, the author says that no amount of rationalising about >"future historical importance," "balanced conditions", and >"public demand" can justify their expenditure of tax dollars for >books about flying saucer "whose purpose seems to satisfy a bad >taste for the bizarre and the sensational". " (Summary quoted >from Marcia S Smith's "Extraterrestrial Intelligence: A >selected, annotated bibliography : Congressional Research >Service, Library of Congress, UG 633, 76-35 SP" (1976) at page >25 (in Part 2) of the Congressional Research Service stapled >edition.) I think many local councillors and library committee members would still take that line. >>Maybe if ufologists clubbed together and bought copies to >>donate to their central library, we'd all be happy. >This suggestion prompts the thought that if I ever get around to >preparing a more comprehensive email on obtaining UFO books, I >really should cover the availability of books from the libraries >of some UFO groups. For example, in England BUFORA has a fairly >extensive library, albeit somewhat light on books by skeptics. >Most of BUFORA's library is available on loan to members, or at >least this was the position the last time I checked (which >admittedly was a few years ago). Many years ago, in association with ASSAP (The Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena) I actually helped set up a UFO/psychic/paranormal/Fortean library housed at the library where I worked - probably the only collection of its type available in a public library in Britain. At its peak it housed several thousand books as well a collection of periodicals. It was in a public building just 30 minutes from central London by train. And guess what? Hardly anyone ever used it, either in person or through the postal service that was offered. Eventually I was unable to justify its continued existence to the borough authorities, and the books and magazines where packed up and returned to the people who had generously donated them. Perhaps that makes me a bit cynical, too?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 20:14:08 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:41:43 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rimmer >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:49:23 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >John, >Please supply me with your library's address, and I will send >them a copy of the UFO Evidence Volume II so that the library >system there will not collapse under the weight of such a >request from this hypothetical saucer-nut. It will also be a >small part of my penitence for my sinful use of library >facilities which Mr. Smith so ably pointed out on this forum. >However, I don't think this donation will change your >unfortunate situation. Certainly, you have every right to feel >bitter, loosing one's employment is wrenching. However, the main >reason for the retrenchment probably had something to do with >changes, either wisely or otherwise, in the local government's >budget. These were probably more to do with local priorities and >the economic situation rather than the UFO rabble's unreasonable >requests on library resources. My comments were intended in general terms, as I think you realise. The only person connected with my library who is likely to be in the least bit interested in The UFO Evidence is myself, and I already have a copy. I was merely suggesting that people might think before lumbering their local libraries with requests for expensive books that are unlikely to be used by more than a tiny number of people (pace, Richard). Local priorities and economic situations have a big impact on public library provision, and library users may wish to consider this when they make demands on the service.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 ET Enigma Missing Aminos In Meteorites From: Terry groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:26:51 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:47:52 -0500 Subject: ET Enigma Missing Aminos In Meteorites Source: Science Daily (Orginal source: Geological Society Of America) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/11/031104064412.htm 11-04-03 Extraterrestrial Enigma Missing Amino Acids In Meteorites Amino acids have been found in interstellar clouds and in meteorites - but with some enigmatic omissions and tantalizing similarities to life on Earth. Just why some amino acids are present in meteorites and others are absent, and why they seem to prefer the same "left-handed" molecular structure as Earth's living amino acids are questions that could unravel one of the most fundamental questions of science: Where and how did life begin? "The bottom line is that you have these materials that come from space," says Steve Macko, professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Macko refers specifically to eight of the amino acids found in a certain kind of meteorite - a carbonaceous chondrite. All eight amino acids are identical to those used by life on Earth. That could seem to point to a cosmic origin of these basic biological building blocks, says Macko. The case is bolstered by the fact that early Earth was bombarded with meteorites and the amino acid glycine has been detected on interstellar molecular clouds. The implications and enigmas of extraterrestrial amino acids will be detailed at a special session celebrating the life and work of the late Glenn Goodfriend, on Monday, Nov. 3, 2003, at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America in Seattle, WA. Making the case for cosmic origins of Earth's amino acids even more compelling is the fact that all of the meteorite amino acids, except glycine, favor the "left-handed" molecular structure, or chirality, that is also favored by life on Earth. The preference for left-handed amino acids was a necessary precondition for life, but just why life chose left (L-amino acids) over right (D-amino acids) is a mystery. "Essentially all of your protein is made of L-amino acids," said Macko. "Why is that? We don't know. The curious thing is that if you go to a meteorite you find a predominance of the same thing." Another unanswered question: Why have only eight of life's 20 amino acids been found in meteorites? Perhaps all the amino acids were there, but something about the history of the meteorites or the analytical processes used limited their presence or their detection, Macko speculates. Only in recent years has the idea of amino acids from space affecting the start of life on Earth become a plausible hypothesis, explains Macko. Initially, amino acids were thought to have been created in the primordial atmosphere of early Earth. In a now famous experiment more than a half-century ago, Stanley Miller and Harold Urey showed that amino acids were synthesized by simply creating lightning-like electrical discharges through a fog of water, methane and ammonia - all of which were thought to be readily available in Earth's early years. The experiment was proof that amino acids, out of which all life's proteins are made, can be created by strictly physical-chemical processes, without the help of living organisms. Perhaps the most famous carbonaceous chondrite was the Murchison meteorite, which fragmented and fell in 1969 in and around the small town of Murchison, Victoria, about 70 miles north of Melbourne, Australia. Amino acids and other organic molecules were found in the Murchison meteorite. The mix of amino acids found in the Murchison Meteorite was similar to those produced in Miller-Urey type experiments. A chief difference, however, was seen by Mike Engel in his PhD research: Unlike the Miller- Urey experiment which produced equal amounts of the D and L- amino acids, Murchison tended to have l-amino acids predominate. The fact that the meteorite was seen falling and fragments were collected quickly minimized the chances that they were contaminated by Earth amino acids. The Miller-Urey experiment, combined with the discovery of amino acids in carbonaceous chondrites and the detection of glycine in molecular clouds, raise compelling issues about the origin of life on Earth, and its possible existence elsewhere in the solar system and beyond.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 UFO-Related Groups Joining INET From: Will Bueche - INET <INET.nul> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:46:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:51:29 -0500 Subject: UFO-Related Groups Joining INET We are delighted that participation in the International Network of Experiencer Therapists (INET) has already expanded, after only a single week since our first wave of announcements were sent out to various ufo-related organizations. Joining the alliance of organizations participating in INET - which started with the International Contact Support Network (ICSN), the John E. Mack Institute (JEMI), and the Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support (OPUS) - we are pleased to welcome MUFON of Central Canada, the Australian Close Encounter Resource Network (ACERN), and Deborah Lindemann's Center for Extraordinary Explorations (CFREE). We are coming together for the purpose of maintaining a master network of therapists who service the "experiencer" population - - people whose lives have been deeply affected by alien encounters or similar extraordinary experiences. We are allied for a priority that supersedes any of our varying opinions and beliefs about aliens: helping people-in-need without pathologizing them. Each of these groups is now inviting the therapists they know and trust into INET (www.INETalliance.org), a secure system accessible only by representatives of each group and by the therapists themselves. (Therapists can also use INET for communication between colleagues). It is our collective intention to broaden this alliance to include other groups in the United States, Canada, and abroad that have each been attempting to maintain their own regional lists of clinicians. We would again at this time like to invite interested parties - representatives of organizations who have similar needs and similar clinical lists - to please contact any of the undersigned for more information on how to ally with this effort for the benefit of all. Or, write directly to INET [at] INETalliance.org We are standing by to invite your organization into the INET alliance and to personally assist you with the process of inviting into INET the therapists whom your group has relied upon. Addendum for therapists - While this particular announcement is directed to organizations, INET can also receive therapists directly. If you are a therapist with prior experience working with experiencers in a supportive, philosophically neutral manner, please contact us. Sincerely, Will Bueche, representing JEMI, INET [at] INETalliance.org June Steiner, representing OPUS, JuniMoon7 [at] aol.com. Lester Velez, representing OPUS, LesterV424 [at] aol.com.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 UFO Review Issue 9 March 2005 From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:11:29 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:57:57 -0500 Subject: UFO Review Issue 9 March 2005 UFO Review issue 9, March 2005 is now available at: http://www.uforeview.net It is available as a PDF at approximately 2.9 kb and also as a Word document at just under 2 kb. Go to either of the two buttons at the top left of the page marked "Current issue". If you get the previous issue, please refresh your browser. In this issue; (special front cover for Alfred) "Included Middle Man" Interview with Greg Bishop, author of Project Beta, the story of Paul Bennewitz, Rick Doty, Bill Moore, the circus that was Kirtland AFB, Dulce, cattle mutes, AFOSI disinformation, and somewhere in there, the kitchen sink as well. Excellent interview including new information. Special announcement from the President of the United States "Give the guy a chance" Interview with Dr. Michale Salla who tells us what it is like to be one of the most criticised individuals within Ufology. An in depth overview of Exoplitics, an explanation of what it's about and where it's future lies. Assemblage of comments about the Jennings UFO special Crytptozoology Corner; Strange, terrifying creature seen in garden pond. "Alternatives" Kithra casts an eye back over "Grandma on the telly" and Alternative 3 Mystery booms heard across London. Case solved! "UFO Recognition Part 2" Second part of a three parter from Bill Hamilton about how to recognise the beggars when they're flying around. "Searching for the Truth" Editorial from Dennis Balthaser "India chosen nation for ET visitation. Aliens to share secrets with our leaders" Exclusive report by Rashid Rabbitveryfast "The abductee who looks forward to being taken" Interview with best selling author Lisette Larkins about her life, philosophy, her early years, what makes her tick, and even a bit about ET. "Did a UFO Crash in S.E. Missouri in 1941?" Fascinating reader submitted article by SeekingMoInfo And as usual, the regular amount of lunacy, cartoons, take offs etc. Excellent value for not a lot.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Lehmberg From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:21 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:32:54 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Lehmberg >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:36:53 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>1. Arrange for someone to hoax a UFO crash in or near your town. >>>Silas Newton is, alas, unavailable, but you might be able to get >>>the MJ-12 types interested, or Ashton Kutcher; >>>2. Let it sit for a few years (like a fine wine, or good >>>whiskey, crashed saucer stories have to age a bit); and >>>3. Resurrect the case, start a symposium/conference, and donate >>>all the proceeds to the local library. <snip> >Sigh. That pregnant exhalation may be as inopportune as it is premature, Mr. Kimball. >Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- >controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. Whenever I hear an assumptively reflexive dismissal of a controlled media _I_ get the jeebie heebies..... >I work in the media. Ok - but you additionally make it known you're a curmudgeony contrarian willing to whither the subject du jour under your own definition of a harsh light... perhaps as larded with assumption and the 'conventional' wisdoms as any other. Taken through your filters it might only be _interpreted_ (and perhaps even too conveniently) to be as you say. >Neither I, nor anyone else I know, has seen any indication of >the type of control you claim exists. Uh - Mr. Gannon/Guckert? Payolaed "Journalists"? Neoconic FM radio and TV? The giggle factor provoking the invisible college Michio Kaku has talked about... control by any other name would smell as sweet... which is not very. And the aforemented is just what we see. Dr. Michael Parenti writes about a lot more. More liberal academia, sure, but has it bothered anyone else that many who actually study the material (regardless what it is) as apposed to those only willing to conveniently make up their minds about it, come to progressive conclusions? Why is it the 'revolution' always starts at college, oddly where the raw information is supposed to be? I digress. >No-one has ever stood over >my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt >that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when >they made Seeing is Believing. We can of course take your word for that, forgetting that that is an observation taken through filters perhaps yet to reveal themselves. I mean, Dude [g]., you'd vote for Bush if you had to make the choice, and there seems to be, predominately, two kinds of people who will do that - the otherwise distracted and so innocently ignorant buying into the lowest common denominator rhetoric provided, or the minority of informed privledged, self- indulgently convenient, and well rewarded sociopaths who can't give a damn about anything outside a canted focus who believes their ends justify their means. I will of course place you outside those discussed. You're Canadian, so how much a canted faschist could you be? [g]. >This doesn't mean it couldn't >happen, but rather that there is no evidence, that I have seen, >for such a broad, sweeping characterisation of the media, >mainstream or otherwise. We may diverge in our assessment of a corrupted mainstream, an undeniably corporate media, and a plethora of ideologue faux- journalists who leaven it. >Besides, who is manipulating whom here? As Stan Friedman has >stated, "Ray Santilli has managed to manipulate ufologists and >the media, and make a load of money without solid backup for any >of his stories." That's like a "welfare queen" being used to justify the dismantling of social services. The most casual assessment of even the hideously flawed American system is that the vast vast majority on the dole do not remotely enjoy the dole. Santilli is (but perhaps!) a welfare queen (justifying the dismantling of ufology), the odd smirking sociopath able to remain unmoved while advantaging themselves on the fearful misery of others - remain unaffected by, knowingly or unknowingly, contributing to the giggle factor or facilitating the information void plaguing us all. >On this occasion, I couldn't agree with Stan more. Hell - he's like betting with the house. The house always wins or they wouldn't be the 'house'. Pretty safe bet. I'm well served sitting at the fire with Stanton Friedman.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Rochester Man Studies UFOs With A Historian's Tools From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:40:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:40:56 -0500 Subject: Rochester Man Studies UFOs With A Historian's Tools Source: Rochester Democrat & Chronicle - Rochester New York http://tinyurl.com/587cr 03-17-05 Rochester Man Studies UFOs With A Historian's Tools Richard Dolan has never seen a UFO. But he believes they are real. Don't roll your eyes. Dolan is a historian and researcher by trade. He has never had any interest in science fiction. If extraterrestrials have visited Earth, Dolan doesn't claim to know where they've come from or what they want. He does believe, though, that the subject is worthy of inquiry. Dolan, a Brooklyn native, earned a history degree from Alfred University, studied at Oxford University, and then studied American Cold War diplomacy at the University of Rochester in the 1990s. He earned a master's degree in history. He left academia because he didn't want to spend his life "begging for adjunct instructorships." He now runs his own professional r=E9sum=E9 writing service. His passion, however, is researching and writing about UFOs. He has been a contributor to The History Channel, has written dozens of articles and, in 2000, published Volume One of UFOs and the National Security State: An Unclassified History. The book documents global UFO encounters from 1941 to 1973. Just in those years, he says, the book documents about 250 UFO encounters involving the military. He is working on a second volume that would present evidence through the 1990s. "I have gone from the standard academic track to the fringe," he says, "and the fringe is the best place to be." He has collected loads of official documents released to many researchers over the years through Freedom of Information Act requests. At first, he says, American intelligence worried that the Soviet Union might have perfected the technology of extremely high- speed craft that can stop in midair and turn on a dime. That turned out not to have been the case, but the reports of sightings continued for decades. As every television viewer knows, the government has long dismissed sightings as mistakes. Either witnesses have mistaken weather balloons or atmospheric conditions for unusual aircraft or they are hallucinating. But when you have trained pilots telling similar stories, you have to listen, he says. "I would hesitate to use the words 'extraterrestrial spacecraft' in describing these things. This could well be so =97 but I really try to be less definitive. Call me picky, but I would simply describe them as military encounters with unconventional craft that vastly exceed our own capabilities." You have to be skeptical of reports, but not closed-minded. So what's credible? "I look at a few things. First, a detailed (Freedom of Information Act) report is something I consider credible," Dolan says. "A photograph that has gone through extensive analysis" is also credible. In fact, he says, people need to be far more open to possibilities we cannot imagine. Might creatures capable of traveling vast distances have more sophisticated ways than low- flying metallic hovercraft to survey the Earth? A reasonable assumption, he says, but who knows? In 1994, Dolan kind of stumbled into the field of UFO research, knowing quite well that most of the world finds the subject amusing, if not nuts. It doesn't bother him. He has pursued his material methodically because, as he says in the introduction to his book, "this topic deserves a respectable history." Dolan will speak on "UFOs, National Security and You" from 6 to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:59:32 -0500 Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the 1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual object flying behind the Duke's head. http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv This scene was reportedly shot on location outdoors. The object appears to fly erratically in front of distant mountains but apparently beyond trees that are much closer to the camera. I had heard from one source that attempts were underway to examine an original print of the film to ensure that the object was not a flaw of some type that was "introduced" onto copies of the film that went to video. However, no additional information has been forthcoming. Is this film clip valuable evidence or merely a bug caught in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:58:34 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:49:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - King >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the >1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual >object flying behind the Duke's head. >http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv >http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv >This scene was reportedly shot on location outdoors. The object >appears to fly erratically in front of distant mountains but >apparently beyond trees that are much closer to the camera. >I had heard from one source that attempts were underway to >examine an original print of the film to ensure that the object >was not a flaw of some type that was "introduced" onto copies of >the film that went to video. However, no additional information >has been forthcoming. >Is this film clip valuable evidence or merely a bug caught in >the klieg lights? Doctor Maccabee, I would be particularly >interested in your insights. Hi Joe, While I too wonder what Dr. Bruce might make of this, herewith my humble theory: First and foremost, the film was shot on a closed movie set, in a studio sound stage. Shooting close-in supporting scenes like this at the time would not have been done outside, since the vagaries of natural lighting, weather, insects, planes, reality, etc, would make getting a good take problematical at best. Artists were employed to paint sometimes very elaborate backdrops to lend the scene an outdoors ambience. It is an art now used primarily in the Science Fiction arena, or in historical dramas like Gladiator. Of course, CGI and digital graphics have moved this art form along, even as more movie directors try to get more "real" in terms of framing and shooting scenes... trying to get the actors to do more stunt work or having them perform "in situ"... underwater, in cold or hot locales, etc., rather than on an enclosed set or through special effects. But I digress..... Whatever is seen in the clip was inside the sound stage, and could be little more than 20 or 30 feet away from the camera. So, while that eliminates an extraterrestrial explanation we move to the obvious question... what is the thing? What is seen in the clip as a moving object is more rightly termed a moving reflection of light in my opinion. To an pobserver, a stationary object with a very bright light trained on it can produce a bright "hot-spot" on the object. If the object moves relative to the light source, or if the light source moves relative to the object, the reflection can move along the object, or can disappear altogether, or can change in apparent color, intensity, and "nature". If we imagine a cable or power feed line traversing the movie set left to right, and above the heads of the actors, and a very bright light is used to light the scene, the light could catch the cable at just such an angle as to produce a bright reflection "hot-spot". As the light moves to follow the actors, or as the cable very slightly swings toward and away from the camera, and the light source, the hot-spot appears to move laterally along the length of the cable. This is very similar to how a fisherman might see his fishing line by the occasional bright hot-spot of sunlight catching it, and often the reflection appears to move along the fishing line as it moves in the breeze. Also in this analogy, the apparent color of the reflection can change as well as its intensity. This is an experiment easily carried out with a piece of fishing line and a sunny day with the sun at your back. In the movie clip, the reflection would only be apparent by looking through the camera lens. Since location is paramount in reflections, anyone standing to the left or right of the camera might not notice the reflection, or might see it in a different place along the line. It is possible from the movement of the reflection that perhaps someone DID notice the reflection, and instruct a stage hand to lift it. Obviously from the clip, if this is the case, said stage hand was only partially successful. <g> I conclude therefore that the object seen in the clip is such a power cable or rope, catching a reflection from the notoriously intense movie lights. As it moves up (perhaps as a stage hand attempts to move it up and out of frame), or as the light moves, or both, the reflection does what reflections do... move, change color and intensity, and appear and disappear. At any rate, It is a very cool clip of an otherwise less-than- stellar turn by the Duke.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Connors From: Wendy Connors <fadeddiscs.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:02:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:50:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Connors >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? <snip> There is also a UFO in the film, Tora, Tora, Tora. It flies behind the head of the Japanese officer on board the ship as they make final preparations for the attack on Pearl Harbor. Look for the scene where the camera is shooting up at the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:24:16 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:21 -0600 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- >>controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. >Whenever I hear an assumptively reflexive dismissal of a >controlled media _I_ get the jeebie heebies..... Alfred: (I know you prefer Mr. Lehmberg, or Sir, but that seems so formal - please, just call me Paul, or, as you did below, "Dude" - we're all friends here... :-) So we're agreed. We both have the heebie jeebies. Ick. >>I work in the media. >Ok - but you additionally make it known you're a curmudgeony >contrarian willing to whither the subject du jour under your own >definition of a harsh light... perhaps as larded with assumption >and the 'conventional' wisdoms as any other. Taken through your >filters it might only be _interpreted_ (and perhaps even too >conveniently) to be as you say. This is, I must say, so cool - I'm finally on the receiving end of Alfred's acid wit. Must be a rite of passage, or something. I take it with good humour. :-) Now, as for the "curmudgeony contrarian" bit, what exactly did I do to earn that epithet? Is it because, after carefully looking at Aztec, I came to the conclusion that it's a con? Is it because, after re-looking at MJ-12, I came to the conclusion that it's probably a hoax? Is it because I have zero respect for the objectivity and supposed methodology of Michael Salla? Or that I think exopolitics is a complete waste of time, a complete distraction from the issue at hand, a dodge, a slight, a veritable smorgisbord of uselessness? Perhaps it's because evidence is something that matters to me? Perhaps it's because I refuse to take Lehmbergian leaps of faith into the unknown, lemming like, off the very steep cliff of illogic? Or, perhaps, it's simply because you and I disagree, on occasion, so obviously when I do I must be a curmudgeonly contrarian. No doubt I'll soon be a Pelicanist and Klasskurtzian as well. Egads and gadzooks. P.S. I'm not old enough - either in actual years, or in spirit, to be curmudgeonly. For God's sake, I just bought, at the same time, both the new Kelly Clarkson CD and Morrissey's latest - would a curmudgeon do that? Would he?? I say nay, nyet, non, and no, firmly and without a hint of reservation. Someone with eclectic musical tastes, perhaps, but a curmudgeon? <snip> >>No-one has ever stood over >>my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt >>that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when >>they made Seeing is Believing. <snip> >We can of course take your word for that, Mighty big of you, but perhaps you shouldn't. Perhaps the CIA/NSA/RCMP/CSIS/MJ-12 guys hang out in my office all the time. If so, however, I just wish they'd leave a bigger cheque. <snip> >forgetting that that is an observation taken through filters >perhaps yet to reveal themselves. Here's what my "filters" are based upon: (a) I'm smart (and not ashamed, as so many are today, to admit it, even as I acknowledge that being smart isn't enough); and (b) more important, I'm a critical thinker. I don't just accept what people are telling me. I go take a look myself, and come to my own conclusions, based on the evidence, of things that interest me, and seem worthy of further investigation. Alas, Ed Gehrman's "crash site" doesn't meet my standard, although I'd be fine with someone doing a thorough investigation that would prove me wrong (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last). I still don't see any other way that makes sense. Frankly, for the record, I couldn't care less if UFOs are alien spacecraft, time travellers, figments of the imagination, explainable atmospheric anomalies, or top secret government projects run amok. I have no vested interest, either financial or emotional, in seeing any of those theories proved, or disproved. I just care about the truth, wherever it leads, and whatever it may be. <snip> >I mean, Dude [g]., you'd vote for Bush if you had to make the choice. Dude, you're right - I would have. It's one of the things that Scott Ramsey and I agree upon. Then again, I would have voted for Clinton, so go figure. I was once a Trudeau Liberal, and am now a Conservative. I'm positively Churchill-ian on my ability to switch sides. <snip> >I will of course place you outside those discussed. You're Canadian, >so how much a canted faschist could you be? [g]. That's "fascist", and I'm so glad to be placed outside that group. You have no idea. Whew... load off my mind. For a minute there I was starting to think, "Maybe I should switch from black shirts to a light blue." And, for the benefit of you Americans, who, thanks to Michael Moore (speaking of a man who manipulates the truth to serve his own agenda!), seem to think we're all peace-loving lefties up here, I can only say that we have the same diversity of opinion as you folks do south of the border. We've got canted commies (most of them now tenured professors) and canted fascists (very few of whom, if any, are tenured professors), and everyone in between. I even have friends who own (gasp) guns, although I do not, nor would I ever, with the possible exception of a working phaser, which would be pretty neat to have. I am, again for the record, "in between". Besides, I've always found the application of labels ("neo-con", "liberal" etc) to be, as Stan might say, false logic, in this case useful only for those too simple-minded to see that a person could be "pro-Bush" on Iraq, or BMD, but "anti-Bush" on, oh, say economic policy, or abortion, or whatever. It's called nuance, and it's the one thing that we Canadians are good at. LOL <snip> >>On this occasion, I couldn't agree with Stan more. >Hell - he's like betting with the house. The house always wins >or they wouldn't be the 'house'. Pretty safe bet. I'm well >served sitting at the fire with Stanton Friedman. Stan's great, but, dude, he does make mistakes (Gerald Andersen pops to mind, right off the top of my head). It isn't quite like betting with the house - even when you're in his house. Besides, what fun is always betting with the house? With respect, admiration, etc., etc.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:57:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:03:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Ledger >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the 1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual object flying behind the Duke's head. >http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv >http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv Hi Joe, I've seen this before. I suspect that the scene was actually shot in the studio with B- roll running in the background to simulate their being outdoors. The B-roll then would not have all of the clutter of the finished shot [the fence and plants etc., the tree in camera left fore-ground] so then the anomaly would be viewable for a greater length of time. The Second Unit who shot this probably locked the camera off once they got the desired, focus light effect and background and let it roll for some many minutes to allow the editor to pick exactly the amount of sky lighting required for the scene. It's doubtful that the crew saw it while shooting it. And someone must have been in a hurry to edit the piece together to have missed the anomaly. It's still up for argument as to whether this was something generated during the developing stage of the neg or something that ocurred during later years on the neg. The fact that it disappears behind and re-appears from behind Wayne's head makes it strange that it wasn't noticed during the 3 or 4 or perhaps more, re-takes of the scene between Wayne and O'Hara. But this has happened before in a more obvious manner. Anyway there might still be a clip in a can somewhere waiting to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:34:32 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:17:34 -0500 Subject: Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I read you e-mail to me of 27 October, 2004 at the time, checked >the website link you provided, and saw nothing there that would >convince me that there was any crash site or that the alien >autospy film was anything other than a hoax - and a bad one at >that. Hi Paul, I think the crash site article goes a long way toward verifying the cameraman's statement that he filmed the retrieval of an alien craft and the creatures it carried. He drew a map of the location and produced two very specific drawings of the terrain we'd find there. His directions to the site, and a description of the strange blue material and severely burned vegetation are 100% correct when compared with what we actually found. This could not happen by chance! But I don't understand your statement that "the alien autopsy film was anything other than a hoax - and a bad one at that." If it's a hoax, bad or not, what is the evidence? >Of course I'm a skeptically inclined - we should all be >skeptically inclined. Even "believers" should be skeptically >inclined about particular incidents or testimony. A certain amount of skepticism is necessary as long as it's tempered with a huge measure of open-mindedness. >And it isn't hard getting people interested in crash sites, >whether hoaxes or not (note that my e-mail posited that both >were possible). Good lord - look at Roswell! Or even Aztec. How >about Shag Harbour? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Lots >of interest. Maybe so but that hasn't been my experience. I've found that most folks will only respond if a person of authority or prestige opens up the possibility that a crash site is bona fide. If Bruce, or Stan, or David, or even you were to visit the site and be so enthused by what you find there that you endorsed it, then the natives might become restless. I thought Wendy's supportive report would make a difference and it has to some, but so far we haven't been able to generate the type of interest this site deserves. >>my only intention is to add quality >>information to the mix so we all can better understand our UFO >>dilemma. I'm not trying to make money or go on the lecture >>circuit but I would like to make a documentary about what we've >>found and what it seems to mean. >As I've said repeatedly, documentaries cost money to make - at >least they do when that's what you do for a living, as I do, and >want to do a good job of it. The first lousy documentary I make >might be the last one. It's that kind of business. I believe you but I see nothing that would indicate to me that a documentary on the AA, using the crash site as the focus, would be "lousy" and I wouldn't suggest it if I thought you'd be comprised in any way. How could it hurt to take a look. >As well, I can only do so much - all documentary makers have to >pick their projects carefully. At the moment I'm in pre- >production for a film about animal mutilations in western >Canada. We have other UFO-related (and non UFO-related) projects >in development. There are any number of other cases of which I >am aware (and no doubt many of which I am not aware) that we >haven't even looked at, but that I find more immediately >compelling than anything to do with the alien autopsy footage. That's because you haven't studied my arguments or the chain of evidence I've tried to present. It's an uphill struggle when no one is paying attention. You and others have simply dismissed the AA as a hoax. If the footage itself is a hoax, where is the proof? You and other critics should be able to articulate your complaints. If the Alien Autopsy a hoax, how was it accomplished? >But that's me. There may be another filmmaker out there who you >could interest in your project. It just isn't me. I'm sorry to hear that, but you should at least take a look. I wouldn't lead you astray. Besides you're the only filmmaker that I have access to. >A final note. At your website... >www.thewhyfiles.net/gehrman.htm >... you write: >"Our culture's systematic refusal to seriously consider this >footage raises an urgent question: have we lost the ability to >objectively examine important, history-altering evidence?'" >Did it ever occur to you that the majority of the ufological >community has objectively looked at the available evidence, and >simply disagrees with you? My extensive contact with the "ufological community" has taught me that only a very few folks of any persuasion are aware of even the basics of the AA, incuding you, and don't intend to change. >Then you write: >"The alien autopsy is a maddening example of how easy it is for >the government-controlled media to discredit something by hiding >it in plain sight." >Sigh. Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- >controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. I work in the media. >Neither I, nor anyone else I know, has seen any indication of >the type of control you claim exists. No-one has ever stood over >my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt >that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when >they made Seeing is Believing. This doesn't mean it couldn't >happen, but rather that there is no evidence, that I have seen, >for such a broad, sweeping characterisation of the media, >mainstream or otherwise. No I don't expect you'll find agents of the government in the control room but what I had in mind was far more subtle and final than that. >Besides, who is manipulating whom here? As Stan Friedman has >stated, "Ray Santilli has managed to manipulate ufologists and >the media, and make a load of money without solid backup for any >of his stories." Ray made money; that's why he bought the footage in the first place. He could have made much more but he hasn't. All I know is that he has been cooperative with me when he didn't have to be. He allowed the distribution the AA CD set and has given me and others helpful information. There is not one scrap of evidence that Ray is a hoaxer.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:05:13 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:23:40 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rogerson >From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 20:14:08 +0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:49:23 -0500 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Please supply me with your library's address, and I will send >>them a copy of the UFO Evidence Volume II so that the library >>system there will not collapse under the weight of such a >>request from this hypothetical saucer-nut. It will also be a >>small part of my penitence for my sinful use of library >>facilities which Mr. Smith so ably pointed out on this forum. >>However, I don't think this donation will change your >>unfortunate situation. Certainly, you have every right to feel >>bitter, loosing one's employment is wrenching. However, the main >>reason for the retrenchment probably had something to do with >>changes, either wisely or otherwise, in the local government's >>budget. These were probably more to do with local priorities and >>the economic situation rather than the UFO rabble's unreasonable >>requests on library resources. >My comments were intended in general terms, as I think you >realise. The only person connected with my library who is likely >to be in the least bit interested in The UFO Evidence is myself, >and I already have a copy. I was merely suggesting that people >might think before lumbering their local libraries with requests >for expensive books that are unlikely to be used by more than a >tiny number of people (pace, Richard). Local priorities and >economic situations have a big impact on public library >provision, and library users may wish to consider this when they >make demands on the service. I suspect that the only copies of UFO Evidence Vo.l2 in the public domain in Britain are the copy at British Lending Library and the 2 copies at Sheffield University Library, these no doubt purchased at the special request of Dr Dave Clarke who teaches there. Neither of Sheffield's copies was out on loan when I looked on COPAC the academic supercatalogue of the British Isles.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:36:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:26:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:58:34 -0600 >Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the >>1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual >>object flying behind the Duke's head. >>http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv >>http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv <snip> >While I too wonder what Dr. Bruce might make of this, herewith >my humble theory: >First and foremost, the film was shot on a closed movie set, in >a studio sound stage. Shooting close-in supporting scenes like >this at the time would not have been done outside, since the >vagaries of natural lighting, weather, insects, planes, reality, >etc, would make getting a good take problematical at best. <snip> >Whatever is seen in the clip was inside the sound stage, and >could be little more than 20 or 30 feet away from the camera. >So, while that eliminates an extraterrestrial explanation we >move to the obvious question... what is the thing? >What is seen in the clip as a moving object is more rightly >termed a moving reflection of light in my opinion. Most, maybe all, of Rio Grande was filmed on location in Monument Valley in Utah. The background in the scene is probably real, not a painting. (Why bother with a painting when you have the real thing right there?) If I were to propose a mundane explanation for the the erratic UFO, it might be a hummingbird or two hovering and rapidly darting around in the background. There are two ways to settle the question. One is to check with a film historian whether this particular scene was filmed outdoors or in a movie studio. If indoors, then UFO is obviously out. If outdoors, however, then the actual 35 mm film stock needs to be examined. It would have at least 10 times the resolution of DVD or video and would also reveal if the 'UFO'
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:32:42 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:29:05 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:21 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I am, again for the record, "in between". Besides, I've always >found the application of labels ("neo-con", "liberal" etc) to >be, as Stan might say, false logic, in this case useful only for >those too simple-minded to see that a person could be "pro-Bush" >on Iraq, or BMD, but "anti-Bush" on, oh, say economic policy, or >abortion, or whatever. It's called nuance, and it's the one >thing that we Canadians are good at. <LOL>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:51 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:30:53 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Hall >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:21 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>Ok - but you additionally make it known you're a curmudgeony >>contrarian willing to whither the subject du jour under your own >>definition of a harsh light... perhaps as larded with assumption >>and the 'conventional' wisdoms as any other. Taken through your >>filters it might only be _interpreted_ (and perhaps even too >>conveniently) to be as you say. >This is, I must say, so cool - I'm finally on the receiving end >of Alfred's acid wit. Must be a rite of passage, or something. I >take it with good humour. :-) >Now, as for the "curmudgeony contrarian" bit, what exactly did I >do to earn that epithet? Is it because, after carefully looking >at Aztec, I came to the conclusion that it's a con? Is it >because, after re-looking at MJ-12, I came to the conclusion >that it's probably a hoax? Is it because I have zero respect for >the objectivity and supposed methodology of Michael Salla? Or >that I think exopolitics is a complete waste of time, a complete >distraction from the issue at hand, a dodge, a slight, a >veritable smorgisbord of uselessness? >Paul (Kimball) >www.redstarfilm.com >www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com <snip> Gentlemen. I am the resident curmudgeon around here, and will brook no pretenders. Also, Paul is right, right, right, wrong,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 18 Re: UFO Review Issue 9 March 2005 - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:24:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:32:55 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO Review Issue 9 March 2005 - Maccabee >From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:11:29 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: UFO Review Issue 9 March 2005 >UFO Review issue 9, March 2005 is now available at: >http://www.uforeview.net >It is available as a PDF at approximately 2.9 kb and also as a >Word document at just under 2 kb. Go to either of the two >buttons at the top left of the page marked "Current issue". If >you get the previous issue, please refresh your browser. >In this issue; (special front cover for Alfred) >"Included Middle Man" Interview with Greg Bishop, author of >Project Beta, the story of Paul Bennewitz, Rick Doty, Bill >Moore, the circus that was Kirtland AFB, Dulce, cattle mutes,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:33:51 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:52:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:36:46 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:58:34 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >>>Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>>I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the >>>1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual >>>object flying behind the Duke's head. >>>http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv >>>http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv ><snip> >>While I too wonder what Dr. Bruce might make of this, herewith >>my humble theory: >>First and foremost, the film was shot on a closed movie set, in >>a studio sound stage. Shooting close-in supporting scenes like >>this at the time would not have been done outside, since the >>vagaries of natural lighting, weather, insects, planes, reality, >>etc, would make getting a good take problematical at best. ><snip> >>Whatever is seen in the clip was inside the sound stage, and >>could be little more than 20 or 30 feet away from the camera. >>So, while that eliminates an extraterrestrial explanation we >>move to the obvious question... what is the thing? >>What is seen in the clip as a moving object is more rightly >>termed a moving reflection of light in my opinion. >Most, maybe all, of Rio Grande was filmed on location in >Monument Valley in Utah. The background in the scene is probably >real, not a painting. (Why bother with a painting when you have >the real thing right there?) >If I were to propose a mundane explanation for the the erratic >UFO, it might be a hummingbird or two hovering and rapidly >darting around in the background. Now that I have another look at the clip, the mountains in the background do have a phony look to them, as if they were painted and in a movie studio. Also the actors' faces are illuminated mostly from the left and softly shadowed on the right, whereas the background fence posts and clothesline are illuminated in the opposite direction with hard shadowing on the left. (However, this might also be explained by the background being illuminated by natural illumination whereas the foreground was illuminated by studio lights plus natural illumination). An important point is that the object toward the beginning of the clips appears to pass behind a "tree" that looks to be 100 feet or more in the distance. So if this was a studio set, it was a large one. For a somewhat distant object, it also appears to be a little too bright and large to be a hummingbird or pair of hummingbirds, although hummingbirds can dart around like that. The unknown is also bright on top and dark on the bottom as if illuminated from above. Some more peculiarities is how the object briefly appears to split in two after passing behind the tree. Then it appears to come back together as it moves to the right. As it gets just right of mountain in the background, it seems to leave a faint image of itself behind as it continues darting to the right and also a glowing trail of some kind. This "afterimage" take several seconds to fade out. The trail fades faster. It also seems to leave faint images and a trail behind toward the end of the clip when it is moving diagonally upward to the left and off the screen at the top.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:56:04 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rudiak >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:16:21 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Now, as for the "curmudgeony contrarian" bit, what exactly did I >do to earn that epithet? Is it because, after carefully looking >at Aztec, I came to the conclusion that it's a con? Is it >because, after re-looking at MJ-12, I came to the conclusion >that it's probably a hoax? Is it because I have zero respect for >the objectivity and supposed methodology of Michael Salla? Or >that I think exopolitics is a complete waste of time, a complete >distraction from the issue at hand, a dodge, a slight, a >veritable smorgisbord of uselessness? Paul, I guess what's bothered me about your blogs and recent posts is that you paint with too broad a brush or tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because some witnesses are hoaxers doesn't make them all hoaxers. Just because some documents might be fake doesn't make them all fake. Or if you want to put it in courtroom parlance, just because a witness for the defense commits perjury on the witness stand doesn't mean the defendent is necessarily guilty as charged. Or just because a witness for the prosecution lies doesn't make the defendent innocent. What needs to be looked at is the _totality_ of evidence. Suppose the MJ-12 documents were hoaxed. This doesn't disprove Roswell. Nor does it discredit all witnesses who have said something extraordinary happened. It also doesn't necessarily discredit that MJ-12 or something exactly like it by another name existed. E.g., I don't see how hoaxed MJ-12 papers discredit Wilbert Smith's documents from 1950 again pointing to a small, ultrascret group headed by Dr. Vannevar Bush within the Research and Development Board looking into the modus operandi of the saucers. Yet that is also your conclusion, according to a recent blog of yours. According to you, Wilbert Smith was perceived as a googly-eyed "UFO believer" by Dr. Robert Sarbacher and deliberately misled for disinformation purposes. As an ex-lawyer, you say you demand good evidence that meets at least a legal standard, yet where is your evidence to support your claim? If Smith's documents were introduced in a court of law and you were put on the witness stand as a rebuttal witness, would your testimony be accepted into evidence? I think not, since it is nothing but unsupported conjecture on your part. It doesn't even rise to the level of hearsay evidence. For "evidence," your statement also makes little sense and is filled with omissions. E.g., Smith's original memo isn't the only document stating that flying saucers were top secret. So did an FBI document from Jan. 1949, after the FBI was briefed by military intelligence on the green fireball and other unexplained aerial phenomena in New Mexico. Another thing you left out was that Sarbacher's interview was arranged through the Canadian embassy in Washington, involved the military attache, the Canadian ambassador, the liaison with the Canadian Defence Research Board, and ultimately the DRB itself. So if Sarbacher was yanking Smith's "true-believer" chain, he was also deceiving many in the Canadian government as well plus wasting Canadian time and money that eventually went into supporting Smith's research. To what end? Was the United States afraid of an invasion from Canada, so we had to make them believe we had highly advanced alien technology in our hands? Isn't the point of disinformation to fool your enemies, not your friends? Furthermore, those involved in such a deception would have extended well beyond Sarbacher to Vannevar Bush and the RDB itself, as follow-up correspondence indicates. This concerns a magazine article by Donald Keyhoe on Smith's theories of saucer propulsion which had to be cleared by Bush and the RDB with other possible censorship from the Canadian government. Documents like that further undercut other dismissive statements from you that Bush couldn't possibly have headed such a group because he had supposedly fallen out of favor with Truman, which amounts to little more than, "I don't believe Bush could have headed such a group because I don't believe he could have headed such a group." Further, when Sarbacher was contacted and interviewed 30+ years later by other people on the List like Stan Friedman and Jerry Clark, he would have had to continue the "deception" for unexplainable reasons. For some of the Smith documents concerning this matter: www.roswellproof.com/smith_papers.html So the MJ-12 papers could be fake, yet a supersecret group just like MJ-12 headed by Vannevar Bush could have, and according to Smith's papers, was very real. The MJ-12 papers appeared just _after_ the Smith documents and Sarbacher. In fact, one of the more plausible _theories_ behind the MJ-12 papers was that they were deliberately put out to discredit the recently discovered Smith documents plus the corroborating testimony of Sarbacher when he was reinterviewed in the early 1980's. Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. ...More and more work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative organization?" Karl Pflock may speak of "the will to be believe." But there is also the flip coin of that, which is "the will to disbelieve," cloaked as supposed hard-nosed skepticism. Yes, we should all be skeptical to some extent. But true skepticism is not seizing on on one or two questionable bits of evidence and then using this as a rationale to flippantly
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: Autopsy Redux - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:14:50 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:58:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux - Ledger >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:34:32 -0800 >Subject: Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>And it isn't hard getting people interested in crash sites, >>whether hoaxes or not (note that my e-mail posited that both >>were possible). Good lord - look at Roswell! Or even Aztec. How >>about Shag Harbour? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Lots >>of interest. A quick point. Although it was originally presumed that something crashed into the waters off Shag Harbour [in actuality-The Sound], subsequent testimony by eye witnesses and the lack of anecdotal evidence by the original witnesses tends to support a soft landing and the submergence of some object. Possibly two of them were involved though only one seems to have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 'Alien Autopsy Inquest' From: Philip Mantle <philip.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:15:37 +0100 (CET) Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:03:18 -0500 Subject: 'Alien Autopsy Inquest' I've read with interest some of the exchanges on the List with regards to the Alien Autopsy film and claims and counter claims. I'd like to inform the List members that I am in the final stages of completing my book on this film entitled 'Alien Autopsy Inquest'. In my humble opinion my book, which is the result of 10 years of research and investigation, offers a fair and balanced look at the film and the many attempts to prove it either fake or authentic. Wherever possible I will be using as many photographs and illustrations to complement the text. Whatever your opinions are about the film there is one thing that I believe cannot be denied, it is _the_ most controversial film in the entire history of UFO research. I've read the exchanges between Ed Gehrman and Paul Kimball regarding a possible documentary. Well, you might be interested to know that at the moment there are 3 production companies interested in my research, 1 in the USA and 2 here in the UK. Whether or not they use my research as the basis of a documentary remains to be seen, but at least they are interested. Ed knows that I will be using some of his crash site material in the book, and I thank him for allowing me to do so. I know I'm biased but irrespective from which viewpoint you look at the AA film from (fake or genuine) then there is one hell of a story to be told here and one that would make a tremendous documentary.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:52:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:31:55 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Reynolds >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >I guess what's bothered me about your blogs and recent posts is >that you paint with too broad a brush or tend to throw the baby >out with the bathwater. Just because some witnesses are hoaxers >doesn't make them all hoaxers. Just because some documents might >be fake doesn't make them all fake. >Or if you want to put it in courtroom parlance, just because a >witness for the defense commits perjury on the witness stand >doesn't mean the defendent is necessarily guilty as charged. Or >just because a witness for the prosecution lies doesn't make the >defendent innocent. What needs to be looked at is the _totality_ >of evidence. <snip> >Karl Pflock may speak of "the will to be believe." But there is >also the flip coin of that, which is "the will to disbelieve," >cloaked as supposed hard-nosed skepticism. > >Yes, we should all be skeptical to some extent. But true >skepticism is not seizing on on one or two questionable bits of >evidence and then using this as a rationale to flippantly >dismiss all other evidence which is not obviously tainted. >That's not skepticism. That's the will to disbelieve in action. Far be it for me to haphazardly defend Paul Kimball, who is away this weekend and can't defend his position, but let me try. Paul Kimball's position is not that all UFO episodes are hoaxes or that all documents are fake. His position, as I understand it, is that MJ-12 hasn't been proved, yet or ever, to be authentic, in his eyes. And Roswell likewise. This is a skeptocal view admittedly, but a rational one. It's not the glassy-eyed belief that some have about UFOs or flying saucers: that they are definitively alien craft and documents about secret government agencies have got to true because Ruppelt and others made oblique references to such agencies. The will to believe is much stronger here at UpDates than the will to disbelieve. So when anyone questions that belief, all guns come out firing to quell the antagonizer, sometimes with erratic and illogically presented views that have nothing to do with the reality of things. UpDaters should go to Paul Kimball's blog: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com and read his stuff for themselves.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:34:25 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:34:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - King >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:33:51 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie <snip> >An important point is that the object toward the beginning of >the clips appears to pass behind a "tree" that looks to be 100 >feet or more in the distance. So if this was a studio set, it >was a large one. > >For a somewhat distant object, it also appears to be a little >too bright and large to be a hummingbird or pair of >hummingbirds, although hummingbirds can dart around like that. >The unknown is also bright on top and dark on the bottom as if >illuminated from above. >Some more peculiarities is how the object briefly appears to >split in two after passing behind the tree. Then it appears to >come back together as it moves to the right. As it gets just >right of mountain in the background, it seems to leave a faint >image of itself behind as it continues darting to the right and >also a glowing trail of some kind. This "afterimage" take >several seconds to fade out. The trail fades faster. It also >seems to leave faint images and a trail behind toward the end of >the clip when it is moving diagonally upward to the left and off >the screen at the top. >All these points need to be addressed whatever the ultimate >explanation. Hi David, If you hypothesize that the object is a suspended aerial cable or line, and that the tree that appears to be "100 feet away" is actually an artful illusion of 2-D depth perception...often used in just such a manner on movie sets... and more like 20-30 feet away, then each of the details you note are easily explained. In fact, this hypothesis is as plausible if the scene was shot outdoors. The actresses shadow is very strong on her ironing board just in front of her, yet her face is lit as well. The lights are not in frame, so must be just above the frame edge and very close to produce a shrp dark shadow. But as you said, the other weaker shadows indicate light coming from several directions. Therefore, there are suspension means for at least some of the lights used. These lights don't run on batteries, so power must be run to them somehow. As I watch the clip repeatedly, the impression of a lengthy cable or rope is hard to shake. The reflection can double, or leave "trails" etc, just from slight movement toward or away from the light. As the clip runs, the rope or cable begins to rise slowly, as if someone noticed it and unobtrusively instructed someone to raise it out of frame. If you watch the clip with this hypothesis in mind, perhaps you will see what I am seeing, as well. If the film frames were available for review, a hi-resolution enlargement of a few frames would easily confirm or refute the cable hypothesis. The cable or rope would certainly not remain invisible on close scrutiny... if it is there at all. I am holding with the cable or rope hypothesis as the most plausible, until analysis of the film frames, if uncertaken,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:36:03 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. ...More and more >work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >organization?" Hi David I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 19 Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 12:23:33 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:39:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? - Rudiak >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:33:51 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:36:46 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:58:34 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>>>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:44:28 -0800 (PST) >>>>Subject: Alleged UFO In John Wayne Movie? >>>>I am sure a number of Listers have seen the video-clip from the >>>>1950 John Wayne film, Rio Grande, which seems to show an unusual >>>>object flying behind the Duke's head. >>>>http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/rio.wmv >>>>http://www.rense.com/RIO2.wmv >>>First and foremost, the film was shot on a closed movie set, in >>>a studio sound stage. Shooting close-in supporting scenes like >>>this at the time would not have been done outside, since the >>>vagaries of natural lighting, weather, insects, planes, reality, >>>etc, would make getting a good take problematical at best. >>>Whatever is seen in the clip was inside the sound stage, and >>>could be little more than 20 or 30 feet away from the camera. >>>So, while that eliminates an extraterrestrial explanation we >>>move to the obvious question... what is the thing? >>>What is seen in the clip as a moving object is more rightly >>>termed a moving reflection of light in my opinion. >>Most, maybe all, of Rio Grande was filmed on location in >>Monument Valley in Utah. The background in the scene is probably >>real, not a painting. (Why bother with a painting when you have >>the real thing right there?) Instead of relying on Internet MPEGs, I checked out Rio Grande on DVD last night (a real "sacrifice" since I'm no great fan of John Wayne). Anyway two documentaries on the making of Rio Grande on the DVD state that it was filmed entirely on location in Moab, Utah (not Monument Valley as often erroneously stated in movie histories). Director John Ford was also well-known for liking to film on location for authenticity and to help get the actors into character. >>If I were to propose a mundane explanation for the the erratic >>UFO, it might be a hummingbird or two hovering and rapidly >>darting around in the background. >Now that I have another look at the clip, the mountains in the >background do have a phony look to them, as if they were painted >and in a movie studio. The background is also much clearer on DVD and does not appear to be a movie set but the real thing. Another point is that one can sometimes see nearby objects, such as clothes hanging on a clotheline, moving slightly as if being blown by a slight breeze. Shadows of tree branches can also be seen moving. If this was an indoor movie set, director John Ford would have had to be a real stickler for small, subtle details like that, i.e., have a small wind machine on set to simulate a slight breeze. >Also the actors' faces are illuminated >mostly from the left and softly shadowed on the right, whereas >the background fence posts and clothesline are illuminated in >the opposite direction with hard shadowing on the left. >(However, this might also be explained by the background being >illuminated by natural illumination whereas the foreground was >illuminated by studio lights plus natural illumination). Extra lights to soften the shadows on the actors' faces seems likely. Most of the scene could still have been natural outdoor illumination. >An important point is that the object toward the beginning of >the clips appears to pass behind a "tree" that looks to be 100 >feet or more in the distance. So if this was a studio set, it >was a large one. This is even more evident in the DVD version, where the object is substantially dimmed or partially disappears behind the tree branches. So it's off in the distance somewhere. It's not some hovering, darting insect a few feet away. >For a somewhat distant object, it also appears to be a little >too bright and large to be a hummingbird or pair of >hummingbirds, although hummingbirds can dart around like that. >The unknown is also bright on top and dark on the bottom as if >illuminated from above. Still looks that way on DVD. If anything, the object looks even brighter and bigger, not some tiny, darting creature like a hummingbird or dragonfly. It is also clearly longer than it is high by a ratio of approximately 2 to 1. >Some more peculiarities is how the object briefly appears to >split in two after passing behind the tree. Then it appears to >come back together as it moves to the right. As it gets just >right of mountain in the background, it seems to leave a faint >image of itself behind as it continues darting to the right and >also a glowing trail of some kind. This "afterimage" take >several seconds to fade out. The trail fades faster. It also >seems to leave faint images and a trail behind toward the end of >the clip when it is moving diagonally upward to the left and off >the screen at the top. I don't see anything like afterimages on the DVD, so this was probably an artifact of converting to a lower grade MPEG version for Internet viewing. One anomaly solved. On the other hand, when the object is darting very rapidly, there does appear to be motion smear. >All these points need to be addressed whatever the ultimate >explanation. The key points remain was this scene filmed outdoors or indoors (probably outdoors) and whether the 'UFO' was on the original film stock. Another point to consider is whether technicians introduced the UFO as a joke during DVD/video transfer. There have been instances of where technicians have played jokes like this, such as inserting a nude frame into a Disney cartoon. I seriously doubt whether we're seeing a technician hoax here, but
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:34:56 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:03:27 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Rudiak >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >>group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >>Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >>investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >>groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >>investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >>demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >>Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >>reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >>over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. ...More and more >>work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >>organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >>organization?" >I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring >to the FBI here. They were tasked with assisting investigations >from September 1947. Martin, Quite the opposite as I understand the history. J. Edgar Hoover severed the relationship between Air Force intelligence and the FBI at that time after the infamous "toilet seat" memo came to his attention, in which the Air Force said only they should investigate serious cases while the FBI should be used to investigate trivial cases involving obvious crazies and ash can covers, toilet seats, etc. For a copy of Hoover's angry letter stating that the FBI was wasting its time and quitting: http://ufologie.net/htm/foia03.htm However, the FBI did continue to investigate informally on its own and sometimes temporary cooperation was reinstated with military intelligence, such as during the green fireball investigation in early 1949 (when the FBI was told that the subject of flying saucers and the fireballs was Top Secret). But, to my knowledge, the FBI never engaged in coordinated UFO investigation nor was their a continuous relationship with the Air Force. Ruppelt was obviously referring to some other organization, and also daring not to utter its name. There were also at least two other coy references to very secret parallel investigations, where again Ruppelt dared not say who. One concerned the 1951 Lubbock Lights (Chapter 8, next to last page): "The only other people outside of Project Blue book who have studied the complete case of the Lubbock Lights were a group who, due to their associations with the government, had complete access to our files. And these people were not pulp writers or wide-eyed fanatics, they were scientists--rocket experts, nuclear physicists, and intelligence experts. They had banded together to study our UFO reports because they were convinced that some of the UFO's that were being reported were interplanetary spaceships..." The other was at the beginning of Chapter 12 on the July, 1952 Washington D.C. sightings: "A few days prior to the incident _a scientist, from an agency that I can't name_, and I were talking about the build-up of reports along the east coast of the United States. We talked for about two hours, and I was ready to leave when he said that he had one last comment to make - a prediction. From his study of the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force Headquarters, and from discussions with his colleagues, he said that he thought that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days,' he told me, and I remember that he punctuated his slow, deliberate remarks by hitting the desk with his fist, 'they're going to blow up and you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO sightings. The sighting will occur in Washington or New York,"' he predicted, 'probably Washington.' The trend in the UFO reports that this scientist based his prediction on hadn't gone unnoticed. We on Project Blue Book had seen it, and so had the people in the Pentagon; we all had talked about it." So who was the scientist and what was the agency he couldn't name? Maybe it was CIA, or maybe it was MJ-12 or an equivalent,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 23:06:25 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:07:49 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >>group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >>Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >>investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >>groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >>investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >>demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >>Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >>reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >>over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. More and more >>work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >>organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >>organization?" >I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring >to the FBI here. They were tasked with assisting investigations >from September 1947. Tilt! Not the FBI. The FBI was tasked to interview witnesses for the AF in late July, 1947. Then as a result of a 'scandal' (AF hired the FBI to investigate the cases of ash can covers and toilet seats, etc.), J Edgar said, "We're out." and by the end of Sept the FBI role was simply to accept a report and immediately pass it on to the AF without interviews or investigation. My guess as to the "other" group would be the Battelle Memorial Institute _if_ this were taking place in 1951 or '52. However, in 1947-8 another group helping ATIC was AFOSI (Air Force Office of Special Investigations, a criminal investigation organization which did lots of UFO sighting investigation; a sizeable part of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:18:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:45:42 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:34:56 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II. <snip> >>I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring >>to the FBI here. They were tasked with assisting investigations >>from September 1947. >Quite the opposite as I understand the history. J. Edgar Hoover >severed the relationship between Air Force intelligence and the >FBI at that time after the infamous "toilet seat" memo came to >his attention, in which the Air Force said only they should >investigate serious cases while the FBI should be used to >investigate trivial cases involving obvious crazies and ash can >covers, toilet seats, etc. For a copy of Hoover's angry letter >stating that the FBI was wasting its time and quitting: This is correct. The complete story is in The UFO-FBI Connection (plus the CIA connecion!). >http://ufologie.net/htm/foia03.htm >However, the FBI did continue to investigate informally on its >own and sometimes temporary cooperation was reinstated with >military intelligence, such as during the green fireball i>nvestigation in early 1949 (when the FBI was told that the >subject of flying saucers and the fireballs was Top Secret). >But, to my knowledge, the FBI never engaged in coordinated UFO >investigation nor was their a continuous relationship with the >Air Force. This is correct. >Ruppelt was obviously referring to some other organization, and >also daring not to utter its name. There were also at least two >other coy references to very secret parallel investigations, >where again Ruppelt dared not say who. One concerned the 1951 >Lubbock Lights (Chapter 8, next to last page): >"The only other people outside of Project Blue book who have >studied the complete case of the Lubbock Lights were a group >who, due to their associations with the government, had complete >access to our files. And these people were not pulp writers or >wide-eyed fanatics, they were scientists--rocket experts, >nuclear physicists, and intelligence experts. They had banded t>ogether to study our UFO reports because they were convinced >hat some of the UFO's that were being reported were i>nterplanetary spaceships..." This might have been the Battelle Memorial Institute or it might have been Republic (?) Aircraft. CIA also a possibility but not as likely. >The other was at the beginning of Chapter 12 on the July, 1952 >Washington D.C. sightings: >"A few days prior to the incident _a scientist, from an agency >that I can't name_, and I were talking about the build-up of >reports along the east coast of the United States. We talked for >about two hours, and I was ready to leave when he said that he >had one last comment to make - a prediction. From his study of >the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force Headquarters, >and from discussions with his colleagues, he said that he >thought that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of >loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days,' he told me, >and I remember that he punctuated his slow, deliberate remarks >by hitting the desk with his fist, 'they're going to blow up and >you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO sightings. The >sighting will occur in Washington or New York,"' he predicted, >'probably Washington.' The trend in the UFO reports that this >scientist based his prediction on hadn't gone unnoticed. We on >Project Blue Book had seen it, and so had the people in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:03:42 -0000 Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:47:52 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:34:56 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>>Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >>>group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >>>Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >>>investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >>>groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >>>investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >>>demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >>>Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >>>reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >>>over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. More and more >>>work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >>>organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >>>organization?" >>I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring >>to the FBI here. They were tasked with assisting investigations >>from September 1947. >Quite the opposite as I understand the history. J. Edgar Hoover >severed the relationship between Air Force intelligence and the >FBI at that time after the infamous "toilet seat" memo came to >his attention, <snip> Whoops, my apologies! You're dead right. I should have re- checked my history. I've also been put right off-line by Brad Sparks, who tells me that Ruppelt was referring to AFOSI. >Ruppelt was obviously referring to some other organization, and >also daring not to utter its name. There were also at least two >other coy references to very secret parallel investigations, >where again Ruppelt dared not say who. One concerned the 1951 >Lubbock Lights (Chapter 8, next to last page): One other thing I'd like to know about Lubbock is the nature of the "very simple and commonplace natural phenomenon" (or words to this effect) that Ruppelt says the lights were finally
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: Autopsy Redux - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:29:53 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:50:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux - Balaskas >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:14:50 -0400 >Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:34:32 -0800 >>Subject: Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] <snip> >A quick point. Although it was originally presumed that >something crashed into the waters off Shag Harbour [in >actuality - The Sound], subsequent testimony by eye witnesses and >the lack of anecdotal evidence by the original witnesses tends >to support a soft landing and the submergence of some object. >Possibly two of them were involved though only one seems to have >entered near Shag Harbour. If one did crash into the water it >didn't stay there. A fluid theory for a fluid environmnet. Hi Don! On the subject of the Shag Harbour government-documented UFO crash which you and Chris Styles wrote about in your excellent book 'Dark Object', is the suspicion that there were two UFOs involved and that both submerged objects left the area on their
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 20 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:22:04 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:00:39 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:32:42 -0600 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>I am, again for the record, "in between". Besides, I've always >>found the application of labels ("neo-con", "liberal" etc) to >>be, as Stan might say, false logic, in this case useful only for >>those too simple-minded to see that a person could be "pro-Bush" >>on Iraq, or BMD, but "anti-Bush" on, oh, say economic policy, or >>abortion, or whatever. It's called nuance, and it's the one >>thing that we Canadians are good at. <LOL> >Nah, Paul, that's not called "nuance" The proper term is >incoherence. Not at all the same thing. Jerry: You're right - nuance is the wrong term, although incoherence is also not applicable. In truth, it's called being open-minded, and not being ideologically blinkered. After all, a good idea is a good idea, no matter where it comes from, with the recognition that reasonable people can disagree about whether or not the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: Autopsy Redux - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:06:07 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:03:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux - Kimball >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:34:32 -0800 >Subject: Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>As I've said repeatedly, documentaries cost money to make - at >>least they do when that's what you do for a living, as I do, and >>want to do a good job of it. The first lousy documentary I make >>might be the last one. It's that kind of business. >I believe you but I see nothing that would indicate to me that a >documentary on the AA, using the crash site as the focus, would >be "lousy" and I wouldn't suggest it if I thought you'd be >comprised in any way. How could it hurt to take a look. Ed: I never said an AA documentary would, necessarily, be lousy. The point I was trying to make is that those things cost money. I wish I could fly on down to New Mexico (a state I've grown to love over the past five years) to take a look, but one has to prioritise, and I've prioritised other things. As I said, if someone else does make an AA documentary that proves Stan, me and a whole lot of other people wrong, I'll be the first guy to say, "yup, I was wrong. Good for Ed et al." >>As well, I can only do so much - all documentary makers have to >>pick their projects carefully. At the moment I'm in pre- >>production for a film about animal mutilations in western >>Canada. We have other UFO-related (and non UFO-related) projects >>in development. There are any number of other cases of which I >>am aware (and no doubt many of which I am not aware) that we >>haven't even looked at, but that I find more immediately >>compelling than anything to do with the alien autopsy footage. >That's because you haven't studied my arguments or the chain of >evidence I've tried to present. It's an uphill struggle when no >one is paying attention. You and others have simply dismissed >the AA as a hoax. If the footage itself is a hoax, where is the >proof? You and other critics should be able to articulate your >complaints. If the Alien Autopsy a hoax, how was it >accomplished? See, now I tried to play nice, and then this is what I get. Look, I've checked out the website, and the papers, and all else there, and I've seen the AA film, and checked out what others have said about it. Frankly, I suspect that's more than a lot of ufologists have done. I'm just not persuaded by your evidence or arguments. We agree to disagree - at least, I do. The problem here is that, when I don't agree with you, you can't accept any possibility other than, "He hasn't looked at the evidence." >>But that's me. There may be another filmmaker out there who you >>could interest in your project. It just isn't me. >I'm sorry to hear that, but you should at least take a look. I >wouldn't lead you astray. Besides you're the only filmmaker that >I have access to. There are plenty of filmmakers. As much as I'd like to think otherwise, the world of documentaries, even UFO documentaries, does not begin and end with me. Alas. >>A final note. At your website... >>www.thewhyfiles.net/gehrman.htm >>... you write: >>"Our culture's systematic refusal to seriously consider this >>footage raises an urgent question: have we lost the ability to >>objectively examine important, history-altering evidence?'" >>Did it ever occur to you that the majority of the ufological >>community has objectively looked at the available evidence, and >>simply disagrees with you? >My extensive contact with the "ufological community" has taught >me that only a very few folks of any persuasion are aware of >even the basics of the AA, incuding you, and don't intend to >change. See my note above about "agreeing to disagree." >>Then you write: >>"The alien autopsy is a maddening example of how easy it is for >>the government-controlled media to discredit something by hiding >>it in plain sight." >>Sigh. Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- >>controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. I work in the media. >>Neither I, nor anyone else I know, has seen any indication of >>the type of control you claim exists. No-one has ever stood over >>my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt >>that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when >>they made Seeing is Believing. This doesn't mean it couldn't >>happen, but rather that there is no evidence, that I have seen, >>for such a broad, sweeping characterisation of the media, >>mainstream or otherwise. >No I don't expect you'll find agents of the government in the >control room but what I had in mind was far more subtle and >final than that. You seemed to be implying the former, at least to me, and left no indication that the latter was what you were really on about. I still disagree, even with the latter, only because I have no idea what you mean. And no (pre-emptive denial here), I'm not being deliberately obtuse. >>Besides, who is manipulating whom here? As Stan Friedman has >>stated, "Ray Santilli has managed to manipulate ufologists and >>the media, and make a load of money without solid backup for any >>of his stories." >Ray made money; that's why he bought the footage in the first >place. He could have made much more but he hasn't. All I know is >that he has been cooperative with me when he didn't have to be. >He allowed the distribution the AA CD set and has given me and >others helpful information. There is not one scrap of evidence >that Ray is a hoaxer. I never - nor did Stan, to the best of my knowledge - say that Santilli was a hoaxer, so this is a bit of a red herring. >>On this occasion, I couldn't agree with Stan more. >And on this occassion both of you are still wrong. Fair enough (file that under "agreeing to disagree). I understand your frustration, at least in principle. I face the same thing everytime I try to convince a network that I have a great idea, and they tell me - always very politely - to circular file it under "never goin' happen." So, lest I be accused, again (perhaps by the good Dr. Rudiak) of being a "true unbeliever" (sigh...), I wish you the best of luck in your endeavour. If you prove Stan, and I, and so many others, wrong, I'll be the first to issue a public mea culpa, even as I try to explain to my fiance how my "unbelief" let another potential cash cow slip on by, and why we're "vacationing" at home, instead of San Francisco. And, if I manage to make my way to New Mexico this year, either for business (a distinct possibility) or pleasure, I'll set aside a day to wander out to your "crash site" with you and poke around, with as open a mind as I can muster.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:04:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >I guess what's bothered me about your blogs and recent posts is >that you paint with too broad a brush or tend to throw the baby >out with the bathwater. Just because some witnesses are hoaxers >doesn't make them all hoaxers. Just because some documents might >be fake doesn't make them all fake. David: Speaking of broad brushes, and pots calling kettles black, I never said any such thing, nor have I thrown any proverbial babies out with the bathwater. See my blog "Frank Scully's 'Barilko' Moment" wherein I give a thumbs up to the Farmington Armada. >Or if you want to put it in courtroom parlance, just because a >witness for the defense commits perjury on the witness stand >doesn't mean the defendent is necessarily guilty as charged. Or >just because a witness for the prosecution lies doesn't make the >defendent innocent. What needs to be looked at is the _totality_ >of evidence. Couldn't agree more. I have. Alas, it appears that you haven't (including, as I'll show below, the totality of what I actually wrote!). <snip> >Suppose the MJ-12 documents were hoaxed. This doesn't disprove >Roswell. Never said it did, although I do believe that MJ-12 has detracted from the effort to get to the truth about Roswell. >Nor does it discredit all witnesses who have said something >extraordinary happened. Again, never said it did. This is getting monotonous, but, sadly, it does give readers a preview of what is to come. >It also doesn't necessarily discredit that MJ-12 or something exactly like= >it by another name existed. Obviously, although, as there is no evidence of "something exactly like it" existing, to suggest that there is would be nothing more than speculation (note that I did not say "idle" speculation). Would this be a good time to point out the following that David is conveniently omitting the following comment I made in my blog? "None of this means that the United States did not take the subject of flying saucers seriously. It does not mean that there were no top secret programs in place to study the phenomenon. It does not even preclude the possibility of the recovery by the United States military of a crashed alien spacecraft - perhaps even several. It does however, provide logical reasons to doubt that the information as provided by Sarbacher to Smith was genuine." =46rom the get go, I think we can see that David missed my whole point. This kind of critical myopia often happens when one gets one's blinkers attached too tightly. But, I digress... Read on, gentle Listers, and be amazed... >E.g., I don't see how hoaxed MJ-12 papers discredit Wilbert >Smith's documents from 1950 again pointing to a small, >ultrascret group headed by Dr. Vannevar Bush within the Research >and Development Board looking into the modus operandi of the >saucers. Yet that is also your conclusion, according to a recent >blog of yours. Alas, you must not have read my blog very closely, for I never said any such thing, nor made those connections. My writings on Smith were separate from my writings on MJ-12, although there was some incidental overlap. For example, nowhere in "Oh Canada - Wilbert Smith & UFOs" does the term "MJ-12" pop up. >According to you, Wilbert Smith was perceived as a googly-eyed >"UFO believer" by Dr. Robert Sarbacher and deliberately misled >for disinformation purposes. As an ex-lawyer, you say you demand >good evidence that meets at least a legal standard, yet where is >your evidence to support your claim? Never said what you state I said (I would never - ever - use the term "googly-eyed"). I also love the term "ex-lawyer." As it may have been used as a slight, as in to imply that I may not be quite up to snuff, let me just say, for the record, that I am still a member of the Nova Scotia Barristers Society, non-practising status. That makes me, as much as I occasionally like to pretend otherwise, a lawyer. As I worked hard for to earn that distinction, I'm a bit touchy when people suggest otherwise. Besides, being a lawyer is like being an overnighter at the Hotel California - you can check out whenever you want, but you can never leave. >If Smith's documents were introduced in a court of law and you >were put on the witness stand as a rebuttal witness, would your >testimony be accepted into evidence? I think not, since it is >nothing but unsupported conjecture on your part. It doesn't even >rise to the level of hearsay evidence. Now I have to take lessons from David Rudiak (now there's a non- lawyer) about what a court would and would not accept? Watching a bit of Court TV, or the Michael Jackson trial, or Law & Order, does not a lawyer make. This reminds me of an amusing little story. Dal law school invited Michael Moriarty (Ben Stone) to speak at the school once. He showed up "under the weather" (ie. umm... over 0.80, if you know what I mean), and prattled on about the law like he was a lawyer. When he was done embarrassing himself, a student had the guts (thank God) to stand up in the Q & A and say, basically, "Mr. Moriarty, you're NOT a lawyer - you just played one on TV." Sage wisdom... Rather than simply cut and paste the entire Wilbert Smith blog, I suggest anyone who wants to find out what I really said, and how David (for whom, ironically, I had heretofore had a great deal of respect) is distorting what I wrote. You can find it at: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/03/oh-canada-wilbert-smith-ufos.html As for whether I would be an expert witness, I should point out that I never claimed I would be. However, I suggest that a careful read of the blog, and its references to the evidence, indicates that I would indeed be qualified - perhaps more so than those who simply accept that everything about Smith is as we have always been lead to believe it was. Like, apparently & alas, David Rudiak. "Unsupported conjecture?" David, that's just not accurate, and, with respect, it's beneath you. Is the following, as just one example, "unsupported conjecture?" I wrote (as this is a long passage, I have added a "<" in front of the sections I am quoting from my own paper, as opposed to David's post here, which I hope does not confuse anyone): "[Grant] Cameron and others have claimed that Project Magnet was far more than a part-time endeavor by Smith, and implied that [Dr. Omand] Solandt and others were just part of a cover-up, but this assertion is undermined by Smith's own words. In his 1950 memo he suggested that: "... a PROJECT be set up within the frame work of this section to study this problem and that the work be carried on a part time basis until such time as sufficient tangible results can be seen to warrant more definitive action."[emphasis added - PK note: I had emphasized the phrase "part time basis"] Further, the 'problem' that Smith refers to was not flying saucers, per se, but geo-magnetic energy, which Smith theorized was related to flying saucers (hence his intitial interest in Behind the Flying Saucers). This is made clear by the following passage from the memo: "Doctor Solandt agreed that work on geo- magnetic energy should go forward." [emphasis added - PK note: I had emphasised "geo-magnetic energy"] In 1961, SMith re- confirmed the true nature of Project Magnet; in a presentation to the Vancouver Area UFO Club, he stated: "May I point out that the Project Magnet I was associated with, which received much publicity, was not an official Government project. It was a project that I talked the Deputy Minister into letting me carry out, making use of the extensive field organization of the Department of Transport. No funds were spent on it and we merely had access to the very large field organization and opened a number of files." [emphasis added - PK note: I emphasized "was not an official government project" and "No funds were spent on it."] That Project Magnet never moved beyond part-time status is understandable, given that the results were less than impressive. In a 1952 draft status report Smith wrote that, "The results to date have hardly been spectacular." Further, he noted that, "The initial group was quite small to start with and was further depleted during the year by two resignations in favour of more lucrative positions elsewhere." This latter comment is particularly revealing: presumably, if Project Magnet had been cutting edge research, people would have been trying to get involved with the project, not leaving it. Dr. Solandt elaborated on the failures of Project Magnet and Wilbert Smith decades later: "The Defence Research Board... gave Smith some facilities on DRB property for his [UFO] radio watch and offered to have some experts repeat his experiments which were the basis of his claim to have found a mechanism for the magnetic propulsion of UFOs. Frank Dawes, head of our telecommunications research Lab and an authority on terrestrial and other magnetism repeated the experiments with Smith and showed that the results obtained by Smith were due to sloppy measurements with uncalibrated equipment. There was nothing in the theory." [emphasis added - PK note: I emphasizes "the results obtained by Smith were due to sloppy measurements with uncalibrated equipment. There was nothing in the theory."] Smith, concluded Solandt, was "not a good scientist." His experiments with geo-magnetic energy, which is what would have been of interest to someone like Dr. Solandt, who was a strong proponent of applied science, came to nothing, and so were of no interest to the Canadian Defence Research Board. Finally, if Project Magnet had really been important, the government would have provided appropriate levels of funding for it. The fact that it did not is further evidence that the Project was not accorded a high level of priority. In fact, Smith, in his memo seeking support for the Project, stated explicitly that it would only cost a few hundred dollars initially, but also that this money would not be new money, but would come from the Department of Transport=E2=80=99s existing appropriation. Without being facetious, this may be the first time in the history of the Canadian government when a civil servant did not ask for new money - no doubt because Smith knew he would not get it." You can disagree with me as to interpretation. Fair enough. But don't say my conclusions are "unsupported conjecture." <snip> >For "evidence," your statement also makes little sense and is >filled with omissions. E.g., Smith's original memo isn't the >only document stating that flying saucers were top secret. So >did an FBI document from Jan. 1949, after the FBI was briefed by >military intelligence on the green fireball and other >unexplained aerial phenomena in New Mexico. None of which, if you actually read my blog, is on point; indeed, it is not even remotely relevant. As Sir Alfred might say, it is positively Kalsskurtzian in its Pelicanism... or something like that. >Another thing you left out was that Sarbacher's interview was >arranged through the Canadian embassy in Washington, involved >the military attache, the Canadian ambassador, the liaison with >the Canadian Defence Research Board, and ultimately the DRB >itself. So if Sarbacher was yanking Smith's "true-believer" >chain, he was also deceiving many in the Canadian government as >well plus wasting Canadian time and money that eventually went >into supporting Smith's research. To what end? Was the United >States afraid of an invasion from Canada, so we had to make them >believe we had highly advanced alien technology in our hands? >Isn't the point of disinformation to fool your enemies, not your >friends? Back to history class for Mr. Rudiak. Not to sound too nationalistic a note (what is it about nationalism being the last refuge of the scoundrel, or some such) but... The United States has a long and less than storied history of yanking (no pun intended) Canada's chain around (and this comes from a guy who genuinely likes and admires the United States). Your comments above betray a fundamental lack of knowledge about the intricacies of your country's relationship with mine, and the tensions that existed, even back in the good old 1950s. Of course, David is being disingenuous here (alas, again). He conveniently omits mention of the following, which addresses his off-hand comments above: "The question then arises - what was the true reason for the disinformation spread by Sarbacher to Smith in 1950? One may reasonably posit a couple of possibilities. The first is the theory that the disinformation was ultimately aimed at the Soviets, designed to convince Stalin that the United States had access to advanced alien technology. If so, it would make sense that Sarbacher would pass along disinformation to Smith, in a seemingly innocuous manner, that the Americans undoubtedly knew would quickly wend its way up to Smith=E2=80=99s superiors - as it did - and from there quite possibly on to the Soviets. Canada would be a logical place to plant this information - a close ally of the United States, so that the Soviets would believe the information had at least the possibility of being genuine, but also a proven center of Soviet espionage, as evidenced by the Gouzenko affair in 1946, where a young Soviet NKVD clerk defected and exposed a large Soviet spy ring in Ottawa, in the process helping to set off the Cold War. As Stanton Friedman is fond of saying, rule number one for security is that "you can=E2=80=99t tell your friends without telling your enemies." In intelligence matters, with disinformation, sometimes this is exactly what you are attempting to accomplish. Perhaps it was even part of an overall campaign to distract both allies and enemies, and maybe even other elements of the United States government, from the truth about flying saucers; maybe even a real crashed saucer retrieval. Or maybe it was for some reason the nature of which we cannot yet surmise." Note that, unlike David, I'm willing to let the facts fall where they may. Even my speculation is grounded in evidence and logic, even as I admit that there may be other possibilities of which I (or we) know nothing. <snip> >Furthermore, those involved in such a deception would have >extended well beyond Sarbacher to Vannevar Bush and the RDB >itself, as follow-up correspondence indicates. David again ignores and misrepresents my thesis, in this case as to why Bush would be nowhere near this subject. >This concerns a magazine article by Donald Keyhoe on Smith's theories >of saucer propulsion which had to be cleared by Bush and the RDB with >other possible censorship from the Canadian government. A red herring. >Documents like that further undercut other dismissive statements >from you that Bush couldn't possibly have headed such a group >because he had supposedly fallen out of favor with Truman, which >amounts to little more than, "I don't believe Bush could have >headed such a group because I don't believe he could have headed >such a group." David, David, David... this is just silly. Is this how far your intellectual rigour has fallen - misquotes, inaccurate (deliberately??) summarisation's? What I wrote, for those with a scorecard at home, was: "The question which naturally follows on from this conclusion is: are there indicators in the information that Sarbacher provided Smith that the information was not genuine? A careful review of the information indicates that there were. The most significant is Sarbacher's claim that a "small group" had been established under the direction of Vannevar Bush to study their "modus operandi." Stanton Friedman, in his book Top Secret / Majic, correctly identifies Bush as a world-renowned research scientist who had been, in essence, the "science czar" during the Second World War under President Roosevelt. Indeed, if such a group had been established during the Roosevelt administration, Bush would have been a likely choice to be part of it. However, given that the flying saucer incidents did not become a serious concern to the United States government until 1947, well into the Truman administration, it is highly unlikely Bush would have played a role in such a group at that time. Bush's role in government was on the wane, and Truman did not consider him a close advisor. There were a number of reasons for this, the first being an inherent distrust of any holdover from the Roosevelt administration who had been close to the President, particularly those, like Bush, who had kept him in the dark about the development of the atomic bomb. For Bush, notes historian Pascal Zachary, Roosevelt's death was a "professional catastrophe" which dealt a "huge blow to his plans for the postwar period" and "reduced his influence on atomic policy." Beyond this, however, was the fundamental difference between the two men's personalities and styles - Truman was a skilled politician, proud of his ordinariness and skeptical of "experts"; Bush could mix it up in the back room if he had to, but he was, at his core, an elitist intellectual. He fit much better with Roosevelt than Truman. Evidence of this diminishment of Bush's role abounds, but it can perhaps best be seen in Truman's rejection of Bush's "Endless Frontier" report in 1945, a major blow to Bush. As Zachary notes, "while not quite a rift, the non-endorsement signaled stormier times to come." The policy differences between the two were profound. Instead of Bush, in 1946 Truman chose John Steelman, a man Bush disliked, as Chairman of the Scientific Research Board, one of the goals of which was to further blunt Bush's influence on civilian science policy. Bush was passed over for the position of the first Secretary of Defense in 1947, which he wanted "in the worst way" and had to settle for the position of Chairman of the newly formed Research and Development Board (RBD), against the better judgment of some of Truman's closest advisors, who were wary of Bush's ambition. Bush hoped that he would still be able to influence policy while with the RBD, but these hopes quickly proved illusory. As Zachary observes, the "RBD post was like a slow-motion train wreck. Bush saw the crash coming but was helpless to stop it." The problem was with the charter of the RBD, which left it without real power. The Board could advise the Secretary of Defence, James Forrestal, on "major policy" , but could not direct or control the internal research and development activities of the various military services, which left it powerless to affect change. This resulted in constant battles between Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which Bush lost time and again. In 1948 he resigned, citing the disregard the Joint Chiefs had for his Board. He wrote to Forrestal, "There is now a general impression that, since the Joint Chiefs can invade the affairs of the Board without notice, the latter is in some manner secondary or subsidiary. I find my ability to serve you in connection with the responsibilities you have placed in my hands seriously impaired." By 1950, Bush was, by his own admission, finished as a force in Washington. Given this reality, there is no reason to believe that Truman would have tapped Bush for any role related to flying saucers. And yet, to those who were not Washington insiders in the late 1940s, unaware of his rapidly diminishing stature within the administration and his battles with the Joint Chiefs (or, one might add, to UFO researchers similarly unaware of these events decades later), Bush would have seemed a logical choice based on their knowledge of his wartime record and influence. Accordingly, his was the perfect name to use in a disinformation campaign - believable to an outsider, but not a name that would in any way compromise security on real secret projects, because Bush by this time was not involved in any such projects. It was a rumour-limiting detail that could be used to control the spread of the disinformation in the event that it went too far." >Further, when Sarbacher was contacted and interviewed 30+ years >later by other people on the List like Stan Friedman and Jerry >Clark, he would have had to continue the "deception" for >unexplainable reasons. A. Those reasons are not "unexplainable"; and B. It never ceases to amaze me how certain ufologists can state, with absolute certainty, that the government has been covering this all up for over fifty years, and then turn around and state, "but, of course, Dr. Sarbacher was not involved in the cover-up; it must have been somebody else." Why wouldn't he continue to lie if he had been part of a disinformation ploy, or a cover-up? The illogic is staggering... But, I stagger on nonetheless..... <snip> >So the MJ-12 papers could be fake, yet a supersecret group just >like MJ-12 headed by Vannevar Bush could have, and according to >Smith's papers, was very real. The MJ-12 papers appeared just >_after_ the Smith documents and Sarbacher. In fact, one of the >more plausible _theories_ behind the MJ-12 papers was that they >were deliberately put out to discredit the recently discovered >Smith documents plus the corroborating testimony of Sarbacher >when he was reinterviewed in the early 1980's. Now who's speculating without any evidence? The above is wishful thinking in it's purest form, even as I admit that, hey, could be (and pink elephants may exist). This also ignores the fact that the Smith documents were not "recently discovered," unless one has a strange definition of "recently" that means "several years later." If so, I suggest you notify Oxford that they need to update their dictionary. >Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. ...More and more >work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >organization?" Who knows? It may even have been MJ-12, a possibility, if you'd really read my writings, that you'd know I have not, entirely, discounted. >Karl Pflock may speak of "the will to be believe." But there is >also the flip coin of that, which is "the will to disbelieve," >cloaked as supposed hard-nosed skepticism. >Yes, we should all be skeptical to some extent. But true >skepticism is not seizing on on one or two questionable bits of >evidence and then using this as a rationale to flippantly >dismiss all other evidence which is not obviously tainted. >That's not skepticism. That's the will to disbelieve in action. David, why you have chosen me to be your whipping boy today is beyond me. Still, when one presents a point of view, a thesis, if you will, that is bound to be controversial, and to ruffle a few feathers, one should expect, indeed, welcome, debate. I know that I do. Alas, what you have provided is not a debate. It is, sadly, one of the worst examples I have seen of intellectual dishonesty from a respected ufologist. It involves: (a) extremely selective quotation; (b) incorrect summarisations of my arguments; (c) mixing and matching different papers (MJ-12 with Smith); (d) ignorance, whether selective or deliberate, it matters not, of the facts that I present to support my position; and, just for good measure, apparently, (e) ad hominem labelling (ex-lawyer? Really. How would you feel if someone called Stan an "ex-physicist"? The same, I suspect, as I did when some have, in the past). You have provided, in reverse, a perfect example of Stan's four rules for debunkers (well known, so I won't repeat them here). I don't mind the debate. I welcome it. I revel in it. This, however, is not a debate. It is an intellectual mugging. Ufology deserves better.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 New Mars Express Photos Rule From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:40:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:40:04 -0500 Subject: New Mars Express Photos Rule From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> To: ufoupdates.nul Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:53:33 EST Subject: New Mars Express Photos Rule Have you all been keeping up on the outstanding photos sent back by the ESA's Mars Express? <http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.htm>http://www.esa.int/S PECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.htm http://www.esa.int/ The HRSC - High Resolution Stereo Camera - sent back pics of the polar regions that are breathtaking to say the least. Any of you experts on this mission? Has there been data returned about the sub-surface scans yet? Best, Greg \_______________________________________________/ UFO UpDates - Toronto - ufoupdates.nul A UFO & Related Phenomena E-Mail List operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp UFO UpDates Archives are available at The Virtually Strange Network: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/ To unsubscribe send a message to this address with 'Unsubscribe' in the Subject: line Sign the International Petition for UFO Information Disclosure http://www.virtuallystrange.net/petition Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' Saturday night at 22:00 Eastern on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB - Toronto http://www.cfrb.com Montreal's NewsTalk Leader CJAD 800 http://www.cjad.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:35:39 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:46:07 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:22:04 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:32:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Nah, Paul, that's not called "nuance" The proper term is >>incoherence. Not at all the same thing. >You're right - nuance is the wrong term, although incoherence >is also not applicable. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. >In truth, it's called being open-minded, and not being >ideologically blinkered. After all, a good idea is a good idea, >no matter where it comes from, with the recognition that >reasonable people can disagree about whether or not the >aforementioned policies are/were good ideas, just as they should >be able to disagree, civilly, about something like Roswell, or >MJ-12, or whatever. I would suggest you address your words not to me but to the following individual, who is urgently in need of them: "I don't do nuance." -- actual words of George W. Bush.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: New Mars Express Photos Rule - Groff From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:25:36 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:14:36 -0500 Subject: Re: New Mars Express Photos Rule - Groff >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:53:33 EST >Subject: New Mars Express Photos Rule >Have you all been keeping up on the outstanding photos sent back >by the ESA's Mars Express? ><http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.htm >http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.htm That link is bad. The correct link needs the 'l' at the end http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.htm>http://www.esa.int/SP ECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMLF6D3M5E_0.html These pictures are spectacular. It seems like there is water everywhere on Mars. This has so many implications. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if it is verified that some form of life still exists on Mars, even if it is microbial. Have you scoped out the "World's Largest Postcard"
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:48:42 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:16:08 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:35:39 -0600 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:22:04 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >I would suggest you address your words not to me but to the >following individual, who is urgently in need of them: >"I don't do nuance." -- actual words of George W. Bush. Jerry: I never said Bush did nuance (although one should always be careful to separate what a politician says for public consumption from what he actually does in private), but rather that someone can agree with some of his policies, but not others, which you good-naturedly (if wrongly, imho) suggested was incoherent. To do otherwise is to get swallowed up by the dogma of party and blind ideology, two things the Founding Fathers (yours, not ours) rightly warned against.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:53:45 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:18:11 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Randle >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:03:42 -0000 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:34:56 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >>>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >One other thing I'd like to know about Lubbock is the nature of >the "very simple and commonplace natural phenomenon" (or words >to this effect) that Ruppelt says the lights were finally >explained as. This is something else about which Ruppelt is coy. >Does anyone know the answer? Good Day, All - A Denver UFO group, when Ruppelt's private papers came on the market, was able to purchase them. They allowed me to look at the papers when I was in Denver for a lecture and one of the questions I had, was, quite naturally, what was Ruppelt's "secret" explanation. According to the notes that Ruppelt kept himself, and, according to an early draft of the book, the answer was "fireflies". Don't
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:23:41 -0500 Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current thread on alt.movies.silent : http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 There are a number of good responses but the consensus is that the scene depicting our glowing, flying object was shot on a sound stage. If this is indeed the case, it would seem that a careless gaffer and not aliens are responsible. One post indicated that the original film is stored at UCLA. If any of our Listers are on the U.S. West Coast, perhaps a visit
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:28:32 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:53:41 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Clark >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:48:42 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:35:39 -0600 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:22:04 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II Paul, >>"I don't do nuance." - actual words of George W. Bush. >I never said Bush did nuance (although one should always be >careful to separate what a politician says for public >consumption from what he actually does in private), In point of fact, the quoted statement was made privately and later reported by a Bush insider. You are probably the only living human who thinks it possible that Bush _does_ "do nuance." Frankly, it would be pretty hard to imagine any less nuanced thinker than Bush, if "thinker" applies here. >but rather >that someone can agree with some of his policies, but not >others, which you good-naturedly (if wrongly, imho) suggested >was incoherent. I stand - firmly - by what I said, for about ten gazillion reasons, but this is not the forum to go into them. >To do otherwise is to get swallowed up by the dogma of party and >blind ideology, two things the Founding Fathers (yours, not >ours) rightly warned against. It seems strange, to put it mildly, to hear a Bush supporter lecture _others_ on "the dogma of party and blind ideology." And don't get me started on the Founding Fathers (on whom, with all due respect, I suspect I know rather more than you do) vs. Bush- era dogma and ideology. I abhor the rightwing regime that (mis)rules America for precisely the same reasons I came to despise the New Left in the America of the late 1960s and early '70s. At least the rigid ideologues of the New Left never got to grab any power to speak of. But as I say, this is not the forum for these matters, and I bow
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Human Body Used For Broadband From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:08:14 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:58:32 -0500 Subject: Human Body Used For Broadband Source: The Taipei Times http://tinyurl.com/64bwz 03-20-05 New technology uses human body for broadband networking By sending data over the surface of the skin, it may soon be possible to trade music files by dancing cheek to cheek, or to swap phone numbers by kissing By Paul Rubens The Guardian - London Sunday, Mar 20, 2005 Page 12 "I recently acquired my own in-body device - a pacemaker - but it takes a special radio frequency connector to interface to it. As more and more implants go into bodies, the need for a good Internet Protocol connection increases." Gordon Bell, a senior researcher at Microsoft's Bay Area Research Center in San Francisco Your body could soon be the backbone of a broadband personal data network linking your mobile phone or MP3 player to a cordless headset, your digital camera to a PC or printer, and all the gadgets you carry around to each other. These personal area networks are already possible using radio- based technologies, such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, or just plain old cables to connect devices. But NTT, the Japanese communications company, has developed a technology called RedTacton, which it claims can send data over the surface of the skin at speeds of up to 2Mbps - equivalent to a fast broadband data connection. Using RedTacton-enabled devices, music from an MP3 player in your pocket would pass through your clothing and shoot over your body to headphones in your ears. Instead of fiddling around with a cable to connect your digital camera to your computer, you could transfer pictures just by touching the PC while the camera is around your neck. And since data can pass from one body to another, you could also exchange electronic business cards by shaking hands, trade music files by dancing cheek to cheek, or swap phone numbers just by kissing. NTT is not the first company to use the human body as a conduit for data: IBM pioneered the field in 1996 with a system that could transfer small amounts of data at very low speeds, and last June, Microsoft was granted a patent for "a method and apparatus for transmitting power and data using the human body." But RedTacton is arguably the first practical system because, unlike IBM's or Microsoft's, it doesn't need transmitters to be in direct contact with the skin - they can be built into gadgets, carried in pockets or bags, and will work within about 20cm of your body. RedTacton doesn't introduce an electric current into the body - instead, it makes use of the minute electric field that occurs naturally on the surface of every human body. A transmitter attached to a device, such as an MP3 player, uses this field to send data by modulating the field minutely in the same way that a radio carrier wave is modulated to carry information. Receiving data is more complicated because the strength of the electric field involved is so low. RedTacton gets around this using a technique called electric field photonics: A laser is passed though an electro-optic crystal, which deflects light differently according to the strength of the field across it. These deflections are measured and converted back into electrical signals to retrieve the transmitted data. An obvious question, however, is why anyone would bother networking though their body when proven radio-based personal area networking technologies, such as Bluetooth, already exist? Tom Zimmerman, the inventor of the original IBM system, says body-based networking is more secure than broadcast systems, such as Bluetooth, which have a range of about 10m. "With Bluetooth, it is difficult to rein in the signal and restrict it to the device you are trying to connect to," says Zimmerman. "You usually want to communicate with one particular thing, but in a busy place there could be hundreds of Bluetooth devices within range." As human beings are ineffective aerials, it is very hard to pick up stray electronic signals radiating from the body, he says. "This is good for security because even if you encrypt data it is still possible that it could be decoded, but if you can't pick it up it can't be cracked." Zimmerman also believes that, unlike infrared or Bluetooth phones and PDAs, which enable people to "beam" electronic business cards across a room without ever formally meeting, body-based networking allows for more natural interchanges of information between humans. "If you are very close or touching someone, you are either in a busy subway train, or you are being intimate with them, or you want to communicate," he says. "I think it is good to be close to someone when you are exchanging information." RedTacton transceivers can be treated as standard network devices, so software running over Ethernet or other TCP/IP protocol-based networks will run unmodified. Gordon Bell, a senior researcher at Microsoft's Bay Area Research Center in San Francisco, says that while Bluetooth or other radio technologies may be perfectly suitable to link gadgets for many personal area networking purposes, there are certain applications for which RedTacton technology would be ideal. "I recently acquired my own in-body device - a pacemaker - but it takes a special radio frequency connector to interface to it. As more and more implants go into bodies, the need for a good Internet Protocol connection increases," he says. In the near future, the most important application for body- based networking may well be for communications within, rather
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Secrecy News -- 03/21/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:35:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:00:23 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/21/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 25 March 21, 2005 ** FORGED INTELLIGENCE CABLE PEGS ARKIN AS IRAQI AGENT ** A FOOTNOTE ON THE HISTORY OF CLASSIFIED INTEL BUDGETS ** NSPD-41 ON MARITIME SECURITY POLICY ** JASON ON BEACHED WHALES ** GOVERNMENT INFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE ** A STEAMING HEAP OF CRS REPORTS FORGED INTELLIGENCE CABLE PEGS ARKIN AS IRAQI AGENT Some unidentified person took the trouble to forge an authentic- looking Defense Intelligence Agency cable that purports to identify author, analyst and gadfly William M. Arkin as a paid Iraqi agent, the Washington Post reported on March 18. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45614-2005Mar17.html "I am extremely concerned that someone familiar with Defense Department classified reporting has forged this document and given it to the press in the hope that it would be reported as genuine," Arkin wrote in a March 17 letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, requesting that the Pentagon undertake an investigation into the matter. Arkin is the author most recently of the book "Code Names" (www.codenames.org), a compilation of data on mostly classified defense and intelligence programs. The bogus cable was provided to Bill Gertz of the Washington Times, a frequent press conduit for classified government documents. Mr. Gertz, who is a professional, was not taken in by the forgery. A copy of Arkin's letter, including the forged cable, may be found here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/03/arkin031705.pdf A FOOTNOTE ON THE HISTORY OF CLASSIFIED INTEL BUDGETS The reason that the Central Intelligence Agency has been unable to locate classified intelligence budget annexes from 1947 through 1970, the Agency now says, is that such classified annexes never existed. In response to a Freedom of Information Act request for historical intelligence budget figures, the Central Intelligence Agency last year told a federal court (1) that "the most definitive source for the total CIA appropriation for any given year is the figure indicated in the classified annex to the intelligence authorization act for that year"; and (2) that "CIA was not able to locate the classified annexes to the intelligence authorization acts for Fiscal Years 1947 to 1970." This alarming admission caught the attention of the National Archives, which asked the CIA to explain whether it had lost or improperly destroyed the budget records (Secrecy News, 12/10/04). In a February 23, 2005 reply, CIA chief information officer Edmund Cohen said the Agency conducted "extensive research" into the matter and found that such classified annexes only began to be produced by congressional authorizers in the 1980s. "It is our understanding that prior to 1979 CIA budget figures were disclosed to CIA from closely held informal Congressional documentation maintained by Congress and not formally disseminated to the Agency," Mr. Cohen wrote. See his letter here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/1947/cia022305.pdf CIA has opposed disclosure of all of its historical budget figures, asserting that their release would jeopardize an intelligence method, namely the clandestine funding of the Agency. However, FAS showed that the 1965 CIA budget -- $550 million -- was already in the public domain. Contrary to the CIA claim, which was accepted by a federal judge, it is not possible to deduce or infer from this figure the precise budgetary pathways by means of which this amount was transferred to the Agency in 1964. NSPD-41 ON MARITIME SECURITY POLICY National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD) 41 "establishes U.S. policy, guidelines, and implementation actions to enhance U.S. national security and homeland security by protecting U.S. maritime interests." The new maritime security policy directive was first reported by Mick Andersen of Port Security News in January. A copy of the text was obtained by Jason Sherman of InsideDefense.com, who reported on it last week. NSPD-41, which is also designated Homeland Security Presidential Directive 13, may be found here: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd41.pdf JASON ON BEACHED WHALES The ultra-low profile JASON scientific advisory group last year investigated a series of "whale-beaching events" that have been linked to underwater sonar exercises conducted by the U.S. Navy. "The initial goal of the study was to use the current level of understanding of these events to recommend modifications of the sonar waveform as a mitigation strategy. As we learned about the subject, however, it became clear to us that this is at present an impossible task; we just do not know enough about the damage mechanism and the chain of causation for an engineering solution to the problem." A copy of the June 2004 JASON study, entitled "Active Sonar Waveform," is here (2.1 MB PDF file): http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/sonar.pdf The unclassified introduction to a 1999 JASON study on "Primary Performance Margins" (referring to the "primary" fission device that is used to initiate thermonuclear explosives) also recently found its way into the public domain here: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/perfmarg.pdf GOVERNMENT INFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE The government's failure to properly archive significant digital records is now damaging the public record, argue three librarians in a forthcoming journal article. The Government Printing Office's refusal to formally deposit digital records in official libraries "has resulted in drastically limiting the amount of important government information available in depository collections across the country," write James A. Jacobs, James R. Jacobs, and Shinjoung Yeo in the May 2005 Journal of Academic Librarianship. "We have seen repeated examples of the loss of information (by removal from government web servers) that would not have been lost if it had been deposited with [federal depository] libraries. The losses we face include the innocuous and trivial as well as the political and controversial." "This has become such a problem that organizations and individuals are starting to create their own collections of government information," they observe, citing TheMemoryHole.org, the FAS Secrecy Project, and others. See "Government Information in the Digital Age: The Once and Future Federal Depository Library Program" by James A. Jacobs, James R. Jacobs, and Shinjoung Yeo here: http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/jj/fdlp/ A STEAMING HEAP OF CRS REPORTS The Congressional Research Service does not permit direct online public access to its publications. Following are some recent CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News. "European Union's Arms Control Regime and Arms Exports to China: Background and Legal Analysis," March 1, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32785.pdf "DOD's National Security Personnel System: Provisions of Law and Implementation Plans," updated March 11, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31954.pdf "Creating a National Framework for Cybersecurity: An Analysis of Issues and Options," February 22, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32777.pdf "Freedom of Information Act Amendments: 109th Congress," February 25, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RL32780.pdf "Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Programs: Issues for Congress," updated February 22, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL32508.pdf "U.N. Convention Against Torture (CAT): Overview and Application to Interrogation Techniques," updated February 10, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32438.pdf "Polygraph Use by the Department of Energy: Issues for Congress," updated February 3, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL31988.pdf "USA Patriot Act Sunset: Provisions That Expire on December 31, 2005," updated January 27, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL32186.pdf "USA PATRIOT Act Sunset: A Sketch," updated January 27, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RS21704.pdf "North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program," updated January 27, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/IB91141.pdf "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: Selected Legislation from the 108th Congress," updated January 11, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL32608.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 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:57:40 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:02:33 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >thread on alt.movies.silent : >http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 >There are a number of good responses but the consensus is that >the scene depicting our glowing, flying object was shot on a >sound stage. If this is indeed the case, it would seem that a >careless gaffer and not aliens are responsible. >One post indicated that the original film is stored at UCLA. If >any of our Listers are on the U.S. West Coast, perhaps a visit >to the University's Film Archives might be an interesting way to >spend a day. >Joe Harvat Joe, I'm out here on the West Coast. Lots of old actors and technicians around to shoot the breeze with. Someone should know exactly what was what. I'll see what I can dig up.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:10:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:04:46 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >thread on alt.movies.silent : >http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 >There are a number of good responses but the consensus is that >the scene depicting our glowing, flying object was shot on a >sound stage. If this is indeed the case, it would seem that a >careless gaffer and not aliens are responsible. >One post indicated that the original film is stored at UCLA. If >any of our Listers are on the U.S. West Coast, perhaps a visit >to the University's Film Archives might be an interesting way to >spend a day. Joe (and others): One of our fellows at the RRRGroup, Nathan Gotsch, is a film- maker who resides at USC. I've sent him your suggestion about checking out the UCLA archive. Young Mr. Gotsch is a brilliant fellow, truly, and he might be
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 So The Government Can't Keep Secrets? From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:47:48 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:09:34 -0500 Subject: So The Government Can't Keep Secrets? Source: Slate http://slate.msn.com/id/2114963/ 03-17-05 The Age of Missing Information The Bush administration's campaign against openness. By Steven Aftergood The government does a remarkable job of counting the number of national security secrets it generates each year. Since President George W. Bush entered office, the pace of classification activity has increased by 75 percent, said William Leonard in March 2 congressional testimony. His Information Security Oversight Office oversees the classification system and recorded a rise from 9 million classification actions in fiscal year 2001 to 16 million in fiscal year 2004. Yet an even more aggressive form of government information control has gone unenumerated and often unrecognized in the Bush era, as government agencies have restricted access to unclassified information in libraries, archives, Web sites, and official databases. Once freely available, a growing number of these sources are now barred to the public as "sensitive but unclassified" or "for official use only." Less of a goal- directed policy than a bureaucratic reflex, the widespread clampdown on formerly public information reflects a largely inarticulate concern about "security." It also accords neatly with the Bush administration's preference for unchecked executive authority. No comprehensive catalog of deleted information exists, which is part of the problem. What follows is a representative selection of categories of data that have been withdrawn from public access in the Bush years, with reflections on what they mean. Department of Defense Telephone Directory. The Pentagon phone book is a useful tool for reporters, students of defense policy, or others who might wish to contact the Pentagon or gauge the size and shape of the bureaucracy. Anyone could buy it at the Government Printing Office Bookstore until 2001, when it was marked "for official use only." A GPO Bookstore notice advises that it is no longer for sale to the public. Questioned about the change, a Defense Department official spoke vaguely of "security concerns." This is hard to swallow, since other agencies have failed to follow suit. The Department of Energy, for example, handles information and materials as sensitive as any in government, and it publishes its telephone and e-mail directory on its Web site. Why was this new wall erected between the public and its government? Los Alamos Technical Report Library. In 2002, the Los Alamos National Laboratory removed from public access its unclassified technical report library, which contained thousands of unclassified Los Alamos technical reports written over a half century. Many are highly specialized studies, comprehensible only to experts. In some cases, although unclassified, they bear directly and uncomfortably on the technologies of nuclear weapons production. But most of them are fundamental studies of materials science, metallurgy, physics, and engineering pursued by the lab over decades. While a selective re-evaluation and withdrawal of individual reports might have been warranted on nonproliferation grounds, Los Alamos elected to remove them all. "The resource you are requesting is not offered to the public," says a Web notice. An index of many of the withdrawn reports, and some of the reports themselves, are available from the Federation of American Scientists. Historical Records at the National Archives. Worried that sensitive information may have been improperly declassified in the late 1990s, government agencies took to scrubbing public records at the National Archives and elsewhere, pulling untold thousands of public records for "review" and possible reclassification. Many 30- or 50-year-old archival collections are a shadow of what they were just a few years ago. On a recent visit to the National Archives, American University historian Anna Nelson recalled, "I found four boxes of Nixon documents full of nothing but withdrawal cards," signifying records that had been removed. In another collection of Johnson records concerning the 1965 intervention in the Dominican Republic, "I found a box of 55 withdrawal cards." Not all archive withdrawals are unwarranted. For instance, documents containing classified nuclear-weapons design information were discovered in otherwise declassified records collections, as this recent DOE report on inadvertent disclosures indicates. But the scope of current withdrawals goes beyond what's necessary and poses arbitrary obstacles to historical research. "Orbital Elements" and Launch Dates. The U.S. Air Force records the orbits of Earth satellites in its "orbital elements" database. For nearly 20 years, it has made the database available to the public through NASA. But beginning at the end of this month, it will be subject to new government restrictions on distribution, including restrictions on any analysis of the underlying data. "This is a crisis," wrote David Finkleman in a letter to Space News earlier this year with pardonable hyperbole. The new policy, he explained, "could ... impair international efforts to mitigate space debris and prohibit all who use DoD space surveillance data in their research from discussing or publishing their work without the approval of the Office of the Secretary of Defense." And for what? The current policy "has operated for decades without ever compromising national security." Most recently, the tide of space-related secrecy has even swept over the launch schedule for unclassified Air Force missions. As reported by Janene Scully in the Santa Maria Times on March 13, "Vandenberg's unclassified schedule Web site has evolved from giving detailed information such as launch dates and liftoff times to more recently revealing only the month for a mission. Now even that is gone." The Military Retreat from the Web. Beginning in 2001, the U.S. Army began moving online content from public Web sites to a password-protected portal called Army Knowledge Online. Untold thousands of documents, from policy directives and regulations to newsletters to after-action reports and all kinds of other records-all unclassified-disappeared from public view. Since there is no reliable inventory of what's been removed, the loss to democratic oversight of defense policy is incalculable. Last year, the Air Force followed the Army lead, disabling numerous formerly public Air Force Web sites and moving data to a restricted portal. A U.S. Air Force official presented the change as a public service to Inside the Air Force. "By removing redundant, confusing, or inappropriate information available to the public, the [Air Force] will deliver a more consistent and coherent message to the public." Energy Department Intelligence Budget. The budget of the tiny Office of Intelligence in the Department of Energy had been unclassified for as long as anyone can remember, and certainly for more than a decade. In fiscal year 2004 it was $39.8 million dollars, about one tenth of a percent of the estimated $40 billion that the U.S. now spends on intelligence. But in 2004, DOE categorized the amount requested and appropriated for its intelligence program as classified information, because its disclosure "could reasonably be expected to cause damage to national security." This is an ironic move, considering that budget information is one of the only two categories of government information to which the public has an explicit constitutional claim (the other is the Journal of Congress). Moreover, the publication of intelligence-agency budgets was one of the 41 recommendations proposed by the 9/11 commission as a means of combating the excessive secrecy that has undermined the performance and the accountability of U.S. intelligence agencies. No official explanation for the change is forthcoming, beyond the national security claim. One department official said that the classification action was taken at the request of the Central Intelligence Agency, which found DOE's unclassified intelligence budget inconsistent with its position that no such budget information should ever be disclosed. Aeronautical Maps and Data. Last November, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency publicly announced its intent to halt distribution of a series of aeronautical maps and other publications that had long been available to the public. The proposal, based partly on security grounds and partly on intellectual property claims, immediately drew respectful protest. Librarians, environmentalists, and others complained to the NGA- a defense agency that is part of the U.S. intelligence community-that these maps and publications are now part of their professional toolkit as well and would be sorely missed. Biologists used them in the mapping of species distribution. Engineering firms used them in construction projects. While too specialized to be missed by the general public, this data contributes to the public well-being. The list of government records removed from public access during the Bush administration goes on and on, and includes environmental data from Environmental Protection Agency reading rooms, various unclassified records on the safety of chemical and nuclear plants, and other infrastructure data. This purge reverses the "openness initiatives" of the previous administration during which government Web sites emerged by the thousands and nearly a billion pages of historically valuable records were declassified. The information blackout may serve the short-term interests of the present administration, which is allergic to criticism or even to probing questions. But it is a disservice to the country. Worst of all, the Bush administration's information policies are conditioning Americans to lower their expectations of government accountability and to doubt their own ability to challenge their political leaders. Information is the oxygen of democracy. Day by day, the Bush administration is cutting off the supply. ---
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & From: Chris Rutkowski <ikswoktur2.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:55:35 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:15:15 -0500 Subject: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Noisy UFO reported over Canada Four separate UFO sightings were reported this past weekend, with a common denominator: the UFO in question made a strange sound as it flew by. The first received was as follows, from Woodstock, Ontario: "Today (March 19) I saw a really strange occurrence, and one of my friends told me to report it. At around eight PM today, I was letting my dog outside when I saw a UFO to my north. It appeared to be at a medium altitude. It looked like it had four lights that made a sort-of diamond shape. Two of the lights across from each other blinked a few different colours, but the other two remained white. "I asked a couple people in my area if they had seen anything, but they hadn't. The characteristic that made me notice the object was it's varying speed. When I first noticed it, the craft looked like it was going fast. It then slowed to a nearly dead-stop, then accelerated again. It did this three times before it faded out of view. "There may or may not have been a noise accompanying the vehicle. I heard a weird, faint sound that sounded like "Looooooo". I don't know if this was the UFO's noise, but I quit hearing the noise shortly after the UFO disappeared from my view." Then the following report was received: "Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 23:59:36. A few hours ago I saw a cluster of colored lights flying across the sky... they were sort of shifting around though, sort of like they would if you were seeing them through heat shimmer. It stopped and hovered for a bit, then it streaked off up and to the west. I don't think anything can go that fast. It was faster than any plane I've ever seen...it was pretty high up too. It made this weird sound as it went across the sky, too. Sort of a "whloooooooo". I didn't think anything of it and I didn't want to sound weird, but then I was talking to my friend Richard and he said he saw it too, so I decided to report it. I mean, I don't know if it's aliens or what, but it was definitely flying, and was an object, and I sure as hell can't identify it." The witness did not provide a location. A third report followed from Cambridge, Ontario: "I feel a tad silly reporting this, but I feel I should. Tonight (March 19) at around 8:30pm I was outside and saw strange lights in the sky. There were four of them, two of them solid white, and two blinking many colours if I remember correctly. They moved as one, hovering in the sky for a few moments, and then they took off at an alarming speed [towards the south]. "I don't believe in UFOs, but I'm almost positive that this was nothing I've ever encountered on Earth. My wife saw it as well, and she doesn't know what to make of it either. To put it quite simply, I'm baffled." Finally, the fourth report came from Rosemere, Quebec, 30 minutes north of Montreal: "At around 8:30 pm EST on Saturday night, while I was outside with my friends, we noticed a peculiar object flying through the sky. It consisted of 4 lights in a circular pattern, 2 of which were completely white lights, and the other which were the same white light but with four other lights that changed colour and rotated around in a circle. Attached is a rough representation of what I saw using MS paint. The UFO proceeded to fly through the sky with immense speed, disappearing from sight within a few seconds. It emitted a bizarre sound that I had never heard before, like a soft voice going "ooooooooooo". Frankly I don't know what to make of it and I thought I'd report it in case someone else saw the same thing." What is most unusual is that there were several witnesses in widely separate locations each reporting a UFO at about the same
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 21 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:33:24 -0000 Fwd Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:17:07 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Shough >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:53:45 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:03:42 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II ><snip> >>One other thing I'd like to know about Lubbock is the nature of >>the "very simple and commonplace natural phenomenon" (or words >>to this effect) that Ruppelt says the lights were finally >>explained as. This is something else about which Ruppelt is coy. >>Does anyone know the answer? >Good Day, All - >A Denver UFO group, when Ruppelt's private papers came on the >market, was able to purchase them. They allowed me to look at >the papers when I was in Denver for a lecture and one of the >questions I had, was, quite naturally, what was Ruppelt's >"secret" explanation. >According to the notes that Ruppelt kept himself, and, according >to an early draft of the book, the answer was "fireflies". Don't >ask me why or how, because I don't know. I suspect his answer >did not deal with the Hart pictures. Thanks Kevin. Well, that puts the cat among pigeons again - or should I say, among the plovers. or the moths, and now the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 2nd Chance To See The Phoenix Lights Documentary From: Dr. Lynne Kitei <drlynne.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:38:17 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:12:17 -0500 Subject: 2nd Chance To See The Phoenix Lights Documentary Due To Popular Demand Harkins Shea 14 Movie Theatre 7354 E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85260 [Scottsdale Rd. and Shea Blvd.] will hold exclusive screenings again on Sunday March 27, 2005 The Phoenix Lights Documentary This groundbreaking Documentary, based on the bestselling book, The Phoenix Lights... A Skeptic's Discovery that We Are Not Alone, stars Arizona's own eyewitnesses, military, former Phoenix Vice Mayor, University based scientists and experts in the field. It is produced by local physician and author, Lynne D. Kitei, M.D. in collaboration with Steve Lantz Productions. "Your documentary is in my opinion brilliant..... It is what the world needs (especially young people). You have woven the evidence, history, personal experiences, and implications beautifully....." U of A Professor, Gary E. Schwartz, Ph.D. "The Phoenix Lights was fascinating to watch and spellbinding from beginning to end... Several people told me between showings that it was the best they ever saw." Frances Barwood, Former Phx. Councilwoman and Vice Mayor "What a Triumph! Your Phoenix Lights documentary provides essential historical documentation and education for generations as we move through these amazing times. I am so grateful for your integrity, compassion and vast knowledge that you share with all of us. You are a vessel of sacred knowledge and light. You are truly a Phoenix Light!" Rebecca Hardcastle, M.D.A., Ordained Minister, Ph.D. Candidate in Divinity Scheduled times for the feature length screenings are 1 p.m., 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Sunday, March 27. For further information and advanced tickets [recommended] contact Harkins Shea 14 Theater at 480-948-6555 or www.harkinstheatres.com and www.movietickets.com
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:00:32 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:15:21 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - This is from our guy Nathan Gotsch, a film-maker in California about the John Wayne/UFO segment in John Ford's movie, Rio Grande: ----- Rio Grande was released in 1950. No Hollywood movie was shot completely on location during those days. (Even now, it is a rare occurrence.) Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt and Touch of Evil are two examples of films shot mostly on location - the giveaway is the re-dubbing of the actor's lines - and they are rare examples. Remember, at this time the audio recording equipment was not even close to what it is today (which is one of the main reasons why it's easier to shoot on location now), so shooting on location meant that you would get dirty, unusable dialog tracks that would have to be replaced in post production. Ford loved shooting in Monument Valley, and so he shot more on location than most of his contemporaries. But when a movie was "shot on location," that didn't mean that every single scene was shot on location. Ford would shoot his exterior scenes, the sweeping vistas, the wading through the river - things without dialog - and then go back to Los Angeles to shoot the rest of the film at the studio (usually 20th Century Fox). All the interior scenes would be shot on a stage, and any exterior scenes that had dialog and could be recreated relatively easily would be shot on a stage as well. This is the category that the alleged UFO scene from Rio Grande falls in. If you look at the scene, the giveaway is the lighting scheme. It's just too bright, too even. When Ford and Co. went to Monument Valley, they set up a huge, military-like camp. They roughed it. Electricity was in short supply - if in supply at all. They couldn't power the big lights that are obviously used in this scene. But even forgetting about the lights, it's clearly a set. It's textbook classical Hollywood - the layers of depth (the clothesline, the fence, the brush, the tree in the back), and the big matte painting behind everything. It's done well, but you can still tell that it's artificial - like a diorama in a museum. People who have seen a lot of old films (and shot on location and on a stage) have a good idea about making the distinction - even with the relatively low quality of the online clip (compared to what you would see on a DVD or a projected print), it was obviously as soon as I started watching that it was on a stage, even before I read the second email you sent suggesting that it was. I know that there are a lot of UFO-philes out there who would like me to be wrong. They can argue all they want that this was shot on location. If they want to know for sure, they might be able to find the call sheet from the day this scene was shot in someone's archives somewhere (if it hasn't been trashed already). That would be irrefutable proof. But you can tell just by looking at the footage. Those who want to believe that it really is a UFO won't be
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:13:07 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:18:51 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >thread on alt.movies.silent : >http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 Well I got a fast and surprising response when I asked a pal who sits on the WGA ( Writer's Guild of America ). He hopped on the phone and got the nitty-gritty. Here's his quoted response: "Quick call to the WGA told me that it was 'principally-shot' on location with no annotation for studio lot use. That probably means that the only non-location shots (if any) might have been done to patch close-ups or to match a voice-over. Hope that helps." That follows other data that says the entire flick was shot on location in Utah. What was also a shocker was that the credits contain Hollywood pros who shined brightly in the special effects and sci-fi field. Too much data to put in this email but at first I thought it was a gag because If I were a skeptibunker I sure would have a big enough case to say it was a prank. Yet all indicators are that it's a location shot. Being the nitpicker that I am though, I'm going to dig more.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:13:56 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:20:54 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:28:32 -0600 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:48:42 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:35:39 -0600 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> Jerry: >>>"I don't do nuance." - actual words of George W. Bush. >>I never said Bush did nuance (although one should always be >>careful to separate what a politician says for public >>consumption from what he actually does in private), >In point of fact, the quoted statement was made privately and >later reported by a Bush insider. You are probably the only >living human who thinks it possible that Bush _does_ "do >nuance." Frankly, it would be pretty hard to imagine any less >nuanced thinker than Bush, if "thinker" applies here. I suspect, given the fact that Bush is still president, and John Kerry is not, that I am not the only person who thinks this possible. Still, who knows? >>but rather >>that someone can agree with some of his policies, but not >>others, which you good-naturedly (if wrongly, imho) suggested >>was incoherent. >I stand - firmly - by what I said, for about ten gazillion >reasons, but this is not the forum to go into them. Fair, and true, enough, if somewhat limited. >>To do otherwise is to get swallowed up by the dogma of party and >>blind ideology, two things the Founding Fathers (yours, not >>ours) rightly warned against. <snip> >It seems strange, to put it mildly, to hear a Bush supporter >lecture _others_ on "the dogma of party and blind ideology." Okay... First, I wasn't lecturing anyone. Second, to characterise me as a "Bush supporter" is simplistic in the extreme, and incorrect. Indeed, my whole point was that you can support him (or anyone) on some issues, and disagree with him (and others) about others. >And don't get me started on the Founding Fathers (on whom, >with all due respect, I suspect I know rather more than you do) vs. >Bush- era dogma and ideology. My intent was never to get into a "who knows more than who" spitting match here. I humbly defer to your infinitely greater wisdom, with the mild caveats, offered with all due respect, that GWB doesn't seem to be the only one who "doesn't do nuance," which was my point in the first place, and that I may know more about the history of your wonderful country than you think I do. >But as I say, this is not the forum for these matters, and I bow >out of further discussion.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Autopsy Redux - Gehrman From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:28:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:26:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux - Gehrman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:06:07 EST >Subject: Re: Autopsy Redux >>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:34:32 -0800 >>Subject: Autopsy Redux [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:25:03 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:00:46 -0800 >>>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II ><snip> >>>As I've said repeatedly, documentaries cost money to make - at >>>least they do when that's what you do for a living, as I do, and >>>want to do a good job of it. The first lousy documentary I make >>>might be the last one. It's that kind of business. >>I believe you but I see nothing that would indicate to me that a >>documentary on the AA, using the crash site as the focus, would >>be "lousy" and I wouldn't suggest it if I thought you'd be >>comprised in any way. How could it hurt to take a look. >Ed: >I never said an AA documentary would, necessarily, be lousy. The >point I was trying to make is that those things cost money. I >wish I could fly on down to New Mexico (a state I've grown to >love over the past five years) to take a look, but one has to >prioritise, and I've prioritised other things. As I said, if >someone else does make an AA documentary that proves Stan, me >and a whole lot of other people wrong, I'll be the first guy to >say, "yup, I was wrong. Good for Ed et al." Hi Paul, Yes I understand all of the above but I don't think we need a documentary to make our case (prove our point). We need a documentary to publicise the case we've already made so that others might factor this information into any conclusions they might draw concerning the nature of the UFO mystery. >>>As well, I can only do so much - all documentary makers have to >>>pick their projects carefully. At the moment I'm in pre- >>>production for a film about animal mutilations in western >>>Canada. We have other UFO-related (and non UFO-related) projects >>>in development. There are any number of other cases of which I >>>am aware (and no doubt many of which I am not aware) that we >>>haven't even looked at, but that I find more immediately >>>compelling than anything to do with the alien autopsy footage. >>That's because you haven't studied my arguments or the chain of >>evidence I've tried to present. It's an uphill struggle when no >>one is paying attention. You and others have simply dismissed >>the AA as a hoax. If the footage itself is a hoax, where is the >>proof? You and other critics should be able to articulate your >>complaints. If the Alien Autopsy a hoax, how was it >>accomplished? >See, now I tried to play nice, and then this is what I get. >Look, I've checked out the website, and the papers, and all else >there, and I've seen the AA film, and checked out what others >have said about it. Frankly, I suspect that's more than a lot of >ufologists have done. Yes that's far more than most. >I'm just not persuaded by your evidence or >arguments. We agree to disagree - at least, I do. The problem >here is that, when I don't agree with you, you can't accept any >possibility other than, "He hasn't looked at the evidence." I've been trying to figure out why others can't see how the evidence for the AA stacks up. It's not complicated. There isn't a hoaxing narrative that I've ever seen and I just don't understand how you couldn't agree with me since you offer no specific explanations or examples of where you disagree. In other words, what bothers you about my evidence. You say you don't agree with me. Please show me where. >>>Then you write: >>>"The alien autopsy is a maddening example of how easy it is for >>>the government-controlled media to discredit something by hiding >>>it in plain sight." >>>Sigh. Whenever I hear or see the phrase "the government- >>>controlled media" I get the heebie jeebies. I work in the media. >>>Neither I, nor anyone else I know, has seen any indication of >>>the type of control you claim exists. No-one has ever stood over >>>my shoulder in the editing room or in the field, just as I doubt >>>that no-one stood over the ABC crew's collective shoulder when >>>they made Seeing is Believing. This doesn't mean it couldn't >>>happen, but rather that there is no evidence, that I have seen, >>>for such a broad, sweeping characterisation of the media, >>>mainstream or otherwise. >>No I don't expect you'll find agents of the government in the >>control room but what I had in mind was far more subtle and >>final than that. >You seemed to be implying the former, at least to me, and left >no indication that the latter was what you were really on about. >I still disagree, even with the latter, only because I have no >idea what you mean. >And no (pre-emptive denial here), I'm not being deliberately >obtuse. Ray showed the footage to members of congress but the government has refused to comment on the AA or make any reference to it at all, not even a denial. Not a single member of the press has ever done a serious article about the AA. I see government interference; I think government agents talked with the various contacts they have in the media and told them "hands off". I don't think you could even get funding if you tried. That's what I mean by "final". No funds, no documentary. But I wanted you to try, anyway. And I realize that my point of view is speculative. >>>Besides, who is manipulating whom here? As Stan Friedman has >>>stated, "Ray Santilli has managed to manipulate ufologists and >>>the media, and make a load of money without solid backup for any >>>of his stories." >>Ray made money; that's why he bought the footage in the first >>place. He could have made much more but he hasn't. All I know is >>that he has been cooperative with me when he didn't have to be. >>He allowed the distribution the AA CD set and has given me and >>others helpful information. There is not one scrap of evidence >>that Ray is a hoaxer. >I never - nor did Stan, to the best of my knowledge - say that >Santilli was a hoaxer, so this is a bit of a red herring. There's no other explanation. Stan stated that Ray lied to him during their meeting when Stan offered Ray $100,000 for the footage. If the footage is hoaxed, then Ray has to be involved. How could it be any other way? Unless you're implying that the cameraman hoaxed the film, then sold it to Ray for $100,000, and Ray, who made his living buying old footage of famous musicians, somehow believed he had old government film when in fact what he had was created by the cameraman. If cameraman is the hoaxer, he not only created the footage, the creature/dummy and the craft's debris, but also found a large, secluded site in NM that matched his story and happened to be covered with rare cristobalite, in a manner that has never been seen before, anywhere in the world, and with vegetation only burned on one side, etc. I haven't seen any logical hoaxing narrative that would encompass all the myriad details of the AA >>>On this occasion, I couldn't agree with Stan more. >>And on this occassion both of you are still wrong. >Fair enough (file that under "agreeing to disagree). >I understand your frustration, at least in principle. I face the >same thing everytime I try to convince a network that I have a >great idea, and they tell me - always very politely - to >circular file it under "never goin' happen." >So, lest I be accused, again (perhaps by the good Dr. Rudiak) of >being a "true unbeliever" (sigh...), I wish you the best of luck >in your endeavour. If you prove Stan, and I, and so many others, >wrong, I'll be the first to issue a public mea culpa, even as I >try to explain to my fiance how my "unbelief" let another >potential cash cow slip on by, and why we're "vacationing" at >home, instead of San Francisco. >And, if I manage to make my way to New Mexico this year, either >for business (a distinct possibility) or pleasure, I'll set aside >a day to wander out to your "crash site" with you and poke around, >with as open a mind as I can muster.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:39:05 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:31:11 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >thread on alt.movies.silent : >http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 <snip> To the List: On the subject of suspected UFOs appearing in movies, NUFORC received a telephone call several years ago from a serious- sounding individual, who was interested to know if we had ever noticed the UFO in the movie, Jaws. I was skeptical, but the next time the movie played on television, I was surprised to see the object, as described. The scene in question occurs immediately following the monologue by Shaw, regarding his experience aboard the USS Indianapolis in July/August 1945. The three suddenly become aware of something tugging at the boat, and all of them rush out onto deck, looking astern. Seconds later, in a scene with Scheider on camera, one can see a bright light streak across the screen, from right to left (I believe). The object appears to be below the cloud level, and seconds later, there is another similar object that can be seen. Given that the first object appears to be below cloud level, it seems unlikely that it is a meteor. The sonic report from a meteor at that altitude, and traveling fast enough to incandesce brightly, would have been noticable, at the very least, and it probably would have generated a deafening sonic report. One has to wonder whether directors put these events in their films to determine whether people like us are paying attention. Given Spielberg's alleged interest in UFOs, perhaps this might
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:45:24 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:33:35 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Sparks >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:18:26 -0500 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:34:56 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:21:10 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II. <snip> >>>I've always been under the impression that Ruppelt was referring >>>to the FBI here. They were tasked with assisting investigations >>>from September 1947. <snip> >>But, to my knowledge, the FBI never engaged in coordinated UFO >>investigation nor was their a continuous relationship with the >>Air Force. <snip> Sorry but this was the AF Office of Special Investigations that assisted Project SIGN as is painfully obvious from reading the actual SIGN case files - AFOSI investigative reports are all over and everywhere in the files. To miss this obvious fact is just incredible. >>Ruppelt was obviously referring to some other organization, and >>also daring not to utter its name. There were also at least two >>other coy references to very secret parallel investigations, >>where again Ruppelt dared not say who. One concerned the 1951 >>Lubbock Lights (Chapter 8, next to last page): >>"The only other people outside of Project Blue book who have >>studied the complete case of the Lubbock Lights were a group >>who, due to their associations with the government, had complete >>access to our files. And these people were not pulp writers or >>wide-eyed fanatics, they were scientists--rocket experts, >>nuclear physicists, and intelligence experts. They had banded >t>ogether to study our UFO reports because they were convinced >>hat some of the UFO's that were being reported were >i>nterplanetary spaceships..." >This might have been the Battelle Memorial Institute or it might >have been Republic (?) Aircraft. CIA also a possibility but not >as likely. Sorry this is 100% conclusively the CIA Office of Scientific Intelligence team that visited Ruppelt and Blue Book (and Battelle staff present at Wright-Pat) on Dec 12, 1952, consisting of supersecret OSI director Chadwell, OSI Operations Staff officer Fred Durant, and OSI permanent consultant H. P. Robertson, and who reviewed the Lubbock Lights case file, and who were pro-ETH at that time. Chadwell and his deputy director Ralph Clark both told me that they and OSI had concluded that UFO's were ET in late 1952, but temporarily, until the Robertson Panel "overturned" their ET conclusion. The "rocket expert" was Durant, President of the American Rocket Society. The "nuclear physicist" was Robertson. The "intelligence expert" (a real tipoff, how many times did Ruppelt ever refer to anyone like that?) was Chadwell. It was Chadwell who spoke out about possible ET propulsion systems, and Ruppelt in his private notes mistakenly thought Chadwell was an "aerodynamicist" because of those propulsion system remarks. >>The other was at the beginning of Chapter 12 on the July, 1952 >>Washington D.C. sightings: >>"A few days prior to the incident _a scientist, from an agency >>that I can't name_, and I were talking about the build-up of >>reports along the east coast of the United States. We talked for >>about two hours, and I was ready to leave when he said that he >>had one last comment to make - a prediction. From his study of >>the UFO reports that he was getting from Air Force Headquarters, >>and from discussions with his colleagues, he said that he >>thought that we were sitting right on top of a big keg full of >>loaded flying saucers. 'Within the next few days,' he told me, >>and I remember that he punctuated his slow, deliberate remarks >>by hitting the desk with his fist, 'they're going to blow up and >>you're going to have the granddaddy of all UFO sightings. The >>sighting will occur in Washington or New York,"' he predicted, >>'probably Washington.' The trend in the UFO reports that this >>scientist based his prediction on hadn't gone unnoticed. We on >>Project Blue Book had seen it, and so had the people in the >>Pentagon; we all had talked about it." >My guess: Dr. Stephen Possony... who used the existence of >flying saucer reports as a justification for traveling around
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: So The Government Can't Keep Secrets? - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:10:52 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:35:51 -0500 Subject: Re: So The Government Can't Keep Secrets? - Sparks >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:47:48 -0600 >Subject: So The Government Can't Keep Secrets? >Source: Slate http://slate.msn.com/id/2114963/ >03-17-05 >The Age of Missing Information >The Bush administration's campaign against openness. >By Steven Aftergood <snip> >Department of Defense Telephone Directory. >Los Alamos Technical Report Library. >Historical Records at the National Archives. >"Orbital Elements" and Launch Dates. >The Military Retreat from the Web. >Energy Department Intelligence Budget. >Aeronautical Maps and Data. <snip> Lest any of the conspiracy theorists misunderstand, this has nothing to do with the US Government keeping UFO top secrets. These are low-level secrets which is a category being greatly expanded under the guise of "war against terrorism," and in reality just another in a big bag of tricks by bureaucrats to keep the "pesky public" out of their hair and so they don't have
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:53:33 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:37:49 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Warren >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:58:59 EST >Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:05:41 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:44 EST >>>Subject: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' ><snip> >>>Like Dracula, no matter how many times one drives a stake >>>through the Aztec case, it seems to rise again a few years later >>>to run amok amongst ufology. >>Interesting analogy... like Dracula, one has to "drive the >>stake" through his heart to kill it, and that hasn't happened >>with Aztec; in fact, quite the opposite. Greetings Paul, Sorry for my slow response... duties call. >Frank: >To extend the analogy even further, I would suggest that, yes >indeed, the stake has been driven - repeatedly - into the Aztec >"vampire" by a host of ufological Van Helsings, but each time >some well-meaning person wanders along and pulls it out without >realising what they're doing. >As a result, the monster wanders around for a bit, killing some >innocents (ie. the reputations of a few UFO researchers), before >another group of ufological Van Helsings wanders in and stakes >it again. >Maybe we should remember to cut off its head this time! Bring the stakes <sharpening the canines>, bring the machete and give it your best shot. Curious to know who's reputations have been hurt by investigating Aztec-you've produced a documentary about it; has it caused you any "ill effects?" >>>Over the past few years, as most of you know, Scott Ramsey and >>>others have been researching the case yet again. Scott's >>>research is given the documentary treatment in my film "Aztec >>>1948". He published a short article about his work in the August >>>2004 MUFON Journal, and is working on a book. You can also check >>>out Frank Warren's blog at: >>>www.frankwarren.blogspot.com >>Scott has been researching/investigating the Aztec case for "15 >>years"; He has traveled to 28 states, spent hundreds of hours in >>various archives, interviewed over 60 credible witnesses tied to >>the event; he has incurred over $200,000 dollars in expenditures >>during this ongoing investigation. >Yes, no question Scott has done a lot of work. He's a good guy, >and I have a great deal of respect for his tenacity. But... >where are the 60 credible witnesses, remembering that the term >witness should be reserved for someone who actually saw >something? Ken Farley and Doug Nolan are the two, to my >knowledge, that have been made public so far. I do not totally >discount their stories, although there are plausible >explanations for them. I will cede the fact that the number of witnesses are not "all direct eye witnesses," and Scott has wisely not made "all the names public; however, if you read Scott's article you'll notice much more then two witnesses. Please cite a "plausible explanation" of what witnesses described as a "large disc shaped craft" that crash landed in New Mexico in 1948, along with a military retrieval and cover- up. (Please don't say "weather balloon"). >Scott also talks about over a thousand pages of documents. I've >seen a lot of them - I have yet to see any that are truly >relevant to Aztec, or prove that it was anything other than a >con. I'll reserve comment as I don't know what you've seen. ><snip> >>>My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: >>>www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com ><snip> >>This is an all too familiar path you're on Paul; if I may, I >>would suggest taking Scully, Newton and Gebauer out of the >>picture for the moment - look at the other 60 direct and >>indirect witnesses that have validated the Aztec Incident. >To discount Scully, Newton and Gebauer is to make the fatal >error of pulling the stake from the corpse. Aztec researchers >make it over and over again. There would be no Aztec story >without Scully, Newton and Gebauer. Therefore, the investigation >hinges upon their credibility. Scott first heard about Aztec during a business trip to the area from locals that were going hunting; that story didn't originate from Frank Scully. The stumbling block, or more accurately, Paul, "your stumbling block, as I see it" is your fixation on Scully, Newton and Gebauer, and while we're at it, J.P. Cahn. There are "independent witnesses" who don't know each other who have described the same chain of events, people, craft etc., and they had nothing to do with S, N & G. As I mentioned earlier, try to omit Scully, Newton and Gebauer, doing that will also take Cahn out of the picture, and focus on the "eyewitnesses not connected" to those men. Some of Scott's witnesses have asked that their names be kept confidential, and I know he's been advised not to divulge to many names as to not corrupt his investigation. >>Surely, you don't think they were all part of some grandiose >>con-game while fighting the precipitates of old age?! >No, although one should never discount the possibility that >people are either pulling your leg, or telling you what you want >to hear, or simply agreeing with leading questions... I give Scott more credit then that as a researcher/investigator, and the variety of independent witnesses who've retold the same account gives credence to the event. >Until some solid evidence can be brought forward that indicates >Aztec was anything other than a hoax, a couple of "eyewitnesses" >are not enough to counterbalance the clear evidence that it was >all a con. I had assumed that you were more informed of Scott's research, particularly since you produced a documentary on the event. Might I suggest rereading his article, and sending him a query; he might not divulge all the names, but certainly can give many accounts; of course, I would imagine "to you" these would be "nameless informants" and might even add to the "hoax conspiracy theory"; however, I urge you to keep an "open mind" and give it a shot-you might be surprised! >I'd love to see a detailed response to my critiques of various >critical elements of the Aztec case. So far, nothing. Aside from the "all to familiar" digs on S, N & G, what critiques do you have? >And there's the fundamental problem with the Aztec proponents - >like Mina, they believe there is good in Dracula, despite all >the evidence to the contrary, and even though everyone else can >see him for what he is - a monster. >Best regards, >Paul Kimball >www.redstarfilm.com >www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com In the end Paul there is only the data-it is neither good nor bad, it just is.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:10:29 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:41:35 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Kimball >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >Karl Pflock may speak of "the will to be believe." But there is >also the flip coin of that, which is "the will to disbelieve," >cloaked as supposed hard-nosed skepticism. >Yes, we should all be skeptical to some extent. But true >skepticism is not seizing on on one or two questionable bits of >evidence and then using this as a rationale to flippantly >dismiss all other evidence which is not obviously tainted. >That's not skepticism. That's the will to disbelieve in action. Just for the record, here's the text of another blog David conveniently forgot to mention, even as he chastised me for my "will to disbelieve". Alas, I am not quite the "disbeliever" that I have been made out to be..... "UFOs & The Red Sox Moment The year 1967, as Dick Hall has noted, is often overlooked by ufology, which, at times, seems to be obsessed with 1947, and Roswell. Yet it was one of the busiest years in terms of sightings, and held out great hope - with the Condon committee in the middle of their investigation of the phenomenon - that the mystery of the UFO phenomenon might be getting closer to being solved. See: http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/78hall-wave67.htm Alas, it was not to be. The Condon Report was a monumental disappointment, and the 1967 sightings are little discussed by mainstream ufology. Coincidentally, and with a very valuable lesson for ufology, 1967 held out such promise in a far more important area of human affairs that was also left unfulfilled. The Boston Red Sox went on a magical run that seemed destined to lead, at long last, to a World Series championship. Carl Yastrzemski won the Triple Crown (the last player to do so), and ensured his mythic status among Red Sox true believers (a group to which I happily belong) by almost single-handedly leading the Sox to the American League championship. And then it all fell apart in game 7 of the World Series, against the Cardinals. Once more, for Red Sox fans, the rug had been pulled out from under their feet. The Curse of the Bambino lived on, and there was no joy in Beantown. Not too long afterwards, the Condon Report pulled the rug out from under the feet of ufologists. There was no joy for James MacDonald, or Allen Hynek, or the younger versions of Stan Friedman and Dick Hall. MacDonald and Hynek are long gone now; Hall and Friedman are now into their 70s, and are the elder statesmen amongst ufologists. And still there are no answers - only more questions. Worse still, we now have Exopolitics, the ufological equivalent of rampant expansion. For a brief while, like the Florida Marlins, or (ugh) the Toronto Blue Jays, they have held the upper hand. But let the long-time suffering of Red Sox fans be a lesson - good things happen to those who stay faithful to the old school, and who have the patience to wait. Sure, there were the crushing defeats of 1975, and 1978 (damn you, Bucky Dent), and 1986, the first Red Sox disaster that I can remember in full, excrutiating detail. But then... 2004. The Impossible Dream had come true. Not only did the Red Sox win the World Series, but they beat the Yankees and the Cardinals to do it. My eyes water up, just a bit, thinking about the comeback against New York, and then the moment of that final out in the sweep of the Cardinals, and what it meant, not only to me, and the fans, and the current Red Sox players, but to former Red Sox players like Jim Rice, and Dewey Evans, and Fred Lynn, and my all-time hero, Yaz. Recently, in a private e-mail, Rich Reynolds called me an optimist about the UFO phenomenon and the search for the truth. He's right - I am. I am convinced that the Red Sox Moment will come, someday, for ufology. What it will mean is unknown. Nevertheless, I sincerely hope that Dick Hall and Stan Friedman are still around to see it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Ufological Mess - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:28:17 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:45:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Friedman >From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:20:46 +0000 >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:56:40 -0500 (EST) >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>From: Steven Kaeser >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:08:30 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>From: Kevin Randle >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:23:33 EST >>>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>>From: Stanton Friedman >>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>>Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:15:39 -0400 >>>>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>>Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >>>>>Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >>>>>of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >>>>>Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >>>>>Wisconsin. >>>>I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole >>>>town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person >>>>someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what >>>>is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. >>>LaCrosse, WI was on the postage strip of the package that was >>>received, according to Don (who originally got the SOM-101). Is >>There was also a number for the postage meter. The person >>involved has been identified. My papers also deal with the claims >>by Kevin about Peter Tytell and the use of generic ranks >Why has this person not been identified? Why don't you tell us >who it is? Could it possibly be our favorite muckraking >Wisconsin-based ufologist of years past? And how do we know that >Person A didn't use a postage meter belonging to Person B? Bob Wood paid for the travel of somebody to check it out. If he
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:06:44 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:52:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Chris Rutkowski <ikswoktur2.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:55:35 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >Noisy UFO reported over Canada >Four separate UFO sightings were reported this past weekend, >with a common denominator: the UFO in question made a strange >sound as it flew by. The first received was as follows, from >Woodstock, Ontario: <snip> >Well-witnessed UFO? Hoax? Or something else entirely? Chris, These appear to be hoaxed reports. They are part of the hoax that was scheduled to be carried out on Saturday. See: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/mar/m07-001.shtml
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Alpha Committee? From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:08:42 -0500 Subject: Alpha Committee? I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. Have anyone any information about this?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:10:33 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:39:05 -0800 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >>thread on alt.movies.silent : >>http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 ><snip> >To the List: >On the subject of suspected UFOs appearing in movies, NUFORC >received a telephone call several years ago from a serious- >sounding individual, who was interested to know if we had ever >noticed the UFO in the movie, Jaws. I was skeptical, but the >next time the movie played on television, I was surprised to see >the object, as described. >The scene in question occurs immediately following the monologue >by Shaw, regarding his experience aboard the USS Indianapolis in >July/August 1945. The three suddenly become aware of something >tugging at the boat, and all of them rush out onto deck, looking >astern. Seconds later, in a scene with Scheider on camera, one >can see a bright light streak across the screen, from right to >left (I believe). The object appears to be below the cloud >level, and seconds later, there is another similar object that >can be seen. I've got to go and rent it again to look. I think it might be the director Steven Spielberg's trademark 'shooting star' that appears in just about every movie he's made except 'Shindler's List' - a must see movie if I might add. If legend serves, Spielberg is a Peter Pan fan - hence his directing the movie, Hook - and in each flick he'd add that shooting star.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Alpha Committee? - Baiata From: Maurizio Baiata <maurizio.baiata.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:11:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:20:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Baiata >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >Subject: Alpha Committee? >I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >Have anyone any information about this? >I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >RRRGroup blog. Rich, Reference to a so called "Alphacom Team" can be found in the book, Catchers of Heaven - A Trilogy, by the late Dr. Michael Wolf (Kruvant). Just a guess. As Dr. Wolf stated, it was a secret government group.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:29:11 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:23:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:06:44 -0800 >Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>From: Chris Rutkowski <ikswoktur2.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:55:35 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>Noisy UFO reported over Canada >>Well-witnessed UFO? Hoax? Or something else entirely? >Chris, >These appear to be hoaxed reports. They are part of the hoax >that was scheduled to be carried out on Saturday. >See: >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/mar/m07-001.shtml >NUFORC received approximately 50 similar reports, and _many_ >telephone calls. Hi Peter, See what happens when I don't read all the posts on UpDates? I was immediately suspicious when the cases sounded so similar, especially the odd sound, and my emails to the senders didn't get responses. That's why I raised the possibility of a hoax. It's actually interesting that the "flash crowd" phenomenon took so long to impact the UFO community. This is reminiscent of "Project Alpha" that the debunkers tried in England a decade or two ago. It underlines the importance of not calling a UFO sighting or report "unexplained" until conferring with colleagues and taking some time to investigate. If the debunkers want to claim "victory" in spoofing ufologists with this orchestrated hoax, they're deluding themselves. No serious ufologist that I know accepted the reports as "real" flying saucers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:43 -0600 (CST) Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:25:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:06:44 -0800 >Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec Oh, and Peter, I found this on a bLog: "the pranksters seem to be targeting the National UFO Reporting Center. NUFORC is essentially one guy named Peter Davenport at a desk here in Seattle. I've spoken with him (long, long ago) and he's a really cool guy doing essential work that nobody else
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Alpha Committee? - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:43 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:27:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Warren >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >Subject: Alpha Committee? >I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >Have anyone any information about this? >I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >RRRGroup blog. Good Day Rich,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Ufological Mess - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:05:53 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:29:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Ufological Mess - Hall >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:28:17 -0400 >Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:20:46 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:56:40 -0500 (EST) >>>Subject: Re: Ufological Mess >>>>>>Update On Operation Majestic 12 Documents. and Review of Kevin >>>>>>Randle's CaseMJ-12, which deal at length with these and a number >>>>>>of other objections to the MJ-12 documents. Incidentally Bob >>>>>>Wood has indeed located the source of SOM 1.01... in LaCrosse, >>>>>>Wisconsin. >>>>>I'm not sure what this means. The source is LaCrosse? The whole >>>>>town or has someone in it been identified? Is this person >>>>>someone who would have access to the SOM 1.01? If not, then what >>>>>is the relevance of the city? We still don't have provenance. >>>>LaCrosse, WI was on the postage strip of the package that was >>>>received, according to Don (who originally got the SOM-101). Is >>>There was also a number for the postage meter. The person >>>involved has been identified. My papers also deal with the claims >>>by Kevin about Peter Tytell and the use of generic ranks >>Why has this person not been identified? Why don't you tell us >>who it is? Could it possibly be our favorite muckraking >>Wisconsin-based ufologist of years past? And how do we know that >>Person A didn't use a postage meter belonging to Person B? >Bob Wood paid for the travel of somebody to check it out. If he >wants to give a name, that is his business. And no it wasn't >Todd Zechel if that is the one you were referring to. >Stan Friedman I have since been informed that the owner of the postage meter was no one known to the UFO community; that is, not a known 'ufologist' or figure of any kind familiar to us. However, now I have to wonder what investigation has been done to determine who he is, what profession, what possible motives,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Incorporating Whistleblower Testimony Into UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 05:53:42 -1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:32:47 -0500 Subject: Incorporating Whistleblower Testimony Into UFO Aloha all, I'd like to reflect over some of the posts during the last month or so at UFO UpDates where I've been involved in various discussions with List members over how to appropriately deal with whistleblower testimonies. What I wish to do in this post is to discuss different categories of whistleblowers who have shared information about extraterrestrial vehicles or extraterrestrial beings they have encountered during their military or corporate service in classified military/government projects. Furthermore, I wish to come up with a strategy on how to satisfactorily incorporate whistleblower testimonies into UFO research given the hard evidence only approach that characterizes UFO research. This may well result in simply concluding that exopolitical research is a complement to UFO research where both are very different animals and conflating the two leads to problems in maintaining a dialogue. In that case, we simply learn to live with the differences between exopolitical research and UFO research in terms of differing emphases on hard evidence, research methodologies, data collection and alleged distorting factors by mil-intelligence agencies. Then we can accept that exopolitical analysis will be something that is quite distinct to the analysis of UFO data, yet both deal with the UFO phenomenon which is what leads to UFO and exopolitical research being complementary processes that can lead to a beneficial dialogue between proponents of each. There is strong sentiment among many UFO researchers that "extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence" which accounts for why whistleblowers are put under such critical scrutiny. Put simply, if they don't have hard evidence to substantiate their claims, then their testimonies are either put into the gray basket of inconclusive, or they are dismissed as liars, frauds, etc. On the other hand, there are those researchers who believe that whistleblower testimonies need to be taken seriously despite the lack of hard evidence and even in cases where they suffer from credibility problems or have insufficient documentation to support their credentials. Basically, there is strong difference over what to do with whistleblower testimony that has insufficent hard evidence to support their claims. I've earlier made the case that 'extraordinary claims require an extraordinary investigatory process'. Such a process would be more nuanced in how to deal with a number of issues that are often raised in how to evaluate whistleblower testimonies. The first thing to consider when it comes to whistleblowers whose testimonies involve claims of classified projects focused on the recovery of, or reverse engineering of, extraterrestrial vehicles, and/or official contact/agreements with extraterrestrial beings, they are revealing information of a highly classified nature. By definition a whistleblower is an individual revealing information about 'wrong doing' by a particular government agency or individuals in such an agency. Whistleblower protection statutes give protection in cases when the information disclosed by the whistleblower is unclassified. However, in the case of classified information, the whistleblower is breaking the law by going public. The only way whistleblowers can legally divulge such classified information in the US is to testify before a Congressional Committee or to report to the Inspector-General of the agency in question. However, no Congressional Committee has ever come close to dealing with whistleblower testimonies concerning egregious government practices involving ETVs/EBEs. Also, an in-house process whereby an agency's Inspector General deals with whistleblower testimonies carries significant risk and many whistleblowers choose to forgo this option. Consequently, most whistleblowers go public. Whistleblowers that reveal information about classified programs concerning ETVs/EBEs go public in three main ways. The first are 'lone ranger' whistleblowers that simply declare in public forums what they have seen as a result of their involvement in classified government projects involving ETVs/EBEs. They come forward due to their belief that the general public has a right to know what is happening in such projects despite the high classification. 'Lone ranger' whistleblowers are undoubtedly the most courageous whistleblowers since they come forward with little legal protection and rely sole on the protection given by the public exposure they receive in coming forward. In some cases, such whistleblowers simply want to clear their conscience in their earlier involvement in classified programs. It is the lone ranger whistleblowers who are the most controversial and often have great difficulty in providing documents supporting their credentials and behave in ways that lead to credibility issues. These whistleblowers claim that government agencies play a role in the removal of public documents such as school records, employment history, etc. Also such whistleblowers claim that extensive government intimidation is occurring. This often leads to what appears to be an excessive degree of caution, paranoia, and/or aggressive behavior by such whistleblowers which makes it difficult for researchers investigating lone ranger whistleblowers. Examples of lone ranger whistleblowers include William Cooper, Phil Schneider, Clifford Stone, Bob Lazar and Daniel Burisch. The second category are 'support group' whistleblowers who create networks of former military service personnel or corporate contractors on classified projects who share information about ETVs and EBEs. These 'support groups' are informal yet appear to be very significant in how these personnel coordinate amongst themselves about how much information to release, when and to whom. With the networking and close relationships built in these support groups, there is an effort to balance respect for legitimate national security concerns, while disclosing to the general public the truth about what is occuring in the classified projects concerning ETVs/EBEs. Examples of 'support group' whistleblowers include Robert Dean, John Maynard and Daniel Salter. The third category of whistleblowers are 'public process' whistleblowers that come forward in a coordinated public campaign whereby a number of whistleblowers simultaneously reveal their information. The most well known process is the Disclosure Project led by Steven Greer who to date can draw upon a data base of 400 whistleblowers who have agreed to the process adopted by Greer to present whistleblower testimony to the general public through a Congressional Inquiry. The whistleblowers included in the Disclosure Project are representative of a range of whistleblowers whose credibility and credentials meet a minimum threshold set of standards maintained by Greer. This is quite helpful in providing a pool of whistleblower data that has been screened by a competent UFO researcher which other researchers can use for exopolitical analysis. Examples of public process whistleblowers include Dan Morris, Don Phillips and Bill Uhouse. Due to the very real possibility that some if not all whistleblower claims concerning government intimidation and document removal are accurate, there is a very real need to include this into the investigative process. Thus a 'normal investigative' process such as occurs in the interviewing of witnesses using a methodology advocated by Allen Hynek in terms of a 'scientific investigation' of UFO sightings, is inappropriate when it comes to whistleblowers. Put simply, a whistleblower is not like the witness of a UFO sighting and an entirely different investigatory process is needed. Similarly, legal/judicial procedures that involve detailed cross examining or questioning of whistleblowers as would occur in a typical legal/judicial case is similarly inappropriate given the lack of legal and physical protection enjoyed by such whistleblowers. A whistleblower is often put in the position of a witness in a typical legal/judicial case that is expected to respond to all questions put to them in order to have their testimony considered credible. However, given the lack of legal/physical protection of such whistleblowers, this is not realistic since whistleblowers may put themselves at further risk by answering all questions. Once again, an entirely different investigatory process is needed. A more nuanced or flexible methodology is needed that factors in some of the constraints that lone ranger whistleblowers suffer from. In terms of interviewing whistleblowers, training is required for investigators along the lines of a more ethical and sensitive approach to these whistleblowers. Aggressive questioning or detailed background scrutiny may be inappropriate for such whistleblowers that may have numerous constraints upon them in terms of what they can truthfully divulge without comprising their physical safety and financial security. A criticism for any public process initiated for whistleblowers is that the biases of the researcher may influence the threshold criteria used to include whistleblower testimony. This may lead to the unnecessary exclusion of some whistleblowers on the basis of 'paranoid beliefs' concerning negative extraterrestrial activities and official complicity in these. While such beliefs are typically considered to symptomatic of paranoia, there is a strong pool of data supporting the validity of such beliefs and whistleblowers should not be excluded. Again, there is a need for flexibility and sensitivity in coming up with the threshold criteria for adopting whistleblower testimonies, and also a need to exclude researcher biases in terms of what data will be included or not. The question that now arises is what to do with the different categories of whistleblower testimonies and the growing pool of data that hitherto remains to be analysed by traditional UFO researcher who are dissuaded from doing so due to the lack of hard evidence? I understand that there will be great resistance to modifying the investigative procedures used to assess whistleblower testimonies by members of this forum. Some may argue that it is appropriate to resist the modification of the criteria in order to maintain the scientific rigor of UFO research. Others will claim that the opposite is true in that the kind of constraints under which whistleblowers operate under require a modification of the investigative process in order to maintain scientific rigor. Science requires developing an appropriate investigatory process for both physical phenomena and humans operating in social environments. Ultimately, whistleblowers are humans in a particular political and social context, and not physical objects operating under laws of physical science. As humans, whistleblowers have a great number of social and political constraints that influence how and what they can reveal in their testimonies. This requires a flexible, nuanced and sensitive investigatory process and appropriate questioning procedures for UFO researchers who question whistleblowers and draw conclusions based on their responses. While there is certainly merit to the idea that hard evidence is important for UFO research, this should not be used as a reason to systematically exclude whistleblower testimonies concerning ETVs/EBEs. Finding a means of satisfactorily incorporating whistleblower testimonies into UFO research is a challenge given the debate over the role hard evidence plays in corroborating whistleblower testimonies. Despite the difficulty of this challenge, it's important to work with whistleblower testimonies so I'm proposing along the lines of what Bruce Maccabee earlier suggested that we simply go ahead with exopolitical analysis of whistleblower testimonies while acknowledging that this for the time being is something different to what happens in UFO research generally. With such a solution those interested in exopolitical analysis of whistleblower testimonies can offer their insights without having to constantly defend themselves against criticisms that they are damaging the credibility of UFO research as a scientific endeavor. Exopolitical research and analysis is a new field that deserves to have a voice in UFO research despite the very different methodologies they respectively use.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 22 Re: Alpha Committee? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:37:49 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:43:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Reynolds >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:43 -0800 >Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>Subject: Alpha Committee? >>I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >>ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >>Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >>Have anyone any information about this? >>I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >>RRRGroup blog. >Is there a reference to a time-frame? Frank: The material which makes the reference is dated 1978 but the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:49:48 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:35:14 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:00:32 -0500 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >This is from our guy Nathan Gotsch, a film-maker in California >about the John Wayne/UFO segment in John Ford's movie, Rio >Grande: >----- >Rio Grande was released in 1950. No Hollywood movie was shot >completely on location during those days. (Even now, it is a >rare occurrence.) Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt and Touch of >Evil are two examples of films shot mostly on location - the >giveaway is the re-dubbing of the actor's lines - and they are >rare examples. Remember, at this time the audio recording >equipment was not even close to what it is today (which is one >of the main reasons why it's easier to shoot on location now), >so shooting on location meant that you would get dirty, unusable >dialog tracks that would have to be replaced in post production. <snip> At the very outset I offered [and was ignored] that this was a studio shot with previously shot B-roll of the mountains [a camera locked off and shooting the vista in real time over a period of minutes-and perhaps a whole reel] being back projected on a screen behind the set. If there was anything accidentally captured on film, it was while the B-roll was being shot. Back-projected scenes, using a large translucent screen behind the set with the image projected on it from behind, were used often during the making of movies back and not to be confused with matting shots when blue and green screening became more prevalent. If you saw Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn in Rome, you were most likely seeing the results of the B-roll crew in Rome while Hepburn and Grant were sweating under the lights in Hollywood or Ealing Studios in England. This process was used during car scenes and airplane-in-flight scenes - the reason why the plane was usually jumping around the sky-the camera ship was doing the jumping - and during chase scenes involving cowboys and indians with the covered wagon being shaken by the crews on the set during the actor's close-ups. The uses or this type of effect was endless. So if there was some sort of UFO in the B-roll that master footage is probably lost and you only see the 2nd or 3rd generation of the original B-roll being reshot on the "new" master final scene with the actors in the foreground set. BUT the master B-roll negative footage might have survived for some years to be used as stock footage [waste not, want not] in other
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:42:00 -0500 Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs Now this is the kind of story I like: http://tinyurl.com/4no2z It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot answering a reader's question about UFOs. She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. Frank, up front and friendly. Worth a look!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:06:05 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:44:52 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:39:05 -0800 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 09:01:18 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>FYI - the John Wayne Rio Grande UFO is the subject of a current >>thread on alt.movies.silent : >>http://tinyurl.com/6uvv5 ><snip> >To the List: >On the subject of suspected UFOs appearing in movies, NUFORC >received a telephone call several years ago from a serious- >sounding individual, who was interested to know if we had ever >noticed the UFO in the movie, Jaws. I was skeptical, but the >next time the movie played on television, I was surprised to see >the object, as described. <snip> >One has to wonder whether directors put these events in their >films to determine whether people like us are paying attention. >Given Spielberg's alleged interest in UFOs, perhaps this might >be his individual 'mark', somewhat similar to Hitchcock's >traditional discrete, cameo appearances in many of his works. Hi Peter, Spielberg might have caught a couple of meteors on film during this wide shot in Jaws or it was recreated in post, but it shows up in other films of his as well, most predominantly in Close Encounters of the Third Kind. It could be that the first meteors [JAWS] were real and he was taken by the look of the meteors crossing the sky and created this type of effect in CE3K for its effect on the audience who would have been kept wondering in the movie whether these were supposed to be meteors or were they seeing some UFO zipping across the sky, in the context of the story. Additionally he used the star formation effect as well, with the Big Dipper-for example-suddenly becoming active and dispersing across the sky. But I'm betting that Spielberg added the meteoric effect to the film in Jaws.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Alpha Committee? - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:48:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Friedman >From: Maurizio Baiata <maurizio.baiata.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:11:38 +0100 >Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>Subject: Alpha Committee? >>I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >>ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >>Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >>Have anyone any information about this? >>I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >>RRRGroup blog. >Reference to a so called "Alphacom Team" can be found in the >book, Catchers of Heaven - A Trilogy, by the late Dr. Michael Wolf >(Kruvant). Just a guess. As Dr. Wolf stated, it was a secret >government group. Michael Wolf Kruvant never worked for the government, was not a scientist, was never in the military, was not head of a big research institute in Connecticut, was not an advisor to President Clinton, was not a pilot, was never married, did not have a son... despite a host of false claims. He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good imagination. I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Alpha Committee? - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:47:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:51:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Ledger >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:37:49 -0500 >Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:43 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>>Subject: Alpha Committee? <snip> I've always wondered why if the military or government wanted to create a group to work in secracy why they would give them such arresting titles as that stated above or Majestic-12 or Project Twinkle for example? I'm sure there are other project names that come to mind. But I wonder if Rich isn't being a bit coy by mentioning the Alpha Committee in light of James Randi's hoax under the name of the Alpha Project?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:24:21 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:56:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:29:11 -0600 (CST) >Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:06:44 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <ikswoktur2.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:55:35 -0800 (PST) >>>Subject: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>>Noisy UFO reported over Canada >>>Well-witnessed UFO? Hoax? Or something else entirely? >>These appear to be hoaxed reports. They are part of the hoax >>that was scheduled to be carried out on Saturday. >>See: >>http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/mar/m07-001.shtml >>NUFORC received approximately 50 similar reports, and _many_ >>telephone calls. >See what happens when I don't read all the posts on UpDates? >I was immediately suspicious when the cases sounded so similar, >especially the odd sound, and my emails to the senders didn't >get responses. That's why I raised the possibility of a hoax. >It's actually interesting that the "flash crowd" phenomenon took >so long to impact the UFO community. This is reminiscent of >"Project Alpha" that the debunkers tried in England a decade or >two ago. It underlines the importance of not calling a UFO >sighting or report "unexplained" until conferring with >colleagues and taking some time to investigate. >If the debunkers want to claim "victory" in spoofing ufologists >with this orchestrated hoax, they're deluding themselves. No >serious ufologist that I know accepted the reports as "real" >flying saucers. >An analogy would be a schoolboy's prank of calling a tobacconist >and asking "Do you have Prince Albert in a can?" Even if the >shopkeeper answered 'Yes', it doesn't prove his profession is >foolish, just that pranksters can be annoying and can interfere >with more serious concerns. Chris, Keeping up with all the UFO Updates would be a challenge for an already busy person..... The first reports on Saturday caught me by surprise, too, since they are all somewhat similar - precisely the type of similarity that a ufologist watches for, of course - so it is no surprise that the reports would capture attention, I believe. Fortunately, the perpetrators were not smart enough to skew their reports enough to make them believable. Most 'crooks' are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:24:38 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:59:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Chris Rutkowski <rutkows.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:29:11 -0600 (CST) >Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:06:44 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>>From: Chris Rutkowski <ikswoktur2.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:55:35 -0800 (PST) >>>Subject: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec >>>Noisy UFO reported over Canada >>>Well-witnessed UFO? Hoax? Or something else entirely? >>These appear to be hoaxed reports. They are part of the hoax >>that was scheduled to be carried out on Saturday. >See what happens when I don't read all the posts on UpDates? >I was immediately suspicious when the cases sounded so similar, >especially the odd sound, and my emails to the senders didn't >get responses. That's why I raised the possibility of a hoax. Dear Chris, Peter: You both hit the nail right on the head! That's why my philosophy, when investigating every UFO sighting report, has always been: first, remember that any time a sighting report comes in it's better than ninety percent likely to be a mundane, then pound it, pound it, pound it flat with the ufological hammer to beat any IFO out of it. It it's still puzzling after this then let colleagues who are experts in their fields beat it some more. Only when they're done with it and it's still a mystery should it be called a UFO - but even then recognize that there's still some distortion in the report! But I've been taking some serious flack over this approach lately! Hmmmmmm!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 12 From: John Hayes <John.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:08:28 +0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:22:10 -0500 Subject: UFO ROUNDUP, Volume 10 Number 12 Posted on behalf of Joseph Trainor. <Masinaigan.nul> ========================== UFO ROUNDUP Volume 10, Number 12 March 23, 2005 Editor: Joseph Trainor E-mail: Masinaigan.nul Website: http://www.ufoinfo.com/roundup/ ROOFTOP MADMAN TURNS UP IN PARANA, ARGENTINA The weird entity known as El Loco de los Techos (Spanish for Rooftop Madman--J.T.) appeared this week in the city of Parana, the capital of Entre Rios province in northern Argentina. "For the past several days, sightings have occurred in several barrios (neighborhoods) of Parana," a large city 40 kilometers (25 miles) east of Santa Fe, where the Rooftop Madman was first reported. "The prowler is said to be two meters (6 feet, 6 inches) tall, very thin, with a gaunt face and two red eyes which send piercing glances at its victims. He also has large ears, dresses completely in black and wears a cape. He has been seen daily cavorting on the rooftops of homes and office buildings in Parana." On Friday, March 18, 2005, the cable TV network El Once aired interviews with eyewitnesses on their popular show "Nunca Es Tarde." The host compared their testimony with that of the Santa Fe eyewitnesses, concluding that "there are strong similarities between the incidents in Santa Fe and Parana." A Parana witness, "Dora Ruiz said, 'At first we thought it was a black shadow. But then we looked again and realized that it was a real person.'" "Elsa Ingaramo said, 'When we saw him for the first time, it was a person dressed all in black, leaping from rooftop to rooftop. He was also seen in trees. Several persons who searched the roof found signs of his passage. People in our barrio have asked for more police protection.'" (Muchas gracias a Mariela de Tomaso para estas noticias.) GREEN FIREBALL SOARS OVER PACIFIC NORTHWEST "Dozens of residents in the (USA's) Pacific Northwest reported seeing a bright streak of light as it flashed across the sky, startling witnesses from Oregon to the Seattle (Washington state) area, according to officials." "Scientists said the falling object was probably a meteor and that it likely disintegrated before any fragment fell into the Pacific Ocean." "'It was like a big ball of fire,' said Summer Jensen, who was in her living room Saturday night," March 12, 2005, "when she saw a streak of light flash above her Portland, Oregon home." "Michael O'Connor, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional office in Renton, Wash. (population 50,052) said as he fielded numerous calls from people reporting that they had seen a bright streak cross the sky shortly before 8 p.m." "He said police, pilots and some air traffic controllers described it as 'a green ball of fire with a long tail.'" "'It appears to have come down over the ocean,' said Dick Pugh of the Canadian Meteorite Laboratory. He said the object flew over the Pacific Coast, streaking along from south to north." "Jim Todd, planetarium director to the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, said that if the meteor had entered the atmosphere during the day, it may not even have been noticed." "'It creates a bright contrast against the night sky,' Todd said." In Seattle, the fireball was accompanied by a slight earthquake and an equally mysterious power outage. According to researcher Michael Goodspeed, "On the evening of Saturday, March 12 (2005), a fireball was seen in the sky by residents ranging from southern Oregon to Seattle. The time of the sighting was a few minutes before 8 p.m. Pacfic Standard Time. At approximately the same time, a 3.3 magnitude earthquake (on the Richter scale--J.T.) occurred near Olympia, Wash. (population 42,514)," the state capital, which is located 60 miles (100 kilometers) southwest of Seattle. "Just a few minutes later, a large power outage left thousands of Seattle residents without electricity for approximately an hour and a half." On June 3, 2004, a meteor flew over western Washington state, exploding over Puget Sound at precisely 2:40 a.m. Within minutes, an earthquake measuring 1.6 on the Richter scale occurred in the same region. (See The Oregonian for March 13, 2005, "Bright streaking light seen in western sky;" and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer for March 14, 2005, "A meteor, an outage and a quake, all in one night," page 1. Many thanks to Jim Hickman, executive director of Skywatch International, and Michael Goodspeed for these newspaper articles.) UFOs APPEAR IN OTTAWA AND COOKSTOWN, ONTARIO Two UFO sightings were reported in Canada last week. On Saturday, March 12, 2005, at 10:30 p.m., Jeff Forrester reported, "My wife and I had just left a restaurant close to our home" in Ottawa (population 323,340), Canada's capital city. "It is only a 10-minute walk from our house to the restaurant. Halfway home, I saw something fly overhead, coming from behind us and flying towards the west. There were no lights at all on the object." "I immediately pointed directly to the object, which I could barely see myself, and said to my wife, 'Look! What the heck is that!?'" "She unfortunately was not able to see it." "Our neighbourhood is very dark at night, and only the bottom of the object was barely visible to me, illuminated by whatever (street) lights were in the area." "The unusual thing, and what made me do this report, was...absolute silence. No sound whatsoever from the object. Also, not a cloud in the sky that night, plenty of stars. I got thinking maybe it was a spotlight or something. But the more I thought about it, the more sure I was that something was different. Spotlights (like the ones they use for grand openings, etc.--J.F.) would usually only illuminate clouds." "Later I took another look outside and saw nothing. I was completely sober and have good eyesight. On road trips, I am always the first to see deer or other wildlife in the field." "The (object's) colour was light grey. The shape was like that of a jet with similar wing shapes, however less defined and with smoother lines. This was because there was no long nose or tail portions. More like a flying wing. Reminded me of something like a hang glider or a blown-up kite. I would estimate that it was about 20 feet (6 meters) long, taking into account the height (altitude), and was fast." On Thursday, March 17, 2005, just after midnight, eyewitness A.M. was at his home in Cookstown, Ontario, Canada (population 1,027) when he saw "a strange object approach from the northwest." "There was an object in the sky quite near a major set of power lines near my house. The object first appeared to be a bright star, then it seemed to tumble. Soon it was changing colour--red to green to yellow. It darted erratically and moved from west to east slowly." A.M. pointed out that he has seen many UFOs at this particular location, usually between midnight and 3 a.m., "on several different occasions, mostly on non-overcast night, in fact." "On one occasion, I saw green lights back off and move away from the object and then slowly fade out." "When I look with binoculars, there appears to be a black, smoke-like substance around the object when it moves erratically. This object has been seen often. Who can one contact about these sightings?" Cookstown, Ont. is on Provincial Highway 89 about 50 miles (80 kilometers) north of Toronto. (Email Form Reports) OVAL-SHAPED UFO SEEN IN FORT WORTH, TEXAS On Saturday, March 19, 2005, at 8:20 p.m., Bryce Griffith was outdoors in his neighborhood in Fort Worth, Texas (population 534,694) when he noticed "a strange object approaching from the west." "I was walking out to the backyard to feed my dog, and I looked up in the sky," Bryce reported, "I saw an oval-shaped, metallic-colored object, twice the size of a fighter jet. It had lights on four sides. Two on the front and two on the back--they were just white. There were two on the opposite sides that were colored." "The UFO didn't make a sound, even though it was flying low. I'm not sure about the height (altitude-- J.T.) About 300 feet (90 meters). It was going faster than a fighter jet, though not that much faster." (Email Form Report) DAYLIGHT DISC SIGHTED IN LAS CRUCES, NEW MEXICO On Tuesday, March 8, 2005, at 6:55 a.m., eyewitness Jim Blackburn reported, "This morning I stepped out into an almost-dawn about five minutes before 7 o'clock all bright-eyed and bushy-tailed after a good night's sleep, facing a cloudless sky and bright early sunlight" in his hometown of Las Cruces, New Mexico (population 74,267). "I was wearing my prescription sunglasses, which give me 20\40 distance vision. I was facing a bit north of west, probably west-northwest, when my eye was distracted by movement in the sky." "What I saw was a solid object, dark brown, but with a darker ridge on the exterior but definitely not with a smooth surface such as a balloon, moving from right to left, i.e. approximately north to south at a low altitude. It moved smoothly, and I could not associate any sound with its movement--no jet engine sound, no whirring propellors or even flapping wings. It did not seem to be rotating. There were two or three brief flashes of light which I supposed to be (the reflection of) bright sun off glass or some polished surface. I watched as it moved away fairly rapidly--out of my (unaided) sight in less than 60 seconds, I surmise." "Having nothing in the sky by which to judge the object's size, and not being a professional observer or estimator of distance, my guesses as to the object's size and elevation can only be that. For size, I would guess 8 to 15 feet (2.4 to 4.5 meters) in diameter. For distance, I would guess 1,000 feet (300 meters) for horizontal distance and 1,000 feet (300 meters) in elevation." "I proceeded on my morning 'constitutional' walk as usual, with nothing untoward to see and hear. The sun at ground level was very bright. I'm tempted to say 'imperceptible.' I can't believe the object was around and I'm the only one who saw it and is replying. The UFO may have been observed by others, but so far I have not received any reports of a sighting like this." (Email Form Report) LUMINOUS GREEN UFO SEEN IN SOUTH YORKSHIRE On Thursday, March 17, 2005, at 8:35 p.m., Alison Booth reported, "My daughter saw a ball of lights that was spinning eastwards" through the sky of Swallownest, near Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK. "The lights had a green tinge to them," Alison reported, "When I was able to look, I saw a shimmering ball of light that kept moving back and forth. The UFO was like a large ball of lights that was rotating slowly. It did not depart suddenly but rather travelled slowly at the same rate of speed. It must have been high, for my daughter and I could see it from at least a mile away." (Email Form Report) WOMAN SEES A UFO IN PUTNEY, VERMONT On Friday, March 18, 2005, at 7:10 p.m., Jacqueline Brook was outdoors in her hometown of Putney, Vermont (population 1,150). She reported, "I had another great UFO sighting on Friday, March 18. I'm wondering if anyone else saw the same thing. I saw a very bright white light against what I thought (after studying a star chart--J.B.) were the very faint stars of Monoceros to the southeast of the zenith. Orion was half-visible rising above my long east-west roof-line in Putney, Vt. to the southwest. The light was as bright as Venus can be when it's blazing. I puzzled over it, wondering if it could be Jupiter, but it seemed too big and bright." "Then I watched as it suddenly diminished in size and brightness, like a camera shutter closing down to a pinpoint of light. It then proceeded to move across the sky to the south or the southwest. I was headed out to hear a band called The UFOs, and it was quite an incredible synchronicity, as well." Putney is on Route 5 in southern Vermont, approximately 7 miles (11 kilometers) north of Brattleboro. (Email Form Report) BIGFOOT TRACKS SPOTTED IN NORTHERN MINNESOTA Bigfoot tracks were spotted twice in the last month in Cook County and Lake County, Minnesota, on the north shore of Lake Superior. Fortean researcher Jim Richardson reported, "I don't think I'm betraying any confidences by spilling this cryptozoological scoop, so here goes. Three people Allen (Richardson) and I work with were hiking about three miles (5 kilometers) into the woods around Grand Marais, Minnesota (population 1,353)," a fishing port on Lake Superior located about 120 miles (192 kilometers) northeast of Duluth, on Saturday and Sunday, February 12 and 13, 2005. "They were making their way to a cabin out there" in Cook County "and snowshoeing a thin trail through waist- deep snow around 1 to 2 a.m., and even with snowshoes on, they were sinking a foot and a half or so into the snow." "Apparently they came upon some large tracks, with a roughly four or five-foot (1.3 to 1.5-meter) stride, along a trail running perpendicular to theirs. It spooked them all pretty good on account of the great length of stride, which persisted as far up and down the trail as their lights were able to see. The tracks also left no kicked- up snow like snowshoes leave, implying great height in whoever made the tracks." "One of the people assured me that the tracks were bipedal and not moose tracks or anything. He was also the one who inspected it closest of the three. He said he could discern, in his close examination, that it was a large footprint." "This one person is really pretty certain that nothing identifiable made those tracks and leans towards a Bigfoot explanation. The other two guys are hedging their bets a little more, but not much...They're being good skeptics, though, and saying the tracks are 'unidentified.' What can be said with some certainty is the experience spooked them all." On Friday, March 4, 2005, another witness "went out to check on the yurt I built in Lake County, Minn., near Isabella, between the (Lake Superior) North Shore and Ely, to see if it had collapsed under the weight of the snow. It was still standing... three winters now...those Mongolians are so smart!" "Sans snowshoes, my dog and I walked through knee-to- hip-deep snow for about a half-mile (0.8 kilometers). Even as a tall person my tracks were a foot apart or less. Yes, it was exhausting. My dog loved it." "Along with many obvious deer trails and smaller tracks in the snow, I came upon a single set of very large, wide and elongated human-like tracks. Each step was 4 to 5 feet apart and each imprint went to the bottom of the snowpack, unlike snowshoes. My first thought was maybe a moose was 'hopping' through the woods, but upon inspection they were clearly single-footed tracks. Not even the tallest person in the world wearing snowshoes could stride like that through such deep snow." The witness returned to the scene on Wednesday, March 9, 2005, informing the Richardsons that the prints "were 16 to 20 inches (40 to 50 centimeters) deep last Friday and had been recently filled with fresh snow. Investigations into moose and bear tracks in deep powdery snow suggested the deep tracks were neither. That leaves snowshoes, which generally go one-third to the bottom of the powdery snowpack. The strides were 4 to 6 feet." Richardson added, "The Grand Marais witnesses all say the tracks in the photos are the same as what they saw." But Fortean researcher and cryptozoologist Loren Coleman, who studied the Isabella track photos, reportedly told the Richardsons that "it's hard to tell anything about the prints without foot casts," adding, "'Too much melting to say much, it appears...These could be anything.'" According to the Bigfoot Reseach Organization, in 1985, witnesses saw a Bigfoot estimated to be 9 feet (2.7 meters) tall in the woods just north of Silver Bay, Minn. (population 2,068). Isabella is on Minnesota Highway 1 about 30 miles (50 kilometers) north of Silver Bay. (See the Reader Weekly of Duluth, Minn. for March 17, 2005, "Local Bigfoot flap," page 30.) CASSINI FINDS AN ATMOSPHERE ON SATURN'S MOON ENCELADUS "The Cassini spacecraft has revealed that Saturn's icy moon Enceladus has a significant atmosphere." "The spacecraft identified the moon's secret during recent flybys, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory" in Pasadena, California "announced Wednesday," March 16, 2005. "Scientists are using Cassini's magnetometer instrument for their studies, and the process may be volcanism, geysers or gasses escaping from the surface or the interior" of Enceladus. Enceladus is a small, ice-covered moon orbiting 147,948 miles (238,100 kilometers) away from Saturn. The moon takes 1.37 Earth days to perform a complete rotation. Enceladus was discovered by the astronomer William Herschel in 1789. He named the moon after a giant in Greek mythology who rebelled against the gods of Olympus, was struck down and then buried on Mount Etna in Sicily. "When Cassini did its first encounter with Enceladus on (Thursday) February 17 (2005) at an altitude of 725 miles (1,167 kilometers), its magnetometer detected a striking signature in the (moon's) magnetic field." On Wednesday, March 9, 2005, "Cassini approached to within 310 miles (500 kilometers) of Enceladus's surface and obtained additional evidence." "The observation showed a bending of the magnetic field, with the magnetospheric plasma being slowed and deflected by the moon. In addition, magnetic field oscillations were observed. These were caused when electrically-charged (or ionized--J.T.) molecules interact with the magnetic field by spiraling around the field line. The interaction creates characteristic oscillations in the magnetic field at frequencies that can be used to identify the molecule. The observations from the Enceladus flyby are believed to be ionized water vapor." "'These new results from Cassini may be the first evidence of gases originating either from the surface or possibly from the interior of Enceladus,' said Dr. Michele Dougherty, principal investigator for the Cassini magnetometer and a professor at Imperial College in London." "In 1981, NASA's Voyager spacecraft flew by Enceladus at a distance of 56,000 miles (90,000 kilometers) without detecting an atmosphere. It's possible detection was beyond Voyager's capabilities, or something may have changed since the (1981) flyby." "This is the first time since Cassini arrived in orbit around Saturn that an atmosphere had been detected around a moon of Saturn, other than on the largest moon, Titan. Enceladus is a relatively small moon. The amount of gravity it exerts is not enough to hold an atmosphere very long. Therefore, at Enceladus, a steady continuous process is required to replenish the atmosphere." "The need for such a strong cause leads scientists to consider eruptions, such as volcanoes or geysers. If such eruptions are present, Enceladus would be like two other moons, Io at Jupiter and Triton at Neptune." "'Enceladus could be Saturn's benign counterpart to Jupiter's dramatic Io,' said Dr. Fritz Neubauer, co- investigator of Cassini's magnetometer and a professor at the University of Cologne in Germany." "Since the Voyager flyby, scientists have speculated that the moon is geologically active and the source of Saturn's icy E ring. Enceladus is the most reflective object in the solar system, reflecting about 90 percent of the sunlight that hits it. If Enceladus does have ice volcanoes, the high reflectivity of the moon's surface might result from continuous deposit of icy particles originating from the volcanoes." "Enceladus's diameter is about 310 miles (500 kilometers), which would fit in the state of Arizona. Despite its small size, Enceladus exhibits one of the most interesting surface of all the icy satellites" in Earth's solar system. (See Space.com for March 16, 2005, "Cassini finds an atmosphere on Saturn's moon Enceladus." READER FEEDBACK: ONLY ONE UFO OVER UK Concerning the story in UFO Roundup, volume 10, number 9 for March 2, 2005, "Daylight discs trigger major flap in UK," (page 1), Martyn J. Rothery writes, "I've plotted the course taken by the mystery object and its trajectory describes a rather wide curve. I would assess that the object was one and the same and that it first entered the scene in Somerset (Bridgwater), then it passed over Wales (Llanidloes) then Cheshire (Sandbach) and lastly it was seen over Yorkshire (Halifax)." "The colour match in all the incidents was very much the same: silvery/greeny/ blue, and its speed was described as that of a 'rocket.' One witness calculated it to be about 6,500 miles per hour. Furthermore, in all cases, no sound was heard, and no sonic booms were recorded." "Assuming that the speed is correct, the object would have travelled the distance between Bridgwater and Halifax in about two minutes." "Accepting this, generally speaking, time pieces are incorrect by as much as two to three minutes. I would further surmise that the times given by the witnesses should be treated with circumspect." "I would therefore say it was not an 'invasion' by many UFOs but rather a fast overflight by one. But whether it was one of ours--or one of theirs--is open to speculation." From the UFO Files... 1951: THE ROOFTOP MADMAN OF BALTIMORE Right now, the hottest story in Forteana is El Loco de los Techos (Spanish for Rooftop Madman--J.T.), the weird black-clad entity that's been terrorizing the barrio (neighborhood) of San Lorenzo in Santa Fe, Argentina for the past couple of weeks. But this was not the Madman's first appearance. No, that took place fifty-four years ago, in the city of Baltimore, Maryland. Indeed, the eyewitness descriptions of the Baltimore "phantom" match precisely the descriptions coming out of Argentina. Without further ado, here he is--Baltimore's Rooftop Madman. "A dying moon sank slowly behind St. Stanislas' Cemetery and the squat, flat-roofed houses of O'Donnell Heights." "Its pale light revealed not only the closely spaced rows of low-rent dwellings but a whole community on the verge of hysteria." "It was just after midnight yesterday morning (Tuesday, July 24, 1951) and throughout the project people waited--in nervous groups on porches and behind drawn shades--for the phantom to strike." "At the rear of the house in the 1200 block of Gusryan Street, a man kept watch on a garbage can with a .12-gauge shotgun. In an upstairs bedroom on Carbore Way, Hazel Jenkins, still suffering from the time when the black-robed prowler grabbed her last week, tried to sleep." "In other houses, residents stretched out on the floor, too frightened to go upstairs. Police squad cars prowled the streets. Somewhere in the darkness, a dog barked, a baby cried." "Every now and then, a face appeared at a door or window to inquire fearfully of bands of patrolling youths: 'Has anybody seen him yet?'" "At the home of Mrs. Agnes Martin, 1211 Gusryan Street, 30 or 40 people, varying in ages from 5 to 50 years old, had gathered on the back stoop to wait for daylight." "'For the last two or three weeks since that man began appearing around here,' said Mrs. Martin, 'people are afraid to go to bed.'" "'I haven't closed my eyes since Thursday night (July 19, 1951),' declared Mrs. Melvin Hensler, a neighbor of Mrs. Martin's. Since her home was broken into last Friday (July 20, 1951), Mrs. Hensler has been staying with her sister-in-law." "'My husband is beginning to talk in his sleep for the first time in his life,' she said, 'He and the children are all sleeping on the floor at his brother's house right now. He says his eyeballs ache from staying awake so long.'" "William Buskirk, 20, of 6452 Fait Avenue, described his encounter with the phantom, which took place around 1 a.m. last Thursday." "'I was walking along the 1100 block Travers Way with several of my buddies when I saw him on a roof,' related Mr. Buskirk, 'He was a tall, thin man dressed all in black. It kind of looked like he had a cape around him. He jumped off the roof and we chased him down into the graveyard.'" "'He lives in that graveyard,' remarked Jack Cromwell of 1203 Joplin Street." "'Yeah,' put in Lynn Griffith of 1217 Wellsbach Way, 'One night I heard someone playing the organ in that chapel up there. It was about one o'clock.'" "'He sure is an athlete,' said one of the other boys, 'You should have seen him go over that fence--just like a cat.' (The fence bordering the graveyard in question is about 6 feet tall with barbed wire along the top.)" "Most of the people who have seen the phantom describe the ease with which he leaps on and off roofs--a feat made all the more remarkable by the fact that the roofs of most houses in O'Donnell Heights are a minimum of 20 feet (6 meters) from the ground." "'But that's nothing,' announced Regina Martin, 'We kids used to jump off these roofs all the time.'" "Mary Ellen Bennett, 14, of 1415 Gregor Way, offered to demonstrate. 'You'd better not,' advised a friend, 'Mr. Pettinger might think you're the phantom and shoot you.' Charles Pettinger of 3848 Quarry Avenue was the man with the shotgun." "Myrtle Ellen, who in the company of Hazel Jenkins, has seen the monster twice at close quarters, described him as a man with a horrible face, dressed in black. 'He walks like a drape (Baltimore slang for a Zoot-Suiter of the 1940s--J.T.) and runs like a horse,' she added." "'I saw him two nights after he tried to break into our house,' remarked Randolph Jenkins, Hazel's brother, 'He was just beginning to climb up on the roof of the Community Building. We chased him all the way to Graveyard Hill.'" "(The Community Building is the tallest structure in the project and at night is completely empty.)" "Mrs. Hensler said that when she returned to her house on Saturday morning (July 21, 1951) after it had been burglarized the night before, nothing had been taken, but there was a strange 'potato bag lying on the ironing board.' She concluded that the bag must have been left there by the phantom for some devious purpose. 'I've seen him three different times,' asserted Mrs. Hensler, 'One time he looked like he had a hump on his back.'" 'Esther Martin, according to reports, saw the stranger once under an automobile. He was beckoning to her. 'Come here, little girl,' he said." "'I don't know,' remarked Mrs. Ruth Proffitt of 1229 Cavendish Way, 'The other night my son saw him at one place at the same time another person was seeing him somewhere else. He couldn't be both places at once unless he had wings.'" "Two hundred angry, aroused residents of O'Donnell Heights chased the area's phantom prowler around midnight Tuesday (July 24, 1951) but the wraith of the rooftops again eluded them." "He was spotted on the roof of 6200 Plantview Way by the Heights' self-formed 'vigilance committee,' searching for him since he started terrorizing the area several weeks ago." "A loaded .22 caliber automatic pistol was found Wednesday (July 25, 1951) on the phantom's stamping ground and was turned over to police." "An O'Donnell Heights lad, Robert Robertson, picked up the firearm, a Colt target model, in a field of the (housing) development." "He said the gun went off twice as he raised it. He turned it in at the housing project office where it was held for the police." "If the phantom was armed, O'Donnell Heights is now practically an armed camp." "Husbands have mounted night guard duty. Housewives keep weapons in their bedrooms, such as baseball bats, heavy clubs, rolling pins, frying pans and other (kitchen) implements." "Several women and girls have been frightened by the phantom over the past few weeks." "About midnight, he was spotted again, a dark-clad figure against the black sky of the night. An immediate hue and cry drove him fleeing and into escape from his pursuers." "Patrolmen Robert Clarke and Elmer Powell, of Eastern (Baltimore) District police, rushed to the scene in answer to phone calls from terrified residents." "They said they found about 200 persons milling around in the community, hunting for the prowler." "Cruising around the north side of O'Donnell Heights, alongside the old German Cemetery, they found Marvin Finke, 21, U.S. Navy Patuxent River (Maryland) base, walking along the street, wearing dark clothing and carrying a hammer." "Finke told police had had been visiting in the neighborhood and had heard there was a reward for the capture of the phantom, so he was hunting for him." "He received a suspended $5 fine Wednesday morning on a disorderly conduct charge." "Another commotion broke out in the neighborhood about 1:30 a.m. when some of the watchers thought they had seen the phantom again." "Sgt. Emmanuel Sandler and Patrolmen Bernard Baranowski and Elmer Weber sped into action." "Once more, no phantom. But, the policemen reported, they found a crowd estimated at 500, collected around a wall of the old German Cemetery. Sandler said:" "'They told us, 'He's in there,' pointing to the cemetery." "The police searched and found five youths and a fifteen-year-old juvenile hiding behind tombstones. They said they had heard about the phantom and were just looking for excitement." "Five were fined $5 and the juvenile was released in custody of his parents for a hearing." "Sergeant Sandler, expressing the opinion 'publicity about the prowler is drawing prowlers and youngsters from all over town,' added this warning: 'They should stay away. They only aggravate the situation and it is very dangerous for them. Those people out there are angry and really aroused. Somebody is likely to get hurt.'" "Three more teen-agers were arrested on disorderly- conduct charges last night (Wednesday, July 25, 1951) in phantom-ridden O'Donnell Heights where nervous residents claim they see mysterious prowlers with alarming frequency." "Weary, fearful residents of the O'Donnell Heights housing development, whose nights have been given over to watching and waiting since their mysterious 'phantom' made his first appearance about three weeks ago, are hoping that their athletic prowler is caught before someone in the community is seriously hurt." "The harm could come from more than one source, they fear, from the prowler himself or from accidental injury to an innocent resident from the impromptu vigilantes who roam their streets in search of the phantom." But for one incident thus far, the prowler--usually dressed in dark clothing and remarkably agile at travelling across the low, flat roofs of the project--has done little but be seen from afar and attempt to enter homes." "Like many other housewives, fearing for the safety of their children, Mrs. Marle Shifflet spends sleepless nights staring into the blackness from the window of her home in the 6200 block Plantview Way." "She says, 'We all sleep with our windows closed and locked despite the terrible heat. Just the other night the phantom was seen on the roof of a house just four doors from us. We're all scared to death.'" "Some are prepared more sternly. William Lawrence has brought out an old Army rifle and given it to his wife. It will no longer shoot, but Mr. Lawrence hopes that should the prowler approach his home in the 1200 block Travers Way the gun will frighten him away." And so it went for the next two weeks, with repeated sightings of the 'phantom' and repeated searches that came up empty. On Monday, August 6, 1951, the Baltimore Sun reported, "The Phantom of O'Donnell Heights has apparently pulled up stakes and moved away, cloak, dagger, hairy face and all." "'The only commotion we ever have around here now,' Jerome Martin of 1211 Gusryan Street, said last night, 'is just the usual fighting among the neighbors. You might say everything is normal again.'" And that was the last anyone saw of Baltimore's "Phantom of O'Donnell Heights." Until a half-century later--Tuesday, March 1, 2005-- when an identical entity appeared in the barrio Centenario (neighborhood) of Santa Fe, capital of the province of the same name, a large city located 400 kilometers (250 miles) northwest of Buenos Aires, the capital of Argentina. The same entity? Good question! (See the Baltimore Sun for July 25, 1951, "Fear in the Night: Phantom Prowler Terrorizes O'Donnell Heights Residents;" the Baltimore News-Post for July 25, 1951, "Phantom on Prowl, Eludes 200 Vigilantes;" the Baltimore Sun for July 26, 1951, "Three More Arrested in 'Phantom' Zone;" the Baltimore News-Post for July 27, 1951, "Watch and Wait Still on in O'Donnell Heights;" and the Baltimore Sun for August 6, 1951, "Phantom Makes Himself Scarce." For more on the Phantom of O'Donnell Heights, see Fortean Studies, volume 3, edited by Steve Moore, John Brown Publishing, London, 1996, "Spring-Heeled Jack" by Mike Dash, pages 102 to 108.) 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, Saturn--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 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 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: John Ford's Rio Grande - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:16:03 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:25:13 -0500 Subject: Re: John Ford's Rio Grande - Reynolds ----- From: rrrgroup.nul Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 11:22 AM To: arsc.nul Subject: John Ford's Rio Grande Mark: We understand that UCLA holds the film footage of John Ford's Rio Grande in the archive. We're trying to determine if the film was made on location, or on a set, maybe both. How do we go about finding that information? Thanks. Rich Reynolds Director Fort Wayne MediaWatch http://mediawatch.homestead.com --- From: "ARSC" <arsc.nul> To: <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:06:57 -0800 Subject: RE: John Ford's Rio Grande Message-ID: <NDBBKPCMJKHDPCCNGMKKMEAEDFAA.arsc.nul> Dear Rich, Thank you for contacting the UCLA Film and Television Archive. The Internet Movie Database at www.imdb.com lists the following filming locations for Rio Grande (1950): Colorado River, Moab, Utah, USA Ida Gulch, Moab, Utah, USA Mexican Hat, Utah, USA Moab, Utah, USA Monument Valley, Utah, USA Professor Valley, Moab, Utah, USA White's Ranch - Milepost 14 Utah Hwy 128, Moab, Utah, USA Our catalog at: http://cinema.library.ucla.edu lists this additional location: Onion Creek Narrows. The synopsis entry for RIO GRANDE in "Halliwell's Film Guide" (U.S. ed.: 1995; Published/distributed: Harper Collins) mentions "too many studio sets" in their brief description for the film... Hope this information proves a useful starting point. Best,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:31:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:27:18 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Maccabee >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:53:45 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:03:42 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>One other thing I'd like to know about Lubbock is the nature of >>the "very simple and commonplace natural phenomenon" (or words >>to this effect) that Ruppelt says the lights were finally >>explained as. This is something else about which Ruppelt is coy. >>Does anyone know the answer? >A Denver UFO group, when Ruppelt's private papers came on the >market, was able to purchase them. They allowed me to look at >the papers when I was in Denver for a lecture and one of the >questions I had, was, quite naturally, what was Ruppelt's >"secret" explanation. >According to the notes that Ruppelt kept himself, and, according >to an early draft of the book, the answer was "fireflies". Don't >ask me why or how, because I don't know. I suspect his answer >did not deal with the Hart pictures.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Human Body Used For Broadband - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:31:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:29:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Human Body Used For Broadband - Maccabee >From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:08:14 -0800 >Subject: Human Body Used For Broadband >Source: The Taipei Times >http://tinyurl.com/64bwz >03-20-05 >New technology uses human body for broadband networking >By sending data over the surface of the skin, it may soon be >possible to trade music files by dancing cheek to cheek, or to >swap phone numbers by kissing >By Paul Rubens >The Guardian - London >Sunday, Mar 20, 2005 >Page 12 <snip> >"If you are very close or touching someone, you are either in a >busy subway train, or you are being intimate with them, or you >want to communicate," he says. "I think it is good to be close >to someone when you are exchanging information." Law of Unintended Consequences. You are on a subway and a person touches you. You receive a message: "Hi. My name is Joe. Pretend you know who I am. Don't say anything, sut hand me your wallet. This is a stickup.!!!" Of course, no one else would be aware of what is going on unless they, too, were "touched." Imagine in the future in advanced societiesall humans are
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: 2nd Chance To See The Phoenix Lights From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:31:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:31:12 -0500 Subject: Re: 2nd Chance To See The Phoenix Lights >From: Dr. Lynne Kitei <drlynne.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:38:17 -0700 >Subject: 2nd Chance To See The Phoenix Lights Documentary >Due To Popular Demand >Harkins Shea 14 Movie Theatre >7354 E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85260 >[Scottsdale Rd. and Shea Blvd.] >will hold exclusive screenings again >on Sunday March 27, 2005 >The Phoenix Lights Documentary >This groundbreaking Documentary, based on the bestselling book, >The Phoenix Lights... A Skeptic's Discovery that We Are Not >Alone, stars Arizona's own eyewitnesses, military, former >Phoenix Vice Mayor, University based scientists and experts in >the field.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 'Alien Corpse' For Sale From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 23:49:30 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:33:31 -0500 Subject: 'Alien Corpse' For Sale Well, that is what it is suggested to be. See:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:52:01 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:36:14 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:53:33 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:58:59 EST >>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:05:41 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' >>>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:44 EST >>>>Subject: The Aztec Case - Ufology's 'Dracula' ><snip> >>To extend the analogy even further, I would suggest that, yes >>indeed, the stake has been driven - repeatedly - into the Aztec >>"vampire" by a host of ufological Van Helsings, but each time >>some well-meaning person wanders along and pulls it out without >>realising what they're doing. >>As a result, the monster wanders around for a bit, killing some >>innocents (ie. the reputations of a few UFO researchers), before >>another group of ufological Van Helsings wanders in and stakes >>it again. >>Maybe we should remember to cut off its head this time! >Bring the stakes <sharpening the canines>, bring the machete and >give it your best shot. Curious to know who's reputations have >been hurt by investigating Aztec-you've produced a documentary >about it; has it caused you any "ill effects?" No ill effects here, probably because I took a neutral stance at the time. As for those who have suffered, one could start with Frank Scully (but, as that is my "stumbling block" I'll leave him aside), and move straight to William Steinman and Wendelle Stevens, neither of whom, to the best of my knowledge, has any credibility with serious ufologists (anyone out there care to disagree? stand up and be counted). >I will cede the fact that the number of witnesses are not "all >direct eye witnesses," and Scott has wisely not made "all the >names public; however, if you read Scott's article you'll notice >much more then two witnesses. Why is it, whenever I disagree with someone around here (a la the Ed Gehrman line a couple of days ago, or David Rudiak's strafing run on me, or Dr. Salla's silliness about Lazar), it is claimed that my conclusions are either unsupported, or that I have not actually read the material, or done my homework? Sigh... I have Scott's MUFON article in front of me. Scott indeed listed 5 "witnesses". I referred to only two (Farley and Nolan), because those are the only two that I was willing to grant have anything, potentially, to offer, for reasons detailed below (although I ultimately discount their testimony, again for reasons I outline below). If this led to a misunderstanding on your part of my level of knowledge, I'm sorry. I'll try to be as precise as I can in the future. Scott's other three witnesses were: 1. Virgel Riggs - I discount Riggs for the simple reason that he is not a witness. He wasn't at the alleged crash, and never claimed to be. Instead, he offers hearsay testimony about an airman he claims to have know while in the military who told him that he was part of the recovery team at Aztec. Said airman has not been named publicly, nor found by Scott. I met Virgel at Aztec last year - a lovely fellow. I asked him if it was possible the airman was joking. He admitted it was, although I don't think Virgel himself thinks he was. This is not a "witness" by any stretch of the term. His testimony is useless until corroborated. 2. Anonymous - He's anonymous. I know you'll disagree, but for me there's nothing more to be said. His testimony is worthless, because we can't check it out. Until we know who he is, or have some corroborating evidence of what he supposedly said to Scott, it is worse than Bob Lazar, or Wild Bill Cooper. Interestingly, I never did hear from Dr. Salla in response to my post on Cooper a couple of weeks ago, but see he has now popped up again. Say what you will about me - and some of you have lately - but at least I have the guts to lay my position out, and respond to the critics. But I digress... 3. Fred Reed - Now I will grant that Reed is the one of the three that claims to have been an actual witness. He maintained that he was ex-OSS, and then part of the "clean-up team" that was "sent to Aztec". His account, if it is to be believed (and one must ask whether Scott or anyone else has done a thorough background check on Reed) is interesting, but not because it backs up the Aztec crash theory. Reed states that, "In 1948 they were ordered to collect any foreign items they found (presumably parts of a spaceship, if you buy the crash story), [and] bury them eighteen inches deep." Does this make any sense? Would they have not carted it all away, (a) so that no-one would ever find it, and (b) so they could study it? If there was anything alien on that mesa, then I cannot imagine the military / MJ-12 / the Unholy 13 (a shout- out there to Major Randle) being so cavalier / stupid as to just bury it 18 inches down. Good lord - my dog could find that! This account gives "crack team" a whole new meaning, in that they must have been smoking the stuff if this was the best they could do. So, Fred Reed? Worthless. I don't expect you to agree with me, but you asked for my opinion, so there it is. >Please cite a "plausible explanation" of what witnesses >described as a "large disc shaped craft" that crash landed in >New Mexico in 1948, along with a military retrieval and cover- >up. (Please don't say "weather balloon"). I don't think they saw anything at all, so I won't posit that it was a weather balloon. >>Scott also talks about over a thousand pages of documents. I've >>seen a lot of them - I have yet to see any that are truly >>relevant to Aztec, or prove that it was anything other than a >>con. >I'll reserve comment as I don't know what you've seen. Fair enough. Let me say, however, that Scott told me in 2003, and again when I visited him in 2004, that I had access to all the relevant documents, so I presume that he meant the best ones in terms of trying to prove the crashed saucer theory. If he withheld documents that would help prove his case from the guy who, at his and his investors's urging, was making a film about the case, I don't know what to tell you. A note here - never once did Scott interfere in the filmmaking process. He was an interviewee, and facilitated our access to documents and locations (El Vado radar base), nothing more. I had complete editorial control, and I do not mean, in any way, to suggest otherwise. This is why I like Scott so much, even though we've wound up on opposite sides of the Aztec fence. ><snip> >>>>My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: >>>>www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com <snip> >>>This is an all too familiar path you're on Paul; if I may, I >>>would suggest taking Scully, Newton and Gebauer out of the >>>picture for the moment - look at the other 60 direct and >>>indirect witnesses that have validated the Aztec Incident. >>To discount Scully, Newton and Gebauer is to make the fatal >>error of pulling the stake from the corpse. Aztec researchers >>make it over and over again. There would be no Aztec story >>without Scully, Newton and Gebauer. Therefore, the investigation >>hinges upon their credibility. >Scott first heard about Aztec during a business trip to the area >from locals that were going hunting; that story didn't originate >from Frank Scully. The stumbling block, or more accurately, >Paul, "your stumbling block, as I see it" is your fixation on >Scully, Newton and Gebauer, and while we're at it, J.P. Cahn. >There are "independent witnesses" who don't know each other who >have described the same chain of events, people, craft etc., and >they had nothing to do with S, N & G. The above proves nothing, other than, perhaps, that Scott's buddies were pulling his leg which, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, makes as much sense (more, in my opinion) than the crashed flying saucer story. And, again, Scully et al are a stumbling block that the Aztec proponents have not been able to get over (Scott has tried, as anyone who read his article, or saw my film, would know, so this criticism is not directed at him), so they just step around it and pretend it doesn't exist. That's hardly being objective. You keep tossing the term "60 direct and indirect witnesses" around. But where are they? Scott's article laid out five, that I've dealt with (and, in the case of Farley and Nolan, will comment on further below). There are no such things as "direct" and "indirect" witnesses, anyway. There are witnesses, ie. people who saw the event, or participated in some aspect of it afterwards (like a cover-up), and then there are people who are, at best, "hearsay" witnesses. There's a reason that this latter group don't get to testify in very many trials (although there are very specific, and carefully constrained exceptions, to the hearsay rule). As much as I know you don't think we're in a court, I will nevertheless quote from Black's Law Dictionary (6th edition), about witnesses, just so, again, I can be clear here, and avoid all of these misunderstandings I seem to be having as of late: "Witness - In general, one who, being present, personally sees or perceives a thing; a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness. One who testifies to what he has seen, heard, or otherwise observed (note that "heard" refers not to stories told, but to sounds, like "he heard a gun fired at about 11:57 pm")" "Hearsay - A term applied to that species of testimony given by a witness who relates, not what he knows personally, but what others have told him, or what he has heard said by others... The very nature of the evidence shows its weakness, and, as such, hearsay evidence is generally inadmissible unless it falls within one of the many exceptions which provides for admissibility." >As I mentioned earlier, try to omit Scully, Newton and Gebauer, >doing that will also take Cahn out of the picture, and focus on >the "eyewitnesses not connected" to those men. Some of Scott's >witnesses have asked that their names be kept confidential, and >I know he's been advised not to divulge to many names as to not >corrupt his investigation. Frank, it's just a difference between how you and I do things, but until those witnesses are made public, they are worthless. For all it's problems, the one thing you can say about Roswell is that the "witnesses" are not shy. So why so shy about the Aztec witnesses. Truth and secrecy don't mix. (Note - I place "witnesses" in quotations here because some, like Marcel, were witnesses, while most were not, at least not in the proper sense of the term, as outlined above). >>>Surely, you don't think they were all part of some grandiose >>>con-game while fighting the precipitates of old age?! >>No, although one should never discount the possibility that >>people are either pulling your leg, or telling you what you want >>to hear, or simply agreeing with leading questions... >I give Scott more credit then that as a researcher/investigator, >and the variety of independent witnesses who've retold the same >account gives credence to the event. Until we've seen the transcripts of his interviews, which I presume he taped (a must for any oral historian or interviewer), we can't know, can we? Further, Nolan and Farley were both in very bad health, by Scott's own account. Nolan had had six strokes, and Farley was dying of respiratory disease. I'm not going to go into a long discussion here about what things like that can do to your memory, or your competence to offer testimony, other than to: a) quote from Heart and Stroke Foundation's, which states in "Memory Loss After Stroke" that memory loss is a common side effect of strokes, and that one common reaction to having a memory problem is "Confabulation, which means trying to 'cover up' the memory problem. The 'cover up' can take the form of excuses. Or the person may embellish (make up) stories to fill gaps in his / her memories. People who confabulate may not be aware that their stories are not completely true"; and b) sadly relate that my fiance's father had a stroke (only one) in November. It's sent a previously strong and articulate man into a nursing home, where he believes he's still living on the farm, has trouble recognising his own daughter, has trouble remembering the simplest things, and has lost track of time and space (ie. asking where X has wandered off to, when he hasn't seen X in a year). It's sad, but it's real. Nolan had had six; Farley was dying. At best, whatever they said is suspect, and needs corroboration. I won't even begin to go into the possibility that untrained interviewers may taint any conversation with witnesses like these. Again, I know you'll disagree, but there is a methodology for things like this for a reason. There is one final reason I am suspicious of these interviews, but it's personal (nothing to do with Scott!), so I won't go any further, other than to say that Scott wasn't the only person involved in the interview, and I have no faith in the objectivity of that other person (who is, for the record, a thoroughly nice man who definitely qualifies as a "believer"). >>Until some solid evidence can be brought forward that indicates >>Aztec was anything other than a hoax, a couple of "eyewitnesses" >>are not enough to counterbalance the clear evidence that it was >>all a con. <snip> >I had assumed that you were more informed of Scott's research, >particularly since you produced a documentary on the event. >Might I suggest rereading his article, and sending him a query; >he might not divulge all the names, but certainly can give many >accounts; of course, I would imagine "to you" these would be >"nameless informants" and might even add to the "hoax conspiracy >theory"; however, I urge you to keep an "open mind" and give it >a shot-you might be surprised! Frank, if I didn't believe you to be a good guy - sincere in your views, no matter how wrong I am convinced they may be - I would be mildly insulted by the conclusion that, because we disagree, I haven't done my homework, or that I would make a film without doing the research. Hmm... Actually, I do find that last bit insulting, at least the part that impugnes my professional competency as a filmmaker, but I'm learning that, in ufology, that's apparently part of the mix, so I'll move on. >>I'd love to see a detailed response to my critiques of various >>critical elements of the Aztec case. So far, nothing. >Aside from the "all to familiar" digs on S, N & G, what >critiques do you have? Frank, the critiques have been there for all to see - for example, check out my blog on the radar bases, which, apparently, you haven't bothered to read, but which Scott and others have claimed provides proof of a crash at Aztec (see Scott's MUFO paper). And I'm not the one doing my homework?? For those who want to see what I've written, as opposed to what others say I have, or have not, written, I again direct you to my blog at www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com. Don't take my word for it here, or Frank's - look for yourself. >>And there's the fundamental problem with the Aztec proponents - >>like Mina, they believe there is good in Dracula, despite all >>the evidence to the contrary, and even though everyone else can >>see him for what he is - a monster. >In the end Paul there is only the data-it is neither good nor >bad, it just is. Frank, this is just ridiculous (or, as you might say, "nonsensical"). Of course there's good data and bad data. The objective observer is capable of telling the difference - that's why things like rules of evidence, and oral research methodology, come in handy. Of course, to the "believers", to extend (and flip around) the original analogy of this thread one more time, those things seem to be the ufological equivalent of holy water to a vampire.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Salisbury's Utah UFO Display From: Chris Burns <Thurstonoreggae.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:36:52 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:39:20 -0500 Subject: Salisbury's Utah UFO Display List, This might be a long shot, but I'm looking for anyone willing to part with a less-than-perfect copy of Frank Salisbury's Utah UFO Display. For those with copies in good shape, hold on to them as they are quite valuable. But surely someone must have a yellowed creased
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Scientist At Center Of Mars Flap Speaks Out From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:49:33 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:49:33 -0500 Subject: Scientist At Center Of Mars Flap Speaks Out Source: MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7261407/ 03-22-05 Scientist At Center Of Mars Flap Speaks Out Controversial story has long-term consequences, Stoker says By James Oberg NBC News space analyst Special to MSNBC HOUSTON - Carol Stoker thought she was talking casually to friends at a party. A NASA scientist, Stoker and her husband and colleague Larry Lemke described work they were doing looking for biological activity =97 life =97 at a site in Spain called Rio Tinto that may be similar to potential habitats on Mars. What happened next is up for debate. Stoker says neither she nor Lemke ever implied that her work could be extrapolated to suggest present life on Mars. She certainly never told anyone that a paper to that effect was about to be published in the journal Nature, she says. Several people at the party, however, later told a journalist that they had said that. The subsequent Space News article set off a brief media frenzy in mid-February that eventually led to a rare official denial from NASA. The media flap was soon overshadowed by actual news from Mars, but the consequences of that week continue to reverberate for Stoker and Lemke, she says. For that reason, Stoker agreed to her first on-the-record interview since the Feb. 13 party in Washington that started the whole thing. "My privacy was violated" Stoker says she is still shocked that comments made at a private party could become fodder for a news story to begin with. "What I feel is that my privacy was violated," she says. "From my point of view, what I had was a private conversation at a cocktail party. I knew who all the people at the cocktail party were. I knew that none of them were reporters. "There was a discussion about various things going on in the space program which we participated in. We probably were the only scientists in the room, and we were more privy to what was going on in the Mars community. We said some things that were going on that were not very different from what goes on in [public conferences]." That was a Sunday. Two days later, Brian Berger, an experienced and well-respected writer for Space News, tried to reach Stoker to confirm what he had heard about her statements at the party. "While waiting for her to get back to me, I tracked down more people who had heard Dr. Stoker's presentation Sunday night to the group," Berger said in an e-mail statement to MSNBC.com. "The people I spoke to were all trusted and reliable sources and they gave consistent accounts of what Stoker and her colleague had said about her research and the implications for present day life on Mars." "I left two voicemails for Dr. Stoker, letting her know I had heard about her research and wanted to write a story about it, preferably with her help," Berger said. Stoker, who was on business travel, says she found the messages only after the article was published the following day. However, she says, even if she had received the messages in time, she wouldn't have considered them specific or urgent enough to answer immediately. Nevertheless, she says she feels Berger should not have used her name without speaking to her first. Stoker also points out that "there was lots of ethanol consumed" at the party, which may have contributed to the loss of accuracy of any secondhand reports. The story breaks Berger's story, which was also published on MSNBC.com as part of a content-sharing deal, described the Sunday event as a "private meeting," not a party. It also cited the attendees as saying that Stoker and Lemke had said their findings had been submitted to Nature and were currently being peer-reviewed. The story was careful to point out, however, that no one was saying there was direct evidence of current life on Mars: "What Stoker and Lemke have found, according to several attendees of the private meeting, is not direct proof of life on Mars, but methane signatures and other signs of possible biological activity remarkably similar to those recently discovered in caves here on Earth." That distinction got somewhat lost in the days that followed, as others news services picked up the story and some headlines suggested that the scientists had in fact found life on Mars. Stoker and Lemke declined all interview requests and NASA issued an unusual denial a few days later. "The work by the scientists mentioned in the reports cannot be used to directly infer anything about life on Mars," a press release stated. "No research paper has been submitted by them to any scientific journal asserting Martian life." The work at Rio Tinto "may help formulate the strategy for how to search for Martian life," the statement said, since the research "concerns extreme environments on Earth as analogs of possible environments on Mars." Stoker now says that the damage was already done and that the conclusions attributed to her created initial skeptical impressions in the minds of her colleagues. "You get this kind of aghast thing, the rest of the scientific community reads this and they think obviously this information is incorrect, it can't possibly be true. You can't possibly have evidence for new life on Mars by drilling holes in Spain, it's just impossible. So they think, they must be stupid." As a result, she says, "you attract a reputation as somebody who isn't cautious, and isn't careful about what you say." Wider consequences The "false alarm" did not just impact Stoker and Lemke, she says, but her colleagues in Spain as well. "I think it damaged the reputation of the project," she says. "The impression I have is my collaborators in Spain were aghast, there were mumblings and grumblings from their scientific community that cast aspersions on the project." "This is a big project, with a lot of people involved," she says. "I think the entire project was damaged because of it." Despite the NASA denial, Stoker says, the original impressions leave strong traces in people's minds. "A story like that goes out and the first thing that happens is that everyone who reads it believes it is true," she says, "except for the people who know you personally who know you wouldn't have said that." But even many of her colleagues just assumed it was true, Stoker says. "I got e-mails from people who were getting calls asking to comment on the paper," she recalls. "So there were people who asked for copies of the paper so they could comment" =96 but there wasn't any paper. If there actually had been a paper submitted to Nature, the pre- publication revelations would have been disastrous, Stoker says. "They would have rejected it instantly." She worries now that she will find it harder in the future to be published since she has gained the reputation =97 however unfairly =97 "as having been talking to the press about our work, unpublished =97 vetting our work in the press." "There's a very good chance we will not be able to get our paper published because of this." 'Constant state of competition' Along with the damage to her research, Stoker says she feels the incident also hurt her career. "The problem is these things are taken at face value, by your own management and by the rest of the scientific community," she says. "Your success as a scientist depends upon your reputation =97 your reputation for caution, your reputation for correctness, for publishing the truth, for not making claims you can't substantiate. If your reputation gets tarnished then that affects your ability to be competitive in the scientific community." A scientist must successfully compete in order to survive, Stoker explains. "You compete for your funding, for your salary, for example, the salary of your staff," she says. "You make applications to do projects, you write proposals, they get reviewed by panels of your peers, you pass or fail, and you get to do that project or not get to do it on the basis of whether or not you pass that process. "You're in a constant state of competition and every one of those steps is dependent on your reputation as a scientist. So if a journalist makes a claim that is attributed to you, that is not a claim that you made, but everyone else hears that it is, then your reputation is tarnished and it affects that entire thing and it ultimately it affects your livelihood," she says. "It affects your ability to do the science, to get the work done, to get any work done." Berger, meanwhile, maintains that the story as originally reported was legitimate. "Our story accurately portrayed what Dr. Stoker told a trusted group of insiders about her research and its implications," he said in the e-mail to MSNBC.com. "As it happened, we were on the leading edge of what turned out to be a month chock full of intriguing science findings about Mars."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:54:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:54:18 -0500 Subject: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Source: Scientific American.Com http://tinyurl.com/6y37m Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing By Michael Shermer In the wee hours of the morning on August 8, 1983, while I was traveling along a lonely rural highway approaching Haigler, Neb., a large craft with bright lights overtook me and forced me to the side of the road. Alien beings exited the craft and abducted me for 90 minutes, after which time I found myself back on the road with no memory of what transpired inside the ship. I can prove that this happened because I recounted it to a film crew shortly afterward. When alien abductees recount to me their stories, I do not deny that they had a real experience. But thanks to recent research by Harvard University psychologists Richard J. McNally and Susan A. Clancy, we now know that some fantasies are indistinguishable from reality, and they can be just as traumatic. In a 2004 paper in Psychological Science entitled "Psychophysiological Responding during Script-Driven Imagery in People Reporting Abduction by Space Aliens," McNally, Clancy and their colleagues report the results of a study of claimed abductees. The researchers measured heart rate, skin conductance and electromyographic responses in a muscle that lifted the eyebrow- -called the left lateral (outer) frontalis--of the study participants as they relived their experiences through script- driven imagery. "Relative to control participants," the authors concluded, "abductees exhibited greater psychophysiological reactivity to abduction and stressful scripts than to positive and neutral scripts." In fact, the abductees' responses were comparable to those of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients who had listened to scripts of their actual traumatic experiences. In 1983, in rural Nebraska, I was abducted by aliens. The abduction study was initiated as a control in a larger investigation of memories of sexual abuse. In his book Remembering Trauma (Harvard University Press, 2003), McNally tracks the history of the recovered memory movement of the 1990s, in which some people, while attempting to recover lost memories of childhood sexual molestation (usually through hypnosis and guided imagery), instead created false memories of abuse that never happened. "The fact that people who believe they have been abducted by space aliens respond like PTSD patients to audiotaped scripts describing their alleged abductions," McNally explains, "underscores the power of belief to drive a physiology consistent with actual traumatic experience." The vividness of a traumatic memory cannot be taken as evidence of its authenticity. The most likely explanation for alien abductions is sleep paralysis and hypnopompic (on awakening) hallucinations. Temporary paralysis is often accompanied by visual and auditory hallucinations and sexual fantasies, all of which are interpreted within the context of pop culture's fascination with UFOs and aliens. McNally found that abductees "were much more prone to exhibit false recall and false recognition in the lab than were control subjects," and they scored significantly higher than normal on a questionnaire measuring "absorption," a trait related to fantasy proneness that also predicts false recall. My abduction experience was triggered by sleep deprivation and physical exhaustion. I had just ridden a bicycle 83 straight hours and 1,259 miles in the opening days of the 3,100-mile nonstop transcontinental Race Across America. I was sleepily weaving down the road when my support motor home flashed its high beams and pulled alongside, and my crew entreated me to take a sleep break. At that moment a distant memory of the 1960s television series The Invaders was inculcated into my waking dream. In the series, alien beings were taking over the earth by replicating actual people but, inexplicably, retained a stiff little finger. Suddenly the members of my support team were transmogrified into aliens. I stared intensely at their fingers and grilled them on both technical and personal matters. After my 90-minute sleep break, the experience represented nothing more than a bizarre hallucination, which I recounted to ABC's Wide World of Sports television crew filming the race. But at the time the experience was real, and that's the point. The human capacity for self-delusion is boundless, and the effects of belief are overpowering. Thanks to science we have learned to tell the difference between fantasy and reality.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 The Economics of Conspiracy Theories From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:59:55 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:59:55 -0500 Subject: The Economics of Conspiracy Theories Source: Global Politician http://globalpolitician.com/articles.asp?ID=460 03-20/-05 The Economics of Conspiracy Theories By Sam Vaknin, Ph.D. Barry Chamish is convinced that Shimon Peres, Israel's wily old statesman, ordered the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, back in 1995, in collaboration with the French. He points to apparent tampering with evidence. The blood-stained song sheet in Mr. Rabin's pocket lost its bullet hole between the night of the murder and the present. The murderer, Yigal Amir, should have been immediately recognized by Rabin's bodyguards. He has publicly attacked his query before. Israel's fierce and fearsome internal security service, the Shabak, had moles and agents provocateurs among the plotters. Chamish published a book about the affair. He travels and lectures widely, presumably for a fee. Chamish's paranoia-larded prose is not unique. The transcripts of Senator Joseph McCarthy's inquisitions are no less outlandish. But it was the murder of John F. Kennedy, America's youthful president, that ushered in a golden age of conspiracy theories. The distrust of appearances and official versions was further enhanced by the Watergate scandal in 1973-4. Conspiracies and urban legends offer meaning and purposefulness in a capricious, kaleidoscopic, maddeningly ambiguous, and cruel world. They empower their otherwise helpless and terrified believers. New Order Order, One World Government, Zionist and Jewish cabals, Catholic, black, yellow, or red subversion, the machinations attributed to the freemasons and the illuminati - all flourished yet again from the 1970's onwards. Paranoid speculations reached frenzied nadirs following the deaths of celebrities, such as "Princess Di". Books like "The Da Vinci Code" (which deals with an improbable Catholic conspiracy to erase from history the true facts about the fate of Jesus) sell millions of copies worldwide. Tony Blair, Britain's ever righteous prime minister denounced the "Diana Death Industry". He was referring to the tomes and films which exploited the wild rumors surrounding the fatal car crash in Paris in 1997. The Princess, her boyfriend Dodi al- Fayed, heir to a fortune, as well as their allegedly inebriated driver were killed in the accident. Among the exploiters were "The Times" of London which promptly published a serialized book by Time magazine reports. Britain's TV networks, led by Live TV, capitalized on comments made by al- Fayed's father to the "Mirror" alleging foul play. But there is more to conspiracy theories than mass psychology. It is also big business. Voluntary associations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the John Birch Society are past their heyday. But they still gross many millions of dollars a year. The monthly "Fortean Times" is the leading brand in "strange phenomena and experiences, curiosities, prodigies and portents". It is widely available on both sides of the Atlantic. In its 29 years of existence it has covered the bizarre, the macabre, and the ominous with panache and open-mindedness. It is named after Charles Fort who compiled unexplained mysteries from the scientific literature of his age (he died in 1932). He published four bestsellers in his lifetime and lived to see "Fortean societies" established in many countries. A 12 months subscription to "Fortean Times" costs c. $45. With a circulation of 60,000, the magazine was able to spin off "Fortean Television" - a TV show on Britain's Channel Four. Its reputation was further enhanced when it was credited with inspiring the TV hit series X-Files and The Sixth Sense. "Lobster Magazine" - a bi-annual publication - is more modest at $15 a year. It is far more "academic" looking and it sells CD ROM compilations of its articles at between $80 (for individuals) and $160 (for institutions and organizations) a piece. It also makes back copies of its issues available. Its editor, Robin Ramsay, said in a lecture delivered to the "Unconvention 96", organized by the "Fortean Times": "Conspiracy theories certainly are sexy at the moment ... I've been contacted by five or six TV companies in the past six months - two last week - all interested in making programmes about conspiracy theories. I even got a call from the Big Breakfast Show, from a researcher who had no idea who I was, asking me if I'd like to appear on it ... These days we've got conspiracy theories everywhere; and about almost everything." But these two publications are the tip of a gigantic and ever- growing iceberg. "Fortean Times" reviews, month in and month out, books, PC games, movies, and software concerned with its subject matter. There is an average of 8 items per issue with a median price of $20 per item. There are more than 186,600 Web sites dedicated to conspiracy theories in Google's database of 3 billion pages. The "conspiracy theories" category in the Open Directory Project, a Web directory edited by volunteers, contains hundreds of entries. There are 1077 titles about conspiracies listed in Amazon and another 12078 in its individually-operated ZShops. A new (1996) edition of the century-old anti-Semitic propaganda pamphlet faked by the Czarist secret service, "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", is available through Amazon. Its sales rank is a respectable 64,000 - out of more than 2 million titles stocked by the online bookseller. In a disclaimer, Amazon states: "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is classified under "controversial knowledge" in our store, along with books about UFOs, demonic possession, and all manner of conspiracy theories." Yet, cinema and TV did more to propagate modern nightmares than all the books combined. The Internet is starting to have a similar impact compounded by its networking capabilities and by its environment of simulated reality - "cyberspace". In his tome, "Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America", Robert Alan Goldberg comes close to regarding the paranoid mode of thinking as a manifestation of mainstream American culture. According to the Internet Movie Database, the first 50 all time hits include at least one "straight" conspiracy theory movie (in the 13th place) - "Men in Black" with $587 million in box office receipts. JFK (in the 193rd place) grossed another $205 million. At least ten other films among the first 50 revolve around a conspiracy theory disguised as science fiction or fantasy. "The Matrix" - in the 28th place - took in $456 million. "The Fugitive" closes the list with $357 million. This is not counting "serial" movies such as James Bond, the reification of paranoia shaken and stirred. X-files is to television what "Men in Black" is to cinema. According to "Advertising Age", at its peak, in 1998, a 30 seconds spot on the show cost $330,000 and each chapter raked in $5 million in ad revenues. Ad prices declined to $225,000 per spot two years later, according to CMR Business to Business. Still, in its January 1998 issue, "Fortune" claimed that "X- Files" (by then a five year old phenomenon) garnered Fox TV well over half a billion dollars in revenues. This was before the eponymous feature film was released. Even at the end of 2000, the show was regularly being watched by 12.4 million households - compared to 22.7 million viewers in 1998. But X-files was only the latest, and the most successful, of a line of similar TV shows, notably "The Prisoner" in the 1960's. It is impossible to tell how many people feed off the paranoid frenzy of the lunatic fringe. I found more than 3000 lecturers on these subjects listed by the Google search engine alone. Even assuming a conservative schedule of one lecture a month with a modest fee of $250 per appearance - we are talking about an industry of c. $10 million. Collective paranoia has been boosted by the Internet. Consider the computer game "Majestic" by Electronic Arts. It is an interactive and immersive game, suffused with the penumbral and the surreal. It is a Web reincarnation of the borderlands and the twilight zone - centered around a nefarious and lethal government conspiracy. It invades the players' reality - the game leaves them mysterious messages and "tips" by phone, fax, instant messaging, and e-mail. A typical round lasts 6 months and costs $10 a month. Neil Young, the game's 31-years old, British-born, producer told Salon.com recently: "... The concept of blurring the lines between fact and fiction, specifically around conspiracies. I found myself on a Web site for the conspiracy theory radio show by Art Bell ... the Internet is such a fabulous medium to blur those lines between fact and fiction and conspiracy, because you begin to make connections between things. It's a natural human reaction - we connect these dots around our fears. Especially on the Internet, which is so conspiracy-friendly. That was what was so interesting about the game; you couldn't tell whether the sites you were visiting were Majestic-created or normal Web sites..." Majestic creates almost 30 primary Web sites per episode. It has dozens of "bio" sites and hundreds of Web sites created by fans and linked to the main conspiracy threads. The imaginary gaming firm at the core of its plots, "Amin-X", has often been confused with the real thing. It even won the E3 Critics Award for best original product... Conspiracy theories have pervaded every facet of our modern life. A.H. Barbee describes in "Making Money the Telefunding Way" (published on the Web site of the Institute for First Amendment Studies) how conspiracy theorists make use of non- profit "para-churches". They deploy television, radio, and direct mail to raise billions of dollars from their followers through "telefunding". Under section 170 of the IRS code, they are tax-exempt and not obliged even to report their income. The Federal Trade commission estimates that 10% of the $143 billion donated to charity each year may be solicited fraudulently. Lawyers represent victims of the Gulf Syndrome for hefty sums. Agencies in the USA debug bodies - they "remove" brain "implants" clandestinely placed by the CIA during the Cold War. They charge thousands of dollars a pop. Cranks and whackos - many of them religious fundamentalists - use inexpensive desktop publishing technology to issue scaremongering newsletters (remember Mel Gibson in the movie "Conspiracy Theory"?). Tabloids and talk shows - the only source of information for nine tenths of the American population - propagate these "news". Museums - the UFO museum in New Mexico or the Kennedy Assassination museum in Dallas, for instance - immortalize them. Memorabilia are sold through auction sites and auction houses for thousands of dollars an item. Numerous products were adversely affected by conspiratorial smear campaigns. In his book "How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where it Comes From", Daniel Pipes describes how the sales of Tropical Fantasy plummeted by 70% following widely circulated rumors about the sterilizing substances it allegedly contained - put there by the KKK. Other brands suffered a similar fate: Kool and Uptown cigarettes, Troop Sport clothing, Church's Fried Chicken, and Snapple soft drinks. It all looks like one giant conspiracy to me. Now, here's one theory worth pondering... Sam Vaknin, Ph.D. is the author of Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West Lost the East. He served as a columnist for Central Europe Review, PopMatters, Bellaonline, and eBookWeb, a United Press International (UPI) Senior Business Correspondent, and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory and Suite101. Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 UFO Sighting In 1648 AD From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:19:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:19:42 -0500 Subject: UFO Sighting In 1648 AD Source: ProFindPages.Com - UK http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/03/22/MN839.htm 03-22-05 UFO sighting In 1648 AD Shows The Star People Will Protect Us UFO sighting in 1648 AD We have published a number of articles recently concerning the coming of a "Galactic Superwave", an event that has happened at least three times in our planets history. James E. Finn, the author of Pandora's Hope has written many reports supporting the belief that a Superwave will once again bring "The End Times" to Earth, and whilst it is not certain, he strongly believes that this could begin in March 2006. There have been many signs recently (the last 50 years) to suggest that the Star people have returned to help us, as they have done before. [Coin Image] A 1648 AD coin showing the Star People protecting us? James Finn opens his latest report by saying "What could be coming from the sky to earth that the Star People are symbolized above being in between? There is only one thing, that even Plato said descends from the heavens after long periods of time like a pestilence. It has a modern name, given by the scientist that has researched this phenomena, Dr Paul LaViolette. It is called: A Galactic Superwave." [at]: http://www.etheric.com/ The following is an extract from his report [at]: http://users.gloryroad.net/%7Ebigjim/news.htm The time has come to awaken from our long sleep. In yet another 1950s "dream" scenario, humans experience another information drop that they had no center of reference for. Each of the brothers, decades later, all had the same memories. The picture here is what I have been talking about all along - humanity, to whatever extent, is leaving. I remember as though in a repeating dream an incident in the Fifties in Utah. My brothers and myself were playing out in the front yard on a summer evening when from over the Wasatch Range to the east came a flotilla of UFOs. Night fell and as the UFOs approached and hovered overhead we panicked and ran into the house to hide inside a storage closet. The ETs found us and took us outside in the backyard where a "machine" had landed. We were taken on board. Not until the 1990s did I confess my recollection to my brothers. To my shock three of them remembered the same dream and in fact gave greater detail. One brother recalls looking
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 In The Beginning... From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:35:16 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:35:16 -0500 Subject: In The Beginning... Source: TheCheers.Org http://www.thecheers.org/article_936_In-the-Beginning.html 03-21-05 [Many links throughout article] In The Beginning... Tony Lucas Independant UFO Investigator ufoinvestigator.hb.nul The Cheers #24: Life Historically, most of the Northern Hemisphere holds the attention of many when it comes to paranormal activity, UFOs, Cryptozoology and strange phenomena. What I hope to bring forth in these articles is the often not heard of Phenomena that is just as prevalent in the Southern Hemisphere. As an Independent UFO Investigator myself I will however ask the readers forgiveness if I often indulge myself in that field. Being a New Zealander, it is often not recognized that New Zealand has many unheard of mysteries and its fair share of UFO activity. We also have our own version of Bigfoot known as the Moehau, also a mystery otter like creature, alien big cats, and more. Our nearest neighbor, Australia also has its fair share of UFO sightings, Criptids (animals that are not known or presumed extinct), and strange phenomena. As a UFO Investigator, I like to make quite clear how easy it is to be fooled. Often, what we think we see is not what it appears to be. In the case of UFOs, weather balloons, the planet Venus, satellites and other man-made phenomena are often mistaken for UFOs. My belief is that once you have eliminated all the obvious and, sometimes the not so obvious, whatever you are left with must be the answer. New Zealand has a long history of UFO activity beginning in the late 19th century with the airship flap of the period, when there was a rash of sightings of what appeared to be Zeppelin- like machines, often having large searchlights and crew visible, during a period when manned flight was unheard of. However there are those who say that it dates back even further and mentions how it was made by the early Maori via the oral legends, the Kaikoura incident of January 1979 gained world wide publicity as recently as a couple of weeks ago. There have also been close encounters of the third kind where beings have been seen often associated with strange craft. 1896 and 1897 saw a rash of sightings of mysterious airships in the United States; however, it was not until 1909 that the first sightings were reported in New Zealand, which also coincided with a great number of sightings in Great Britain. This plague of airships lasted until mid-August of that year, a great majority being seen at night, although daytime sightings were not unknown. Witnesses varied from farm workers to the pupils and a teacher of a school. The first Zeppelin flew on the 2nd of July 1900 and was accepted into army service in March 1909. It wasn't till 1914 that the craft was refined and able to reach speeds of 136 kph. All this occurred on the other side of the world in Germany. Although activity climaxed in about 1909, 1908 was the year during which the airship scare started. Four men claimed they had seen a strange aerial light on three separate occasions. On one of these occasions a beam like a search light descended to the ground, with two accompanying lights streaking around it. The following year, reports started filtering in documenting lights moving in the sky, which could only have been from one of these mysterious airships. Reports of clanking and machinery noises were heard coming from the skies, focused beams of light shone from the heavens, and people became more and more unnerved by the strange phenomena. The first actual visual encounter with an airship, presumably responsible for the strange goings on, occurred several days after the initial lights were seen. An airship was spotted at Kaka Point near Balclutha, the region of focus for most of the activity. Sunday the 18th of July was the beginning of regular nightly activity of one of these airships, witnessed by the beach residents of Kaka Point, and lasted for about a week. July 19th marked the beginning of the wave with a report coming in from the town of Omaru where three residents reported flickering lights moving in the sky. From there, reports increased in frequency, becoming more and more common. One witness claimed to have been shouted at in a guttural harsh language by a helmeted figure aboard one of the airships. One of the best reports came from the Otago Daily Times newspaper. It stated, on July 23rd in Kelso, that an airship came down and bobbed around in the sky over a school for a few minutes. It was witnessed by a small group of school children and some residents. Drawings were made and all showed the classic zeppelin-like shape, the underside being particularly detailed as it flew over them. One drawing also showed a propeller at the rear. The reports gradually moved north and soon the North Island was to be under scrutiny from these mysterious crafts. As people began gathering on the streets at night in the hopes of spotting these mysterious 'sky boats', scientists tried to reassure the public by explaining them away as originating from Mars, which was close to the earth at the time. Meteor showers were also offered. German spies from ships anchored below the horizon were blamed and even Australian smugglers shared the blame for these strange crafts appearance. Speculation abounded as to their origin and more than once it was wondered if some inventor had been at work on the creation of this new type of flying machine. This reached a point where a reward was offered if a anyone were to come forward and publicly display his/her wonderful machine. The offer was never taken up. It was noticed with these craft were generally always seen from a distance, with the closest observation being 30 to 60 meters away. Interestingly, the crafts were always seen singularly, never more than a solitary craft. Due to the distances involved between sightings, it was concluded that more than one craft must have been present in the skies over New Zealand during the period these sightings were being reported. By mid-to late-August, reports became less frequent and finally stopped. However, as the reports stopped and the New Zealand wave came to an end, reports of the same sort of phenomena then became prevalent in Eastern Australia, and an Australian airship wave began. Most of these reports from such an early period would have largely gone unnoticed were it not for the diligence of one man who gifted us with the accounts of this airship wave. Tony Brunt, a researcher who during the 1960's, spent countless hours scouring old newspaper and library records throughout New Zealand to get as comprehensive a picture as possible of the phenomena. Had some alien race got there time periods wrong, trying, as they were to fit in inconspicuously? Throughout history, man has seen strange things in the heavens. With the Romans, it was fiery shields in the skies. Medieval Europe witnessed Angelic apparitions. Foo fighters dogged WWII aircraft, was this a case of a mistaken attempt to try and blend in. Could it have been, though, even today, the experimental testing of a new top secret aircraft kept under wraps from the general populous? Does this sound familiar? Perhaps things don't
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Business Owners Oppose Sign Removal From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:44:08 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:44:08 -0500 Subject: Business Owners Oppose Sign Removal Source: The Valley Courier - Alamosa, Colorado http://www.alamosanews.com/main.php?story_id=3D5320&page=3D23 03-22-05 Business Owners Oppose Sign Removal By Sean Weaver The Colorado Department of Transportation will be removing several illegal signs, including the billboard advertising the UFO Watchtower, along Highway 17 Judy Messoline, owner of the UFO Watchtower near Hooper, said she is concerned about the economic impacts of removing business-signs along Highway 17. ALAMOSA -- For five years, Judy Messoline relied on a friendly red alien to help direct traffic to her door. Now the Colorado Department of Transportation would like to see Messoline's alien abducted. This month, the transportation department contacted several landowners along Highway 17, saying many of the signs advertising businesses must be taken down. "It makes it tough," said Messoline, who owns the UFO Watchtower in Hooper. "We're struggling." Messoline said many tourist-oriented businesses along the highway, including the Alligator Farm and Joyful Journey Hot Springs rely on the signs placed on private property to draw tourists to their businesses. "When you're down in a rural area, the only way we can get the tourists to any of us is the signs," Messoline said. "And now they're telling us to take down the signs." By law, signs advertising a business must be placed at least 660 feet away from the right of way unless the sign is on the business-property. "Those signs are illegal," said Stephanie Balzly, Region 5 inspector for the Colorado Department of Transportation. "Any sign that's visible that's not on the business-property requires permit." Legislators passed the federal Roadside Beautification Act, which dictates how and where billboards can be placed along highways, in 1965 to protect rural areas from the proliferation of billboards. Under the law, billboards may not be placed on a designated scenic byway and states and counties have the authority to regulate signs under zoning regulations. "Those places that don't have the zoning have to take the sign down," Balzly said. Business owners along the highway will meet today at 10 to discuss their options. "They're affecting economic development in the county," said Lynne Young, owner of the Alligator Farm. Balzly said businesses along the highway can apply for a state- approved Tourist Oriented Directional Sign. "They are signs that are placed in CDOT's right of way, but administered by private company," Balzly said. Young said the Alligator Farm used the signs several years ago, but stopped after the fees increased. "The cost was $100 per year for two of them," Young said of the signs when the state was in charge of the signs. "Then the state decided to go private, so it was $500. Sure it's an option, but when they do things like that, and the cost goes to 500 a year, it's not an option anymore." Messoline said she also feels the cost of the tourist directional signs is too high for many businesses in the Valley.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:20:46 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:47:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST >Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >Now this is the kind of story I like: >http://tinyurl.com/4no2z >It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot >answering a reader's question about UFOs. >She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. >Frank, up front and friendly. >Worth a look! Unfortunately she ignores the more than 3,000 pilot sightings collected by Dr. Richard Haines, the large number collected by NARCAP, the Weinstein collection, the many pilot sightings amongst the UNKNOWNS of Project Blue Book, the many pilot sightings noted in the UFO Evidence, those in Jim MacDonald's congressional testimony, etc. I have never seen Tokyo, but believe there is ample evidence
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:51:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >Source: Scientific American.Com >http://tinyurl.com/6y37m >Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >By Michael Shermer <snip> Whew! And I thought people were being abducted by real aliens. Wait until I tell my wife that she just hallucinated as I duck the pots and pans coming my way. What I don't understand is how she hallucinated when in a perfectly good state of health in May 1991 while wide awake reading a book just after turning the television off for the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:52:10 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:55:07 -0500 Subject: Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 >Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>From: Maurizio Baiata <maurizio.baiata.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:11:38 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>>Subject: Alpha Committee? >>>I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >>>ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >>>Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >>>Have anyone any information about this? >>>I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >>>RRRGroup blog. >>Reference to a so called "Alphacom Team" can be found in the >>book, Catchers of Heaven - A Trilogy, by the late Dr. Michael Wolf >>(Kruvant). Just a guess. As Dr. Wolf stated, it was a secret >>government group. >Michael Wolf Kruvant never worked for the government, was not a >scientist, was never in the military, was not head of a big >research institute in Connecticut, was not an advisor to >President Clinton, was not a pilot, was never married, did not >have a son... despite a host of false claims. >He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good >imagination. >I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn >and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university >personnel, the NY Acd. of Sci., AAAS, etc. >His book is fiction, and self-published at that. Stan, Not that I can add much to what you have said here except to say that Michael sent me a metal sample from an alleged ET spacecraft which I had analyzed. It was found to be a highly pure piece of silicon slag of terrestrial origin. I found an identical piece in a store which I bought for $1.00. Nothing exotic to this piece of metal. I also have a transcript of his college record. He flunked out of Upsala College. No M.D., No PhDs. In court documents, his wife sued him saying he had an emotional illness and mental disorder. She also alleged that he had required 'constant psychiatric treatment' and had been at one time hospitalized at the Carrier Clinic, a private mental institution located at Belle Mead, N.J. This was during the prime of his life in the early 60s when he was allegedly earning college degrees. Anyone can check these records. I talked with Michael several times over the phone and found him engaging on occasion. I talked with his brother once and it does
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:07:22 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:57:11 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:49:48 -0400 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >At the very outset I offered [and was ignored] that this was a >studio shot with previously shot B-roll of the mountains [a >camera locked off and shooting the vista in real time over a >period of minutes-and perhaps a whole reel] being back projected >on a screen behind the set. If there was anything accidentally >captured on film, it was while the B-roll was being shot. I'm not sure where you are getting your terminology, Don, but in the motion picture business A-roll and B-roll have very specific meanings, and this is not one of them. This is not the place to go into this in detail, but if you check out some books (and maybe web sites) on film editing, you will see what a B-roll is. Regardless, background footage such as you are speaking of was used in many films, but always when movement of the background was part of the plan. There would be absolutely no advantage, and many disadvantages to doing this when you wanted a static background as in the John Wayne film. I looked at this and other scenes on the DVD and they are obviously sound stage shots with painted backgrounds. When you are using rear projection onto a translucent screen your lighting options for your subjects are very limited because you must go to great effort to keep your subject lighting from spilling onto the projection screen. This forces you to light from very oblique angles which produces a specific and unnatural
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:17:56 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:55:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST >Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >Now this is the kind of story I like: >http://tinyurl.com/4no2z >It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot >answering a reader's question about UFOs. >She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. >Frank, up front and friendly. >Worth a look! Hi Greg, I used the opportunity to respond to Captain Getline's article as a pilot myself. I'll let you know if I get a response.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Secrecy News -- 03/23/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:26:07 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:36:39 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/23/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 26 March 23, 2005 ** FBIS PHOTOS OF IRAN'S BUSHEHR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ** IN CONGRESS ** MILITARY TRIBUNALS AND PRESIDENTIAL POWER ** GOVT AGENCIES PROPOSE TO SUE INFO REQUESTERS ** A BOUQUET OF CRS REPORTS FBIS PHOTOS OF IRAN'S BUSHEHR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT The CIA's Foreign Broadcast Information Service has compiled a new gallery of photographs of Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant. The photographs were taken from the Iranian Fars News Agency and from the Persian blog rasanic.com. The monitoring of blogs is a relatively new and fruitful expansion of FBIS coverage of world media outlets. The CIA has not made the new FBIS compilation on Bushehr available to the public. But a copy was obtained by Secrecy News. See "News Agency, Blogger Post Photos of Bushehr NPP," Foreign Broadcast Information Service, February 2005 (2.4 MB PowerPoint file): http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/bushehr.ppt IN CONGRESS Recent congressional activity on secrecy and intelligence matters includes the following. Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) asked the Inspector General of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to investigate NRC restrictions on the dissemination of unclassified and formerly public information. A copy of his March 21 letter is here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/markey032105.pdf Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT) introduced the "Restore FOIA Act" to narrow the FOIA exemption previously enacted for "critical infrastructure information." See: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/s622.html Senators Leahy and Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the "Faster FOIA Act" that would establish a Commission to investigate ways to expedite the processing of FOIA requests. See: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/s589.html Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) introduced a baffling bill to exempt livestock identification information collected by the Department of Agriculture from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. See: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/hr1256.html Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) introduced a bill that would make past employment in Air America, and other former CIA front companies, count for civil service retirement purposes. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/hr1276.html A bill introduced by Sens. Chambliss and Nelson would establish a new Military Intelligence Command that would serve as an intermediary between the new Director of National Intelligence and the various defense intelligence agencies. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s640.html Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee introduced a resolution calling for a new multi-level security clearance system that would facilitate the hiring of linguists and cultural experts in U.S. intelligence agencies. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/hres173.html Rep. Rush Holt paid tribute to Mark Lowenthal, the Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Analysis and Production, who is the latest high-level official to announce his departure from the troubled Agency. See: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/h032005.html The transcript of last year's none-too-edifying confirmation hearing of Porter J. Goss to be Director of Central Intelligence has been published. (The PDF version, linked on the page below, includes Mr. Goss' detailed answers to questions for the record on various aspects of intelligence organization and management.) A copy is here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2004_hr/091404goss.html MILITARY TRIBUNALS AND PRESIDENTIAL POWER The largely unchecked expansion of presidential authority to prosecute the "war on terrorism" forms the backdrop to a new book by Louis Fisher, the constitutional scholar and specialist on separation of powers. The author focuses on presidential war powers and specifically on the history and development of military tribunals. He concludes with a constitutional critique of the current system for detaining and trying enemy combatants. "Tribunals are created by Presidents, staffed by Presidents, and guided by rules and procedures developed by the executive branch, all with little or minimal involvement of the other two branches. It is a form of government that the framers would find repugnant," he writes. "It is especially in time of war that the apparatus of the presidency poses the highest risk, executive errors inflict the greatest damage, and individual liberties are placed at maximum peril. Institutional checks are needed more, not less." "Military Tribunals and Presidential Power" by Louis Fisher is published next month by the University Press of Kansas. See: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/book6.html GOVT AGENCIES PROPOSE TO SUE INFO REQUESTERS In North Carolina, "government agencies are pursuing the authority to sue citizens who ask to see public records." That would be a delightful story if it appeared in The Onion or some other "fake news" outlet. Unfortunately, however, it is from the Associated Press. See "N.C. Cities Want To Sue Over Public Records Requests," March 20: http://www.wral.com/news/4301487/detail.html The AP story is based on "Cities, agencies seek right to sue" by Matthew Eisley, Raleigh News and Observer, March 20, 2005 (free reg. req'd): http://tinyurl.com/52wdj A BOUQUET OF CRS REPORTS As previously observed, the Congressional Research Service does not permit direct public access to its publications. Some more recent CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News include the following: "U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial," updated February 28, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/IB92011.pdf "Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy and Implementation," updated February 17, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL30153.pdf "Mexico-United States Dialogue on Migration and Border Issues, 2001-2005," updated February 16, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32735.pdf "Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami: Humanitarian Assistance and Relief Operations," updated February 10, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32715.pdf "Proliferation Control Regimes: Background and Status," updated February 10, 2005: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/RL31559.pdf "China-Southeast Asia Relations: Trends, Issues, and Implications for the United States," updated February 8, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32688.pdf "Democracy in Russia: Trends and Implications for U.S. Interests," updated January 28, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32662.pdf "Nuclear Arms Control: The U.S.-Russian Agenda," updated January 24, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/IB98030.pdf "Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons and Missiles: Status and Trends," updated January 14, 2005 (2.6 MB PDF file): http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL30699.pdf "Nuclear Terrorism: A Brief Review of Threats and Responses," updated February 10, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32595.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 > Mar > Mar 23 Filer's Files #13 - 2005 From: George A. Filer <Majorstar.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:23:42 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:49:40 -0500 Subject: Filer's Files #13 - 2005 Filer's Files #13 - 2005, Skywatch Investigations George A. Filer, Director MUFON Eastern Vice President of Skywatch International March 23, 2005, Web: www.georgefiler.com Webmaster: C E Warren www.cewarren.com http://groups.aol.com/filersfiles? Canadian Sightings Increase 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. I personally chased one over England as directed by London Control. Mars =96 Possible Reservoir found in Endurance Crater including hieroglyphics. Two new planets discovered. UFOs were seen over California, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wyoming. Sightings were also reported in Brazil, Canada, and South Korea. Mars =96 Endurance Crater Has Hieroglyphics There are numerous petroglyphs on Mars that seem to depict writing or symbols. This is a JPL image taken by the Opportunity Rover of Burns Cliff inside Endurance Crater. Note the T, P, Y, I, A, I, and V like symbols below. I'm looking for anyone with expertise of ancient writing and hieroglyphics. Mars - Is Endurance Crater a Reservoir? Harold Carver writes, "While looking at images that Rover Opportunity was taking of 'Endurance Crater', I noticed similar features that one could easily say were artificially made. A comparison of the edge of Endurance Crater is very similar to man made spill-ways as can be seen with the Mars image on the left and Earth image on the right. The angles are too precise to be a freak of nature and are suggestive of a purpose. The entire structure of Endurance Crater lacks the profile of a crater, yet everything about it suggests that it was built to hold a body of water. This water flowed out of the ground and into the "reservoir". The entire walls and floor of Endurance image on the left seem to be made of fitted slabs of rock neatly put together as shown. A similar structure on Earth is shown below right. A meteor strike would simply destroy everything it made contact with. Along the walls of Endurance are what look like openings for the water to flow like an Earth spill-way. Another feature that bothered me for months was the make up of the so-called "sedimentary" or "layered" rocks. A close study of the rocks reveals a pattern of lines criss crossing the "layers." And then there were what looked to me like scraped rocks with lines. After some research, I discovered that the lines were similar to the lines left on concrete slabs after they are brushed smooth. Small grains form the lines on both images from Mars and Earth. I have also noticed material that looks similar to "plaster" at both rover sites. Image "2" is a side by side comparison of the Mars material and plaster made on Earth. Some of the leading technology into building compounds is in "fibrous" cement, concrete, and plaster. All of which is much stronger and crack resistant. Also, I am looking into areas of "metal spray plaster" that contains fiber to see if such comparisons can be made with Mars Rover images. The close-up image below shows the clarity of the "groves" and the grains. The lines could not have been naturally formed from standing water levels that changed over time. I know this because the lines intersect and are uneven. My theory is that whoever made "Endurance" used it as a water reservoir. I believe it was made with stone and "concrete-like" blocks and covered with a hardened fibrous plaster. The evidence speaks for itself. Thanks to Harold Carver. Editor's Note: Endurance may have been a natural crater that was modified using cement and artificial structures to catch underground sources of water. California - Bight Blue Fireball Modesto =96 The witness and I were driving home at 3:10 PM, on a country road and as he drove over some railroad tracks a bright blue fireball came from his left and jetted in front of his windshield and flew up into the sky on February 23, 2005. He states, "As I was driving to get on the freeway this object stayed in front of me and almost seemed to be watching me." When I got on the freeway heading north I then saw three objects as in a formation. They were very high in the sky and I then thought maybe I was seeing stars. I watched them for thirty minutes and it was a very strange experience. Modesto =96 On March 21, 2005, I saw this object travel a little to the south of my house. I don't think that it was very high up, maybe only about 500 feet. At first it was headed west, but then it suddenly turned toward the south. This is when I took about three pictures of it. It flew south about 20 seconds and then it turned its course back toward the west. I have color enhanced this picture, and it clearly shows that the UFO has two luminous spherical sections that are connected by a cylindrical section. This object went over my location in complete silence. The day was sunny and calm. District of Columbia =96 UFO photographed Will Allen writes," These images were taken July 4, 2002, from the US Capital. This is 12 days earlier from my encounter at the US Capitol. There are different technologies in the air, obviously not from Earth! This is P-51 Restricted Airspace and nothing should be in the air, anywhere near or around any Government buildings or Monuments. Because this is restricted airspace, an image like this should not exist, yet it does. These are not just 'lights in the sky', lens flares, or any other conclusive assessment made by the "experts" on UFOs. Thanks to wilballen.nul Florida - Unusual Object Filmed From My Boat. FLORIDA KEYS =96 The witness reports, "My wife, some friends, and I were pleasure boating about a mile from shore while the sun was setting on March 6, 2005. I started taking pictures of everyone on the boat, not being quite so sure whether or not I was getting enough light because, I had an older digital camera which has auto focus. I was looking at the beautiful sunset, and adjusting my camera. As sun was going down it "flickered" or got slightly brighter. I took photos and saw a tail in the sky that I thought was probably a jet flying at a high altitude but it just stayed stationary. So, I took another picture of it. I wasn't able to tell much about the exact shape of the object that "flickered." At the time, it looked like it had a side or two that were actually "edges." I showed my wife how the cloud was changing, but not moving, and that it looked like it had an edge, but she refuses to accept anything other than clouds. I also wanted to make sure it wasn't my camera playing tricks on me, so I sat on the edge of the boat, and took another shot at the strange "edged" cloud, except this time, I turned the camera sideways. This way, I was sure to get it both angles. What amazed me was one of the pictures shows it turn to 3 sides, and then another showing an almost "squared off" appearance with even 4 sides! When I got home and downloaded all of the shots, I was blown away by what I had found. Earlier in the afternoon before I even saw any of this stuff, I decided to get some shots of the sun, clouds, water, etc. Another big surprise...to the left side of the picture, I could clearly make out an outline of an object that was in the same color as the clouds, but was clearly shaped with edges of "cloud" color/cover. TAVARES -- The witness reports seeing a cylindrical shaped object on February 23, 2005, that appeared below a small cloud formation at 7 PM. There were several bright white and red lights. The object seemed to move toward my direction and then it suddenly vanished. This happened four times. I then asked my coworker to come and watch and he came out and witnessed the last episode. I waited to see if it would happen again but it did not. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ Illinois - Circular/Disk Shaped Craft NORTH of CHICAGO -- three witnesses were driving on a clear day when they saw a shiny UFO like polished stainless steel at 4 PM, in early August of 1950. Two friends and I were traveling by car, on our way back to Chicago from Lake Geneva, Wisconsin. The circular disk shaped UFO was seen through the car windshield and maintained about the same altitude as we watched it for five minutes. It moved slowly toward the top left corner of the windshield and suddenly accelerated and then it was gone. It moved faster than anything we possessed as winged aircraft at the time. Thanks to Brian Vike, Director, http://www.hbccufo.org/ Indiana - Unknown Object Caught On Film BLOOMINGTON --This is Mark, I'm breaking in the new digital camera and here's something I caught around 9 PM, on Friday Night, March 18, 2005. The sky conditions were cloudy and I first thought it was a plane, but I realized it wasn't moving and was just hovering in a gap between the clouds. I also grabbed a few stills and enhanced them, sorry the camera was shaky. I gave up after twenty minutes. Thanks to Mark for the pictures =A9 2005 Mark Evans. Indiana Unknown Object Caught On Film - Video .98 mbs. http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2536 Missouri - Fast Moving Unknown KANSAS CITY -- It was Sunday, March 13, 2005, about 2:55 PM, and the day was as clear as I've seen for a long time, and the usual jet traffic was seen with short contrails marking the sky. I was out hitting golf balls and was wearing an expensive pair of sunglasses, so there isn't a lot of distortion or darkening, just clear resolution. I looked at the sky just noticing the clarity of the day and a reflection caught my attention. It was 3/4 the way from the southern horizon; therefore it covered 3/4 of the sky much faster than any commercial jet takes. It was out of sight in 20- 30 seconds. There was no trail, jet noise, or sonic boom, and no contrail. Even though it was flying in a straight line, the reflection affect made it look almost like a wobble. The Sunday before this, I had the same experience. I looked up at just the right moment to catch the reflection. The pictures on Rense.com are exactly what I saw. It was silent, fast, and undetectable unless I had looked up at just the right time. It was heading south without a sound or contrail. I saw other jets in the sky and the speed of this thing was ridiculous. Thanks to Brian Vike Director, http://www.hbccufo.org/ New Jersey - Cylinder HOWELL =96 The witness was driving north and crossed West Farms Road, near the Manasquan Reservoir, on February 24, 2005, at 7 PM,, when a slow moving series of red lights that appeared to be part of the same craft and flew in tight configuration) moved slowly south. No noise could be heard. The craft passed by and then disappeared as fast as it appeared flying at about 900 feet altitude. I watch the skies in this area quite a bit, and I know the flight patterns in the area for both commercial and small private planes. I can assure you, this was not your typical flight pattern, nor light configuration of any plane. There was a series of three non blinking red lights moving in a north to south direction making no noise, that disappeared after two to three minutes. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ New York =96 Huge Egg Shaped Craft HICKSVILLE, LONG ISLAND -- I was driving home from work in a snow storm when all of a sudden a saw this egg shaped oval hovering over Duffy Avenue horse farm on February 20, 2005, at 2:15 AM. It had very bright lights that went around the egg. There were many lights that seemed to be split in half shining all different directions from this huge craft. It was about the size of a baseball stadium and made no noise at all. The witness said, "My car radio went crazy when I got close to the farm and changed channels on its own very fast." I wish I had a camera or video since it was only a couple hundred feet away. This has been my third experience seeing a craft of this nature over a span of thirty years. I'm 44 years old, a father of three, and if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I would not have believed it. There is nothing in our Earth that can compare to this object. It moved much faster in any direction than anything I have ever seen. The lights were much brighter than the brightest florescent light I have ever seen and it changes it self from a stadium looking craft to almost like a big metallic battle ship with different heights and levels. I hope one day to see it again. It's weird because basically Duffy Ave is a busy road but no vehicles were out last night. Duration: 12 minutes Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ GLEN COVE =96 The witness reports seeing a blue light suspended in the sky, while looking through binoculars at 11:20 PM, on February 17, 2005. He states, "The light was very distant but not too small, without binoculars it look very steady, but once I looked at it through them the craft looked like it was moving around." I kept on trying to focus, but it wouldn't look steady, other than if you look at it through the naked eye. I actually saw an airplane plain fly right underneath 'the blue light'. The lights on the plane were flashing and looked normal, but the 'blue light' right above the airplane was steady and much larger. I took some photos and looked away for a few seconds and before I knew it was no longer there. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ Ohio =96 Video of UFO FOSTORIA =96 George Ritter continues to send video of fast moving UFOs flying near his home in the countryside. The average object appears to be at least 25 feet diameter based on similar measurements of a corn crib on a nearby farm. The objects appear to be moving in the RCA VHS video camera faster than a speeding bullet. Thanks to George Ritter. Pennsylvania - Triangle Craft That Split CLARKS SUMMIT -- My daughter and I were in our driveway 7 PM on February 1, 2005, and through the trees in our backyard saw bright white lights (no noise). We stopped and looked and it looked like a triangle, very large with three distinct points and it hovered over the trees for a second, then, the three points seemed to break off and fly close together, extremely fast. We were getting in the car anyway and decided to follow them as best as we could. We noticed them only for a couple of minutes and then lost sight of them. This was the strangest thing I have ever seen! Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ Virginia -- Large Triangular UFOs Seen Twice CAPITAL BELTWAY -- On Wednesday, February 23, 2005, eyewitnesses Cathy and Tom were driving south when they saw something strange in the night sky. The couple reported, "As we approached Langley on Interstate I-495, we noticed two distinct triangular bright lights ahead. We passed directly underneath the completely stationary large object and saw four triangular lights. Two were directly opposite each other, and further down the object there were two more but set well off from each other. At one end of the object, there was a small red light, and on the other end a very small blue-green light." It was maybe 1,000 to 1,500 feet up. The object was dark. A very large object and it seemed very long." Thanks to Brian Vike Director, http://www.hbccufo.org/ Wyoming - Bright Object Observed CASPER -- The witness writes, "I was laid back on a park bench on February 23, 2005, at 2 PM, when I noticed a jet to my left and a bright point of light near the jet. I stood up and watched the object, and began taking photos. The object moved north to south in a slight arc, maintaining it's brightness throughout, from about a ten o'clock position to about a two o'clock position. When I juxtaposed the object with the point of a tree branch, I noticed that it wobbled slightly and had a slightly meandering course. About a minute into the sighting I brought the object to the attention of a passerby who watched it with me for a few seconds, commented that we needed binoculars, and then proceeded up the pathway. Later upon his return I offered to exchange contact info with him that he may corroborate this sighting and he refused. His opinion was that it was a Mylar weather balloon. I turned away to notify two passersby of the object, about two seconds, looked back and it was gone. I took ten photos of the object and some contain a second faint object that I did not see at the location of the sighting. When I zoom in on the object with my photo editing program I can see dark areas around the object that change from photo to photo. Thanks to Peter Davenport Director http://www.nuforc.org/ Texas - Black Triangular Object HOUSTON --I was going home from work on March 17, 2005 at 7 PM and noticed what seemed to be an unusual amount of aircraft and/or helicopters which had the blinking lights that you always see. It wasn't yet dark but was getting close to being dark. It was difficult to determine due to the distance from my vehicle as to whether I was seeing planes, helicopters or both. Then, all of a sudden I saw a black triangular object not too far away from one of the planes or helicopters at Westheimer and Highway 6-S. It did not have any lights and it was very strange to see an object of this shape traveling across the sky. It had a slight wobble to it as it flew consistently in the direction of my car. It seemed to fly in the clouds, but the clouds were spaced enough that you could see the object and its shape quite well. It was hard to determine the size of the object but I would say that it was definitely much larger than a jet aircraft. I had the sense that it was intentionally trying to hide its existence within the clouds. Once it went past my car, I turned my car around and drove into a nearby parking lot so that I could continue to watch the object. By the time I found a place to park I could no longer see the object. As I got back into my car to go home, I noticed the planes and or helicopters in the sky with blinking lights seemed to be circling the area. I then called the Harris County Sheriff's Dept. I reported what I saw. I was told that they were conducting life flight landings in the area with helicopters. I told them that what I saw was absolutely not a helicopter nor a plane. It was definitely a craft in the shape of triangle. It sure seems coincidental that at the same time I observed this triangular object that they would be conducting life flight landings. Thanks to Brian Vike KAUFMAN COUNTY -- On March 12, 2005, around 8:30 PM, I noticed several blinking lights in the western sky and was trying to get some of them on film. I managed to get some but all of a sudden this bright white light came on and appeared to be coming my way. Before I could get ready for it to come by, it blinked back off. It appears to be moving quite fast back toward the west. I had nearly forgotten about this one till I was getting the other clip for you. I think the 12th was the same night I was watching a high flying jet heading to the northwest. Usually I would be taping it for a while, but this time I was just watching. There was a fairly bright star nearly due north it was about to pass, when this star started really brightening up like turning up a dimmer switch. After the jet past, it dimmed back down to regular starlight. Of course I taped the star, but am not sure if I got any of it dimming back down or not. When I run across it, if I did catch the dimming, I'll send it to you. I really don't think it was a star, but it never moved from that spot as long as I watched it. Anyway, here's the clip and some grabs of this one. http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D25 31 Thanks to Brian Vike Director, and =A9 Lawwalk 2005 Virginia - Colored Objects Return To The Area SPOTSYLVANIA =96 The witness writes, "I observed the same unidentified flying objects again that I reported in January and February. On March 15, 2005, at 7:45 PM, at a distance of 5-9 miles just above the northwest horizon there were six objects hovering for 15 to 20 minutes that are round, with an orange, red, and yellow glow. I used a digital camera with a 6 x zoom 4.9 mega pixels. My 14 year old daughter also witnessed the event. These objects continue to come back in this area on a regular monthly basis. These are definitely not planes as they are too close together and hover for an extended period. They should be visible to anybody facing toward me in the eastern sky, I am 7 miles west of Interstate 95. I was facing northwest toward Culpeper,Virginia when the sighting occurred These are not planes or helicopters. They make no noise and whenever they seem to appear here there is heavy air traffic overhead? Photos can be viewed at: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=3DNews&file=3Darticle&sid=3D2523 Thanks to Brian Vike Director, http://www.hbccufo.org/ Eastern US - Unusual Grass Circles and UFOs Last month during a thaw I noticed dark green rings in my alfalfa field. I made a mental note to investigate but it snowed again after and since. When the snow melts I'm going to take a picture of what I have. My alfalfa field was mowed short in the Fall as I do every year when we bail the hay up. The distinct rings were noticed after the Fall freeze when the alfalfa stubble turns brown. My estimate is the ring is about 15-20 feet in diameter with a ring thickness of four feet. The center of the ring was undisturbed normal brown color like the rest of the field. I have never applied any chemicals or fertilizer on this field. Because of my agent orange exposure I cannot tolerate chemicals, not even room deodorizers. I'm now looking forward to Spring even more now. Similar rings were reported in Argentina Strange Circles On Grass Runway located at: http://www.rense.com/general63/grass.htm) We have seen columns of orange shafts of light emanating from the woods near the house and coincidentally near the area of the circle. The beams pointed straight up (or down) but nothing else was seen overhead at the time. Did I tell you about the day before Thanksgiving 4 years ago when we were pulling up to the house from shopping and a silver ball about 3 feet in diameter was about 3 feet above the center of our house above the roof? When we came in the house it smelled like ozone, or arcing electrical wires etc. The smell was strong and even though we didn't see anyone in the house we felt like we were not alone as it felt like we were being watched. The heavy feeling of having our space violated bothered us. The ball stayed in sight as it moved off the house as we watched from the driveway. As it sped up it seemed to "fade" as it must have been changing dimensions or whatever. It was still in full view as it moved off, the image of the ball went from solid to nothing or invisible. If you recall I sent you a picture of my wife sitting on the corral fence and a UFO was off in the distance. I think there is much activity here all the time. On July 4, 2002, we had a disc swoop across the path of our car perpendicular to the road, crossing from our left to our right. It was really low, at eye level and it had lights of orange, red, green on the outer edge of it. It didn't disturb the operating of the car nor did we feel any wind from it's passing. It was only about 20 feet ahead of us as it zipped in front of the car. Thanks to Brian Vike Canada - Green UFO Photographed and Triangle VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- Jon Kelly writes, "This green UFO was photographed facing North over downtown at 9:34 PM, on March 14, 2005." It did arrive early for St. Patrick's Day and dressed in an appropriate color I might add. In the original frame the signs on the buildings are clearly detailed, indicating that the object was at some altitude above the ground and not close to the lens as people might suspect. In the camera's macro mode (used in taking this photograph), the auto-focus system will shorten the focal distance when something is up close to the lens, resulting in a blurred and unfocussed background against which the well-focused foreground object appears. This effect does not occur in the UFO photograph. Readers can compare the UFO image with many other images that do show this effect in the photo gallery on my website, www.yourinnervoice.com. Camera: Panasonic Lumix FZ20 Shutter: 1/30 sec Aperture: 2.8 Exposure: +1 ISO Speed: 200 Flash: Auto Red-Eye Mode: Macro Thanks to Jon Kelly is (C) 2005 All Rights Reserved and Brian Vike, Director TERRACE, B.C. -- Last night March, 17, 2005, there were two lights floating in the air darting around, almost as if playing with each other. After just hovering for five minutes they darted around for another two minutes. When they got closer we could see their triangular shapes. They were glowing a whitish color, but they gave off a few blue and red flashes. After they stopped darting around, they stayed stationary for almost an entire minute before darting across the sky. They traveled at an incredible rate of speed and disappeared. I am starting to think Terrace is a real UFO hot spot. This summer I am going be out every starry night till I get some video footage. Thanks to Brian Vike PETERBOROUGH, ONTARIO =96 On March 14, 2005, the witness took his dog out and noticed a red and white light low in the west moving towards the east. The light just seemed to stop. At exactly 10:05 PM, a large moving slow triangular object passed slowly overhead making a slow southeasterly turn flying at 1500 to 2000 feet overhead. The craft had a light on each corner that could easily have been mistaken for stars, but they moved together across the sky and all other lights-stars remained stationary. It just disappeared out of sight behind the horizon and buildings. Thanks to Brian Vike CALEDON, ONTARIO -- Last night I was going to my office at 10 PM, on March 15, 2005, and noticed a bright object through the window, that was changing colors, red, blue, green. It was a very starry night and the object was in the west moving in a small circle. I got my camera out and started taking pictures, It was strange because each time the flash went off it appeared to be coming towards my direction, it almost seemed as though it could see me from as far away as it was. I went in to try and down load the pictures but for some reason they were all black! It stayed there for around 35 minutes and when I went to see it at 10:55 PM, and it was gone. Thanks to Brian Vike TORONTO, ONTARIO =96 The witness reports, "I saw a craft zooming by that looked like just a blur on March 19, 2005, at 9 PM, with four lights. Two of them were odd blinking lights. The craft was heading south towards United States over Lake Ontario. It was flying extremely low and really quiet. At first I thought it was some kind of bomber or something. But it slowed down, then took off completely. It didn't make any noise and that's what scared me. I've been hearing reports on news stations in America that lots of people are seeing something similar so I have decided to report this." Thanks to Brian Vike, Director HBCC UFO Research Home - Phone 250 845 2189 WHITBY/OSHAWA ONTARIO paul.shishis.nul writes: "I have witnessed dozens of sightings, mostly daylights in both towns." What caught my attention is your recent report in Oshawa by Agnes Sroczynski who reports "Between 3 and 5 AM, a large vertical row of three lights was observed on February 13, 2005, flying quickly over, and then hovered for a few minutes before going into the clouds." About three hours later, a similar object that ties in exactly to my report was observed. Whitby township is 70 kms east of Toronto in Southern Ontario, near Lake Ontario and "between" two nuclear power plants[ that are located west [Pickering] and east Bownamville. Thanks to Paul Between TEXADA ISLAND and Vancouver Island, B.C. =96 The photographer took pictures I took a few days ago, at about 10 AM, on March 15, 2005. I was trying to take pictures of chemtrails and noticed an airplane heading north between Texada Island and Vancouver Island, and it suddenly pointed its nose upward and increased speed. Managed to snap this one photo. Doesn't look like a UFO to me, but it was moving up and decreasing in size rapidly. No sound was heard at all and no con trail. Looks like a new model? Shaped like a hairpin? Brazil - Great Yellow Light Like Fireball EMBU =96 The witness reports he was driving to his friend's house on February 21, 2005, at 8:35 PM, when he stopped his car because he saw a large light behind the trees in an elevation of the terrain. He saw the light for five seconds and wanted to follow, but his friend was waiting for him. Russia =96 Built flying Saucer A unique 'flying saucer' developed by Russian inventors in the late 1970s. is aging at an aviation plant in Central Russia. The engineers joined a fuselage and wings into one thick "wing", before trimming and rounding its edges. The saucer can lift more than half its weight, and its inner volume is 8-10 times bigger than the saloon of the plane it was made from. The aircraft can take off from any surface with the help of an air cushion. In 1988 it started test flights in Nizhny Novgorod, but was moved to Saratov after an accident. U.S. aviation constructors visited Nizhny Novgorod and attempted to make their own saucer, but failed because of a defect in the Soviet model. Specialists at the Saratov plant quoted by the Moskovsky Komsomolets Newspaper complained about the indifference of the Russian authorities towards the "saucer" project. Thanks to Moskovsky Komsomolets News South Korea =96 Light DAEJON -- I took a picture of a night scene, and I found a UFO on one of my pictures. I just wanted to take some night pictures and had a few shots at that night from my apartment on February 20, 2005, at 11:30 PM. Then, I found this picture which has a strange lightening flight thing in the dark sky. The shutter speed was 2 seconds. If you crop the flight part and put 'auto level' on it, you would find flashes from the flight. What the heck is that? Glow of Two Alien Planets Detected By Robert Roy Britt, Senior science writer Space Com reports, "The glow of planets outside our solar system have been spotted in the first direct detections of light emitted by alien worlds. The two planets were detected in infrared light, an emission of heat that is not visible to the human eye. There are no conventional photographs, but astronomers are ecstatic nonetheless. The gas giant worlds, each around a different star, were discovered previously by noting the gravitational wobbles they induce in their host stars -- an indirect method. Both are roughly Jupiter-sized and hot, orbiting very close to their stars. Each completes a "year" in less than four days. snip. thanks to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7267687/ Subscribe to Filer's Files to receive UFO CD So you won't miss a single breaking news story or the increased evidence for UFO and life in the universe. George A. Filer 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. Subscribe today and receive a free UFO Photo CD upon request. Send check or money order to: George Filer, 222 Jackson Road, Medford, NJ 08055. You can also Click: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr for majorstar.nul You may use Paypal, Visa, American Express, or Master Charge. http://martian-lifeforms.com/REAL ESTATE! Get your free report and learn how you can obtain the best real estate agent to help you relocate, 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 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 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:00:33 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:07:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:49:48 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>At the very outset I offered [and was ignored] that this was a >>studio shot with previously shot B-roll of the mountains [a >>camera locked off and shooting the vista in real time over a >>period of minutes-and perhaps a whole reel] being back projected >>on a screen behind the set. If there was anything accidentally >>captured on film, it was while the B-roll was being shot. >I'm not sure where you are getting your terminology, Don, but >in the motion picture business A-roll and B-roll have very >specific meanings, and this is not one of them. B-ROLL: Stock footage acquired for miscellaneous needs. I imagine they still called it B-roll back in the 50s, shot by the second unit. Once matched into the principle shot I suppose it then would then qualify as a special effect. >Regardless, background footage such as you are speaking of was >used in many films, but always when movement of the background >was part of the plan. Not always movement of but movement in the background as well. >There would be absolutely no advantage, and many disadvantages >to doing this when you wanted a static background as in the John >Wayne film. I looked at this and other scenes on the DVD and >they are obviously sound stage shots with painted backgrounds. I haven't seen the full screen movie version of the piece, so I can't say that it was or wasn't, but was offering a possibility. However even in the mini-clip it's easy to see that the foreground is in studio. But who's to say Ford wasn't breaking new ground by using a filmed but static background B-roll shot by a Second Unit? >When you are using rear projection onto a translucent screen >your lighting options for your subjects are very limited because >you must go to great effort to keep your subject lighting from >spilling onto the projection screen. This forces you to light >from very oblique angles which produces a specific and unnatural >look. Even so Bob, it was done all of the time. Lighting, particularly back then, was always a problem because the film wasn't as fast as it is now and required more lighting. Many scenes were shot using back screens and all had to deal with the lighting in the foreground. What's the difference here? >Bob Shell >(been there, done that) Yeah, me too. Don Ledger
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:15:50 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:45:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over >From: Eugene Frison <eugene.frison.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:24:38 -0400 >Subject: Re: Multiple Witnesses Report Noisy UFO Over Ontario & Quebec <snip> >That's why my philosophy, when investigating every UFO sighting >report, has always been: first, remember that any time a >sighting report comes in it's better than ninety percent likely >to be a mundane, then pound it, pound it, pound it flat with the >ufological hammer to beat any IFO out of it. It it's still >puzzling after this then let colleagues who are experts in their >fields beat it some more. Only when they're done with it and >it's still a mystery should it be called a UFO - but even then >recognize that there's still some distortion in the report! Good procedure. My approach also includes time. When a report
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:20:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:47:14 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:07:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:49:48 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>At the very outset I offered [and was ignored] that this was a >>studio shot with previously shot B-roll of the mountains [a >>camera locked off and shooting the vista in real time over a >>period of minutes-and perhaps a whole reel] being back projected >>on a screen behind the set. If there was anything accidentally >>captured on film, it was while the B-roll was being shot. >I'm not sure where you are getting your terminology, Don, but >in the motion picture business A-roll and B-roll have very >specific meanings, and this is not one of them. This is not the >place to go into this in detail, but if you check out some books >(and maybe web sites) on film editing, you will see what a B- >roll is. Bob,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Alpha Committee? - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:20:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:49:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? - Reynolds >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:47:55 -0400 >Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:37:49 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:43 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>>>Subject: Alpha Committee? ><snip> >I've always wondered why if the military or government wanted to >create a group to work in secracy why they would give them such >arresting titles as that stated above or Majestic-12 or Project >Twinkle for example? >I'm sure there are other project names that come to mind. >But I wonder if Rich isn't being a bit coy by mentioning the >Alpha Committee in light of James Randi's hoax under the name of >the Alpha Project? >Was the Alpha Committee real? Don: Since "Alpha" is such a popular antecedent: Alpha Male, Alphabet, Alpha Bits (cereal), Alpha Romeo, et cetera, one can see how it might end up in front of Project or Committee. The reference to me was in a 1978 letter/booklet, for an organization extant in 1968.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:57:32 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:54:58 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST >Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >Now this is the kind of story I like: >http://tinyurl.com/4no2z >It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot >answering a reader's question about UFOs. >She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. >Frank, up front and friendly. Greg, Thank you for calling to the List's attention the response by Capt. Getline in USA Today, date March 21, 2005. I, too, have responded to the comments, and copy below the e- mail I just sent to her. Peter NUFORC ----- Dear Capt. Getline, I was apprised of your response to a question regarding UFOs, which appeared in the March 21 issue of USA Today, and I feel compelled to respond to your comments. I preface by complimenting you on your willingness to address the fascinating field of UFO sightings. Many people simply dismiss out of hand the UFO question, assuming that there is no serious basis to UFO sighting reports. In your response, you state that you apparently have never met another pilot who has been witness to a UFO, but you do not indicate how many pilots you have queried on that subject. This is an important point to address, I believe, because unless the issue is raised among pilots, and raised in the right venue, you might not become privy to the sightings that some of your aviation colleagues may have experienced. Many of them might choose not to talk openly about their sightings, not wanting to jeopardize either their seniority, or even their right to fly. The National UFO Reporting Center, founded in October 1974, has received countless reports from pilots of all types, many of whom have reported to our organization most unusual sightings of anomalous objects. I list below the web addresses where you will be able read but a few of those reports: http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/035/S35822.html Summary: Minneapolis ARTCC submits report of sighting on March 25, 2004, by Northwest crew of four disc-shaped objects that were visible from their a/c, and pace the flight for approximately 15 minutes. Objects did not appear on radar, and did not activate TCAS. Case investigated by member of the Mutual UFO Network ("MUFON"), who obtained the audio of the exchange between the a/c and Minneapolis Center. http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/013/S13684.html Summary: During the evening of June 22, 2000, a pilot flying a Pilatus PC-12 "Transporter" (with passengers) looks west into the setting sun and observes a dark speck, which he assumes might be a large soaring-type bird. He reaches to disengage the autopilot, and glances back at the object, at which time he realizes that the object is converging on his a/c at VERY high speed. It passes over the starboard wing of his a/c, within 50 feet of the wing, he estimates, and disappears behind him. The object was egg-shaped, the color of charcoal, and it had no visible windows, nacelles, insignia, or empennage. Providence Approach Control detects object on radar, which is seen to reverse its course suddenly, and pace the a/c for an estimated 2 minutes. Radar data confirms target behind a/c, and proceeds to vector other a/c away from the unidentified target. Audio and radar data in the possession of NUFORC. http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/010/S10525.html http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/010/S10534.html Summary: Two crews witness a very large cluster of three intensely bright lights, which fly directly toward their a/c at cruise altitude. The objects execute an estimated 120-degree turn to the east in under 5 seconds, and then streaks out of sight of the a/c. Both witnesses were former USAF military pilots, and both ruled out any type of aerial refueling operation. The FAA Controller was involved with the sighting confirms that nothing appeared on the radar screen. He polled all the Controllers at Ft. Worth Center, and approximately half of them indicated that they thought they had handled a UFO sighting report at sometime during their respective careers. Our organization has many more reports posted to our website, which have been submitted by pilots. I would be happy to direct you to them, should you be interested in reading more reports from airline pilots. Finally, I would like to call to your attention that the FAA takes the UFO issue seriously enough that they include contact information for the National UFO Reporting Center in the Aeronautical Information Manual ("AIM"), the 2002 edition being the one exception. I would invite you to check your copy of the most recent edition of the AIM by looking in the Index under "UFO". In fact, there is an office at FAA Headquarters, where UFO reports are taken quite seriously. I would be happy to direct you to that office, if you would like to communicate with the party responsible for processing those reports. If you have any more questions on the subject of UFOs, and the reports we receive from pilots of UFO sightings, I would be happy to assist in any way I can. Again, thank you very much for your attention to this most interesting question regarding sightings of strange objects in the skies above our planet!! Cordially, Peter Davenport Commercial Pilot #2263995 (issued October 1978) Certified Flight Instructor (gliders)(1978-1988) National UFO Reporting Center P. O. Box 45623 University Station Seattle, WA 98145
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:19:54 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:22:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:20:46 -0400 >Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST >>Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >>Now this is the kind of story I like: >>http://tinyurl.com/4no2z >>It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot >>answering a reader's question about UFOs. >>She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. >>Frank, up front and friendly. >>Worth a look! >Unfortunately she ignores the more than 3,000 pilot sightings >collected by Dr. Richard Haines, the large number collected by >NARCAP, the Weinstein collection, the many pilot sightings >amongst the UNKNOWNS of Project Blue Book, the many pilot >sightings noted in the UFO Evidence, those in Jim MacDonald's >congressional testimony, etc. >I have never seen Tokyo, but believe there is ample evidence >that it is really there. Of course she didn't! Geez, she's a highly trained pilot not a UFO investigator. She's also quite the sought after speaker on building success and overcoming obstacles. She's a woman in a traditional man's game and she's risen above the negativity to glow in her own right. That alone to me is worthy of note. All she did was to answer a reader's question with sincerity and directness. None of the smug, arrogant, condescending nor 'armchair psychiatrist' nonsesense you get from the mainstream press and from some UFOlogists. Give her a break. At least she didn't toss the guy's email away. I'm sure she'd be honored to have Stanton T. Friedman as a responder to her column. Who knows, millions of USA Today readers might be able to order some Stan Friedman materials and get the story straight. :) I can't believe I'm propping USA Today. I remember that day decades ago when our editor at Gannett said we're launching a new nationwide newspaper.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:35:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:26:01 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >B-ROLL: Stock footage acquired for miscellaneous needs. I >imagine they still called it B-roll back in the 50s, shot by the >second unit. B roll is the secondary or "safety" footage for a film. In order to string together two interview clips that were not shot consecutively, an editor will cut away from A Roll to B Roll, while the audio from the A Roll shot plays under. Then when the editor cuts back to the second A Roll shot, it appears as if the concepts were always married together. This technique of using the cutaway is common to hide zooms in documentary films: the visuals may cut away to B roll footage of what the person is talking about while the A camera zooms in, then cut back after the zoom is complete. The cutaway to B roll footage can also be used to hide verbal or physical tics that the editor and/or director finds distracting: with the audio separate from the video, the filmmakers are freer to excise "uh"s, sniffs, coughs, and so forth. In fiction film, the technique can be used to indicate simultaneous action or flashbacks, usually increasing tension or revealing information. "B roll" also refers to footage provided free of charge to broadcast news organizations as a means of gaining free publicity. For example, an auto maker might shoot a video of its assembly line, hoping that segments will be used in stories about the new model year. -- Wikipedia The first definition above is the one that applies. I've never heard what you are talking about called a B-roll among filmmakers. >Even so Bob, it was done all of the time. Lighting, particularly >back then, was always a problem because the film wasn't as fast >as it is now and required more lighting. Many scenes were shot >using back screens and all had to deal with the lighting in the >foreground. What's the difference here? I think the use of back screens was far less common than you are supposing. Unless there was some particular reason for doing it this way, a painted background would be much simpler and much cheaper. There are lots of technical problems in making such a system work. Synchronizing camera and background projector is the most obvious one, spill of lighting is the other important one. I have done lighting setups for subjects working in front of back projection screens, and it is exceedingly difficult. Front projection, which was used in some films prior to blue screen, has its own set of problems. Anyway, in summary I don't think they would have used rear projection in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. I see no compelling reason in this film.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Rudiak From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:02:05 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:27:43 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Rudiak >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:07:22 -0500 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:49:48 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>At the very outset I offered [and was ignored] that this was a >>>studio shot with previously shot B-roll of the mountains [a >>>camera locked off and shooting the vista in real time over a >>>period of minutes-and perhaps a whole reel] being back projected >>>on a screen behind the set. If there was anything accidentally >>>captured on film, it was while the B-roll was being shot. <snip> >>Regardless, background footage such as you are speaking of was >>used in many films, but always when movement of the background >>was part of the plan. >Not always movement of but movement in the background as well. >>There would be absolutely no advantage, and many disadvantages >>to doing this when you wanted a static background as in the John >>Wayne film. I looked at this and other scenes on the DVD and >>they are obviously sound stage shots with painted backgrounds. >I haven't seen the full screen movie version of the piece, so I >can't say that it was or wasn't, but was offering a possibility. >However even in the mini-clip it's easy to see that the >foreground is in studio. But who's to say Ford wasn't breaking >new ground by using a filmed but static background B-roll shot >by a Second Unit? I suggest people check out the movie on DVD or video. The very next scene after the "UFO" scene, where John Wayne is talking to Maureen O'Hara as she is ironing, is Wayne continuing to talk to O'Hara with an obviously _flowing_ Colorado River in the background. So if this scene was shot on a sound stage, the flowing river was an on-location movie shot backprojected onto a screen. That means the ironing scene with the "UFO" could be the same thing instead of a static painted background, i.e., another on-location movie shot. If that's the case, this being filmed on a sound stage still
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Michael Wolf - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:12:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:30:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Wolf - Friedman >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:52:10 -0800 >Subject: Re: Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? <snip> >>Michael Wolf Kruvant never worked for the government, was not a >>scientist, was never in the military, was not head of a big >>research institute in Connecticut, was not an advisor to >>President Clinton, was not a pilot, was never married, did not >>have a son... despite a host of false claims. >>He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good >>imagination. >>I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn >>and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university >>personnel, the NY Acd. of Sci., AAAS, etc. >>His book is fiction, and self-published at that. >Not that I can add much to what you have said here except to say >that Michael sent me a metal sample from an alleged ET >spacecraft which I had analyzed. It was found to be a highly >pure piece of silicon slag of terrestrial origin. I found an >identical piece in a store which I bought for $1.00. Nothing >exotic to this piece of metal. >I also have a transcript of his college record. He flunked out >of Upsala College. No M.D., No PhDs. >In court documents, his wife sued him saying he had an emotional >illness and mental disorder. She also alleged that he had >required 'constant psychiatric treatment' and had been at one >time hospitalized at the Carrier Clinic, a private mental >institution located at Belle Mead, N.J. This was during the >prime of his life in the early 60s when he was allegedly earning >college degrees. Anyone can check these records. >I talked with Michael several times over the phone and found him >engaging on occasion. I talked with his brother once and it does >seem they had a UFO sighting together during the teen years. >Perhaps they inspired him to become a member of Alphacom team! Thanks Bill. I hadn't heard about the silicon. Not surprising. One slight correction. It was his mother who was suing her ex- husband (Michael's father) for additional support to cover his mental hospital costs. He never had a wife. I am glad to hear somebody else checked on him.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:56:16 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:32:27 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:57:32 -0800 >Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:00:45 EST >>Subject: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >>Now this is the kind of story I like: >>http://tinyurl.com/4no2z >>It's USA Today travel columnist who is a professional pilot >>answering a reader's question about UFOs. >>She answers with no nonsense and without the hassles. >>Frank, up front and friendly. >Thank you for calling to the List's attention the response by >Capt. Getline in USA Today, date March 21, 2005. >I, too, have responded to the comments, and copy below the e- >mail I just sent to her. >Peter >NUFORC >----- >Dear Capt. Getline, >I was apprised of your response to a question regarding UFOs, >which appeared in the March 21 issue of USA Today, and I feel >compelled to respond to your comments. <snip> Peter, I know it would be poor 'netiquette' to post her response, should she provide one, but I would love a quick synopsis either
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 23 Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi From: Isaac Koi <isaackoi2.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:21:54 -0000 Fwd Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:34:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II - Koi >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:53:45 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:03:42 -0000 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II ><snip> >>One other thing I'd like to know about Lubbock is the >>nature of the "very simple and commonplace >>natural phenomenon" (or words to this effect) that >>Ruppelt says the lights were finally explained as. This is >>something else about which Ruppelt is coy. >>Does anyone know the answer? >Good Day, All - >A Denver UFO group, when Ruppelt's private papers came on the >market, was able to purchase them. They allowed me to look at >the papers when I was in Denver for a lecture and one of the >questions I had, was, quite naturally, what was Ruppelt's >"secret" explanation. >According to the notes that Ruppelt kept himself, and, >according to an early draft of the book, the answer was >"fireflies". Don't ask me why or how, because I don't >know. I suspect his answer did not deal with the Hart >pictures. >KRandle Greetings All, Don't forget that the 1959 revised edition of Ruppelt's book (with its 3 extra concluding chapters) states the nature of the "very commonplace and easily explainable natural phenomenon". Also, it is fairly clear even from the first edition of Ruppelt's book that his comments about positive identification "as a very commonplace and easily explainable natural phenomenon" were intended to refer to the v-shaped formation of bluish green lights reported as passing over Lubbock by the Texas Technical College professors (W I Robinson, A G Oberg and W L Ducker from 25 August 1951 onwards), and not Carl Hart Jr's photographs (purportedly taken on 31 August 1951). For ease of reference, I've set out below Ruppelt's conclusion in relation to the Lubbock Lights as stated in the first edition of his book: "Personally I thought that the professors' lights might have been some kind of birds reflecting the light from mercury vapor street lights, but I was wrong. They weren't birds, they weren't refracted light, but they weren't spaceships. The lights that the professors saw - the backbone of the Lubbock Light series - have been positively identified as a very commonplace and easily explainable natural phenomenon." "It is very unfortunate that I can't divulge exactly the way the answer was found because it is an interesting story of how a scientist set up complete instrumentation to track down the lights and how he spent several months testing theory after theory until he finally hit upon the answer. Telling the story would lead to his identity and, in exchange for his story, I promised the man complete anonymity. But he fully convinced me that he had the answer, and after having heard hundreds of explanations of UFO's, I don't convince easily." "With the most important phase of the Lubbock Lights "solved" - the sightings by the professors- the other phases become only good UFO reports." (The above extract is from the end of Ruppelt's discussion of the Lubbock Lights in his "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" (1956) at pages 96-110 (in Chapter 8 generally) of the original 17 chapter Doubleday hardback edition, at pages 133-150 of the Gollancz hardback edition, at pages 130-148 of the Ace paperback edition, at pages 96-110 (in Chapter 8 generally) of the 1959 revised Doubleday 20 chapter hardback edition, at pages 70-80 of the reprinted Source Books softcover edition. The first of these editions (i.e. the original 17 chapter hardback edition) has the same page numbering as the version available free online at: http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/Rufo.htm). Ruppelt's discussion of the Carl Hart photographs takes up part of the chapter devoted to the Lubbock Lights. The relevant pages are principally devoted to a discussion of the possibility of a hoax and conclude: "My official conclusion, which was later given to the press, was that "The photos were never proven to be a hoax but neither were they proven to be genuine." There is no definite answer." (see Ruppelt's discussion of the Carl Hart photographs in his "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" (1956) at pages 97, 100-101, 105-107 (in Chapter 8) of the original 17 chapter Doubleday hardback edition, at pages 135, 138-139, 143-145 of the Gollancz hardback edition, at pages 132, 135-136, 141-143 of the Ace paperback edition, at pages 97, 100- 101, 105-107 of the 1959 revised Doubleday 20 chapter hardback edition, at pages 72, 73-74, 76-77 of the reprinted Source Books softcover edition. The first of these editions (i.e. the original 17 chapter hardback edition) has the same page numbering as the version available free online at: http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/Rufo.htm). The 1959 revised Doubleday 20 chapter hardback edition includes additional discussion of the "very commonplace and easily explainable natural phenomenon" which Ruppelt accepted as an explanation for the professors' lights. That discussion appears in the chapters that were added in that edition, specifically at pages 254 (in Chapter 18) and 276 (in Chapter 20). The discussion at page 254 is merely a passing reference, but at page 276 Ruppelt makes the following comments: "[The Lubbock Lights case is] probably one of the most thoroughly investigated reports in the UFO files and it contained the most precise observational data we ever received. Scientists from far and near tried to solve it. It remained an 'unknown'." "The men who made the original sightings stuck by the case and furnished the 'more detailed objective observational data' the Air Force speaks of." "The mysterious lights appeared again and instead of looking for something high in the air the looked for something low and found the solution." "The world famous Lubbock Lights were night flying moths reflecting the bluish-green light of a nearby row of mercury vapour street lights." Whatever the merits of this explanation of the Lubbock Lights sighting, it is significant to note that the "men who made the original sighting" do not appear to have offered the explanation attributed to them by Ruppelt. In "Captain Edward J Ruppelt : Summer of the Saucers - 1952" (2000) Michael David Hall and Wendy Ann Connors refer to research by David Wheeler identifying the mysterious scientist as Professor Ducker. Their book suggests that "Ducker had had conversations with Ruppelt in later years and told him that he conclusively proved their UFO sightings were caused by birds. In fact, these author's have recently discovered this correspondence in Ruppelt's personal papers." (The relevant observation at page 35 is part of the discussion of the Lubbock Lights in that book at pages 30-31, 32-35 (in Chapter 1), 65, 74 (in Chapter 2), 245 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Final Word - The Forgotten Correspondence of Edward Ruppelt") of the Rose Press softcover edition.) Similarly, Jerry Clarke's Encyclopedia quotes from an undated Project Blue Book document which includes the following "In 1959 Dr J Allen Hynek contacted one of the professors at Texas Tech regarding [the] case. This professor informed Dr Hynek that he had conducted an extensive study of the Lubbock sightings and determined that they were definitely [of] birds" (discussed by Jerome Clark in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: The Phenomenon from the Beginning - 2nd edition" (1998) in Volume 2:L-Z at page 590 (in an entry entitled "Lubbock Lights") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition). However, this resolution of the mystery created by Ruppelt's comment in the first edition of his book: (a) is inconsistent with the comment made by Ruppelt in both editions of his book that "Personally I thought that the professors' lights might have been some kind of birds reflecting the light from mercury vapor street lights, but I was wrong"; and (b) is inconsistent with the "night flying moths" explanation offered by Ruppelt in his revised edition; (c) fails to explain why these inconsistencies exist. The professors' sighting is listed in the records of Project Blue Book as "Other (BIRDS)" (listed as Project Blue Book Case Number 978 on US National Archives and Records Administration ("NARA") Microfilm T1206-1. An image of the relevant index page has the Page ID ("PID") of 11048 at the link below: http://www.bluebookarchive.org/browse.aspx ). (By the way, if you are interested in areas in which Ruppelt was a bit coy, you may find the book by Wendy and Michael a useful resource. It quotes extensively from the draft of Ruppelt's book, plus relevant correspondence and relevant interviews. Also, see the article entitled "Ruppelt's Coverup" by Brad Sparks at pages 40-49 of the Sign Historical Group UFO History Workshop available free online in pdf format at the link below: http://www.project1947.com/shg/wonline.htm ) I'll avoid boring members of this List with the full list of references from the incomplete draft of the chronology I've been working on, but I'll cut and paste the top few entries when those references are sorted by length of the relevant discussion: 23 pages - Steiger, Brad (with extracts from relevant documentation) in his "Project Blue Book" (1976), at pages 78- 100 of the Ballantine Books paperback edition (Chapter Four : Mystery of the Lubbock Lights") particularly at pages 83-90 and 98-100. 21 pages- Randle, Kevin D in his "Conspiracy of Silence" (1997) at pages 2 (in the Introduction), 80 (in Chapter 3), 81-97 (Chapter 4 generally), 227, 228 (in Chapter 11) of the Avon paperback edition. 17 pages - Ruppelt, Edward J in his "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" (1956) at pages 96-110 (in Chapter 8 generally) of the original 17 chapter Doubleday hardback edition, at pages 133-150 of the Gollancz hardback edition, at pages 130-148 of the Ace paperback edition, at pages 96-110 (in Chapter 8 generally), 254 (in Chapter 18), 276 (in Chapter 20) of the 1959 revised Doubleday 20 chapter hardback edition, at pages 70-80 of the reprinted Source Books softcover edition. The first of these editions (i.e. the original 17 chapter hardback edition) has the same page numbering as the version available free online at: http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/Rufo.htm 10 pages - Randle, Kevin D in his "The UFO Casebook" (1989) at pages 56-65 (in an entry entitled "August 1951: The Lubbock Lights") of the Warner Books paperback edition. 9 pages - Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial" (1998) at pages 342-350 of the Visible Ink Press softcover edition in an entry entitled "Lubbock Lights". 9 pages - Hall, Michael David and Connors, Wendy Ann in their "Captain Edward J Ruppelt : Summer of the Saucers - 1952" (2000) at pages 30-31, 32-35 (in Chapter 1), 65, 74 (in Chapter 2), 245 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "Final Word - The Forgotten Correspondence of Edward Ruppelt") of the Rose Press softcover edition. 8 pages - Clark, Jerome "The UFO Encyclopedia: The Phenomenon from the Beginning - 2nd edition" (1998) in Volume 2:L-Z at pages 584-591 (in an entry entitled "Lubbock Lights") of the Omnigraphics hardback edition. 8 pages - Clark, Jerome in his "The UFO Encyclopedia: 1st edition: Volume 2 - Emergence of a Phenomenon" (1992) at pages 230-237 of the Omnigraphics hardback edition in an entry entitled "Lubbock Lights". 8 pages - Randle, Kevin and Estes, Russ in their "Spaceships of the Visitors" (1997) at pages 122-129 (in Part 3) of the Fireside softcover edition. 8 pages - Randle, Kevin D in his "Project Bluebook Exposed" (1997) at pages 182 (in the unnumbered chapter entitled "So, What Do We Make of All This?"), 189-193 and 203-204 (in Appendix A) of the Marlowe softcover edition. 8 pages - Randle, Kevin D in his "Project Moon Dust" (1998) at pages 33 (in Chapter 2), 109-115 (in Chapter 5) of the Avon softcover edition. 7 pages - Menzel, Donald and Boyd, Lyle in their "The World of Flying Saucers" (1963) at pages 123-129 (in Chapter VI) of the Doubleday hardback edition. 6 pages - Hall, Michael David in his "UFOs : A Century of Sightings" (1999) at pages 145-150 (in Chapter 4) of the Galde Press softcover edition. 6 pages - Ortzen, Len in his "Strange Stories of UFOs" (1977) at pages 64-69 (in Chapter 9) of the Coronet paperback edition.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:56:16 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:24:28 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:02:05 -0800 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:07:22 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>There would be absolutely no advantage, and many disadvantages >>>to doing this when you wanted a static background as in the John >>>Wayne film. I looked at this and other scenes on the DVD and >>>they are obviously sound stage shots with painted backgrounds. >>I haven't seen the full screen movie version of the piece, so I >>can't say that it was or wasn't, but was offering a possibility. >>However even in the mini-clip it's easy to see that the >>foreground is in studio. But who's to say Ford wasn't breaking >>new ground by using a filmed but static background B-roll shot >>by a Second Unit? >I suggest people check out the movie on DVD or video. The very >next scene after the "UFO" scene, where John Wayne is talking to >Maureen O'Hara as she is ironing, is Wayne continuing to talk to >O'Hara with an obviously _flowing_ Colorado River in the background. >So if this scene was shot on a sound stage, the flowing river >was an on-location movie shot backprojected onto a screen. >That means the ironing scene with the "UFO" could be the same >thing instead of a static painted background, i.e., another on- >location movie shot. >If that's the case, this being filmed on a sound stage still >won't settle the question as to whether there was a genuine UFO >there in the background. There you go. A flowing river. So they shot the background using a second unit and rear projected it for background purposes. But Bob's right in that in this case it was not used to mate two shots together but was used instead as a special effect, probably to give a majectic [NPI] view with the realism that would not be possible with a painted backdrop.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:54:20 -0600 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:26:56 -0500 Subject: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor Source: Dallas University News http://tinyurl.com/4nrxh 03-23-05 Life On Mars Not Possible, Oklahoma Professor Says By Ashley Wolford Contributing Writer Scientific research so far suggests that Mars cannot sustain life as known on Earth because Mars lacks characteristics that allow for life on Earth, Dr. Gordon Emslie, associate research vice president and graduate college dean at Oklahoma State University, said in a speech last week. Emslie's speech titled Spinning Pliers, The Chaotic Obliquity of Mars, and the Existence of Extraterrestrial Life involved aspects of physics, probability, statistics, and a consideration of Earth's planetary features. Emslie described the characteristics of a suitable planet for life. Characterisitics include the distance of the planet from the nearest star. If the star is too close, the planet's climate will be too hot. If the star is too far away, the planet's climate will be too cold: neither instance will sustain life. The planet's rotation rate must be moderate as well. If the rate is too slow, then light and heat from the star will burn one side of the planet while other side freezes, Emslie said. Chemical composition is important because without the right chemicals life cannot form, Emslie said. Another significant reason for the life on earth is that the Earth's rotation axis is remarkably stable. The moon stabilizes the Earth, Emslie said. "Many planets have moons. Mars has a moon. But the Earth's moon is fairly unique," he said. The moon's size is more than one-sixth the size of the earth. Earth is so stable because it has a uniquely large moon, which is uncommon. The moon is as necessary to life on Earth as the sun is known to be, Emslie said.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:29:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>Source: Scientific American.Com >>http://tinyurl.com/6y37m >>Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>By Michael Shermer ><snip> >Whew! And I thought people were being abducted by real aliens. >Wait until I tell my wife that she just hallucinated as I duck >the pots and pans coming my way. >What I don't understand is how she hallucinated when in a >perfectly good state of health in May 1991 while wide awake >reading a book just after turning the television off for the >night! >I am sure Shermer has an additional explanation for that. Welcome to Shermer's website GEIWYW (Great Explanations Invented While You Wait) where he writes: "Bill's wife hallucinated being awake, turning off the TV, etc."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Bush Truman MJ-12 Etc From: Paul Kimball <Redstarfilm.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:27:53 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:31:03 -0500 Subject: Bush Truman MJ-12 Etc List: Anyone who is interested in further discussion on the subject of Vannevar Bush and Harry Truman, as it relates to both MJ-12 and the Smith memo, subjects brought up by both myself and David Rudiak here lately, can wander over to my friendly (honest) little blog for my latest ruminations: www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com The title is "The End of the Frontier: Vannevar Bush & Harry S. Truman." My only regret is that I couldn't come up with something more pithy.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:23:19 -0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:32:53 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shough >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:35:57 -0500 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> >Anyway, in summary I don't think they would have used rear >projection in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. I >see no compelling reason in this film. >Bob Shell And if rear projection had been used in a shot which, as far as
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Gord Heath <gheath.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:45:38 -0800 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:31:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - I have been following the response to Greg Boone's initial post on UFO Updates with some interest as I have noticed that all responder's to the column seem to have missed a key point. As far as I know, airline pilots have specific reporting procedures they are required to follow in the event that they witness a UFO. I remember talking to my brother about this a few years ago - he is a pilot for a Canadian airline. I recall that he told me that the regulations require that these sightings be reported and that the reporting procedures for UFOs are the same as those for suspicious aircraft (such as high flying foreign military aircraft). I assume these regulations are in place to ensure that potentially hostile air traffic incursions are properly documented. If a pilot sees a meteor, this is not a UFO and certainly there is no reason why they would not be free to report it to an Astronomy professor or the media as they are clearly not going to get in trouble for doing so. On the other hand, if a pilot sees something that looks like it might be a spaceship that looks like it is probably advanced beyond earth originating technology, then the pilot faces a dilemma. Should the pilot report the sighting taking into account that the report will likely get you in trouble because such spacecraft/aircraft aren't officially supposed to be there? Therefore the witness is either lying, crazy or maybe just trying to stir up trouble for his/her superiors who also want to avoid getting associated with those pesky flying saucer reports. I make reference to the Japan Airline sighting of the massive UFO over Alaska as a case in point. I don't know for certain whether the reporting procedures for UFOs are the same for US airline pilots as Canadian airline pilots, but I suspect that they are if anything, probably more onerous and cloaked in military secrecy. I hardly believe anyone who knows about this would feel compelled to congratulate the pilot travel columnist on her "frank, up front" response to the question about what she would do if she witnessed a UFO (not a meteor). Maybe she is answering truthfully in a way, the subtext being, if I witnessed a meteor, I might report it to someone who might be searching for meteors, but if I saw a truly unidentified aerial phenomena, then you can bet your bottom dollar that I
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 24 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:27:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:43:56 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Shell >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:23:19 -0000 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>Anyway, in summary I don't think they would have used rear >>projection in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. I >>see no compelling reason in this film. >>Bob Shell >And if rear projection had been used in a shot which, as far as >I can make out, contains no background motion (putative UFO >excluded) wouldn't a static slide projection have been easier, >cheaper and much less problematic than a movie? I don't think static slide projection would have been done. This has its own problems. They would use a painted background. The studios all had painting crews skilled in producing such backgrounds. Projectors used for back projection had to have _very_ bright lamps. Since motion picture film is moving through a gate at 24 frames per second, no frame is exposed to the heat from the lamp for more than 1/24th second. A static slide would be very different and I don't know if it could have been kept cool enough for prolonged projection. I'll have to get the DVD again and look at this scene and the next one with the flowing river. It could be that this scene was
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:32:01 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:32:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDdates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:54:20 -0600 >Subject: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor >Emslie described the characteristics of a suitable planet for life. Seems the professor is repeating the "Habitable Zone" Earth- chauvinisms. These claim that a planet must be pretty much as Earth is now, for life to evolve. Rubbish. Check the data - they say life probably evolved in conditions very unlike conditions today on Earth. "Life 'began on the ocean floor' It may all have begun next to hydrothermal vents in the deep sea" - "One of the implications of this idea is that life on other planets or some large moons in our own solar system, like ice- crusted Europa - a moon of Jupiter - might be much more likely than previously assumed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2541393.stm and "As the vent water bursts out into the ocean, its temperature may be as high as 400=B0C (750=B0F)." http://www.ocean.udel.edu/deepsea/level-2/geology/vents.html Recommend search for "habitable zone" - but that is nonsense - for more details. Cheers Ray D "A physicist is a mathematician with a feeling for reality" -
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:59 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:39:18 -0500 Subject: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? The latest issue of UFO Review (#9) mentions a website: http://www.seekingmoinfo.com/ that presents details of an alleged UFO crash in Missouri in 1941. In looking at the site, I noticed all of the usual problems with such stories - records mysteriously missing, principals conveniently dead. Are any of our Listers aware of any compelling evidence that would lead us to believe this event is anything more than just another campfire tale? Joe Harvat Joe Harvat
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:03:35 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:43:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Peter Davenport - NUFORC <director.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:57:32 -0800 >Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs [snip] >Greg, >Thank you for calling to the List's attention the response by >Capt. Getline in USA Today, date March 21, 2005. >I, too, have responded to the comments, and copy below the e- >mail I just sent to her. >Peter >NUFORC >----- >Dear Capt. Getline, >I was apprised of your response to a question regarding UFOs, >which appeared in the March 21 issue of USA Today, and I feel >compelled to respond to your comments. >I preface by complimenting you on your willingness to address >the fascinating field of UFO sightings. Many people simply >dismiss out of hand the UFO question, assuming that there is no >serious basis to UFO sighting reports. >In your response, you state that you apparently have never met >another pilot who has been witness to a UFO, but you do not >indicate how many pilots you have queried on that subject. This >is an important point to address, I believe, because unless the >issue is raised among pilots, and raised in the right venue, you >might not become privy to the sightings that some of your >aviation colleagues may have experienced. Many of them might >choose not to talk openly about their sightings, not wanting to >jeopardize either their seniority, or even their right to fly. Peter, I'll have to admit that I'm surprised that the reaction to the column has been to try and argue with the viewpoint expressed. She expressed a viewpoint in response to a question and there's no indication that the reported was actually interested in the subject and went on to other questions without followup. The column was in a Travel Section and I think one has to take that into account when one reads the responses. Not only are the questions designed to be simple, informative, and non-threatening, but the answers are couched to keep people flying as well. Certainly a Travel Section is not the forum for a serious interview on whether or not there are objects that pilots can't identify flying near commercial airliners. She came across as a pilot who had a good attitude and that's probably what they were striving for I think that letting her know of NARCAP would probably be worthwhile, but she didn't really indicate an interest in unknowns and hopefully she'll know who to get in touch with if she ever has an encouter that bothers her enough to report it.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:05:52 -0400 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:44:44 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:23:19 -0000 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:35:57 -0500 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:06:45 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO ><snip> >>Anyway, in summary I don't think they would have used rear >>projection in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. I >>see no compelling reason in this film. >And if rear projection had been used in a shot which, as far as >I can make out, contains no background motion (putative UFO >excluded) wouldn't a static slide projection have been easier, cheaper and much less problematic than a movie? According to Dave Rudiak the Colorado River is flowing in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Michael Wolf - Hamilton From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:24:08 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:47:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Wolf - Hamilton >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:12:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Michael Wolf >>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:52:10 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? ><snip> >>>Michael Wolf Kruvant never worked for the government, was not a >>>scientist, was never in the military, was not head of a big >>>research institute in Connecticut, was not an advisor to >>>President Clinton, was not a pilot, was never married, did not >>>have a son... despite a host of false claims. >>>He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good >>>imagination. >>>I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn >>>and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university >>>personnel, the NY Acd. of Sci., AAAS, etc. >>>His book is fiction, and self-published at that. >>Not that I can add much to what you have said here except to say >>that Michael sent me a metal sample from an alleged ET >>spacecraft which I had analyzed. It was found to be a highly >>pure piece of silicon slag of terrestrial origin. I found an >>identical piece in a store which I bought for $1.00. Nothing >>exotic to this piece of metal. <snip> >Thanks Bill. I hadn't heard about the silicon. Not surprising. The sample was dubbed "BHI" and the analysis was done by a Canadian lab. This was in the report: The material, BHI, that you sent to me most recently is the one (not RR4) that had the bubble. This bubble, exposed and at the surface, was noticed by a minerologist technician using a stereo microscope. It was also confirmed by me. Spectral-analysis plots of the chemical composition, including some micro images of BHI have been completed a while back. The conclusion is BHI is a manufactured item. >One slight correction. It was his mother who was suing her ex- >husband (Michael's father) for additional support to cover his >mental hospital costs. He never had a wife. Yes, you are correct. It was her disabled son she was seeking support for.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Michael Wolf - Aldrich From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:2:50 -0500 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:43:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Michael Wolf - Aldrich >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:52:10 -0800 >Subject: Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>From: Maurizio Baiata <maurizio.baiata.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:11:38 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? >>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:03:24 -0500 >>>>Subject: Alpha Committee? >>>>I have private correspondence (1977) from a somewhat prominent >>>>ufologist who makes reference, in an aside, about an "Alpha >>>>Committee" which I assume was supposed to be a government group. >>>>Have anyone any information about this? >>>>I plan to scan the letter and put it online here and at our >>>>RRRGroup blog. >>>Reference to a so called "Alphacom Team" can be found in the >>>book, Catchers of Heaven - A Trilogy, by the late Dr. Michael Wolf >>>(Kruvant). Just a guess. As Dr. Wolf stated, it was a secret >>>government group. >>Michael Wolf Kruvant never worked for the government, was not a >>scientist, was never in the military, was not head of a big >>research institute in Connecticut, was not an advisor to >>President Clinton, was not a pilot, was never married, did not >>have a son... despite a host of false claims. >>He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good >>imagination. >>I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn >>and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university >>personnel, the NY Acd. of Sci., AAAS, etc. >>His book is fiction, and self-published at that. >Not that I can add much to what you have said here except to say >that Michael sent me a metal sample from an alleged ET >spacecraft which I had analyzed. It was found to be a highly >pure piece of silicon slag of terrestrial origin. I found an >identical piece in a store which I bought for $1.00. Nothing >exotic to this piece of metal. >I also have a transcript of his college record. He flunked out >of Upsala College. No M.D., No PhDs. >In court documents, his wife sued him saying he had an emotional >illness and mental disorder. She also alleged that he had >required 'constant psychiatric treatment' and had been at one >time hospitalized at the Carrier Clinic, a private mental >institution located at Belle Mead, N.J. This was during the >prime of his life in the early 60s when he was allegedly earning >college degrees. Anyone can check these records. >I talked with Michael several times over the phone and found him >engaging on occasion. I talked with his brother once and it does >seem they had a UFO sighting together during the teen years. >Perhaps they inspired him to become a member of Alphacom team! Bill, I am sure that your investigation in the Michael Wolf matter was most thorough. Along this line, I have some questions for you. Why didn't you do the same "due dilligence" on Mel Noel and Dr Dan Burisch? Would you support a committee of ufologists to vet witnesses who claim "insider" information? Such a committee would perfrom checks on creditials and military assignments and other such claims.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:46:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>Source: Scientific American.Com >>>http://tinyurl.com/6y37m >>>Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>By Michael Shermer >><snip> >>Whew! And I thought people were being abducted by real aliens. >>Wait until I tell my wife that she just hallucinated as I duck >>the pots and pans coming my way. >>What I don't understand is how she hallucinated when in a >>perfectly good state of health in May 1991 while wide awake >>reading a book just after turning the television off for the >>night! >>I am sure Shermer has an additional explanation for that. >Welcome to Shermer's website GEIWYW (Great Explanations Invented >While You Wait) where he writes: >"Bill's wife hallucinated being awake, turning off the TV, etc." >And remember the Rule #1 of Debunking: >Any explanation is better than none. >So, when in needed contact GEIWYW. Bruce, See: http://www.geocities.com/jorgeconesa/Paralysis/sleepnew.html for a discussion of sleep paralysis, which despite its name can occur in non sleep states. David Hufford gives examples of occurances in a library and sat on an airliner. Henry James Snr, the father of William the psychologist and Henry the novelist had a particularly shattering sleep paralysis episode while sat reading in his study. False awakening is also a well established experience which has been discussed by Keith Basterfield and Jenny Randles among others, and is discussed in Celia Green's "Lucid Dreaming". The line between SP episodes and false awakening is very blurred, and it seems likely that SP episodes can occur on a continuum from, at least a subjective sensation of, being wide awake to obvious sleep. See also: http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/70/visions.html for a classic case of a ufo themed sleep paralysis episode and incidences of hypnogogic and hypnopompic hallucination Conesa also suggests that SP can be associated with micro rem states such as occur to fatigued drivers (think of the Hills here folks), and it may well account for some otherwise inexplicable accidents (the terrible Moorgate tube train disaster comes to mind). Abduction narratives fit well into the tradition of the secret night adventure, which have included belief that one has been turned into a horse and ridden round the fields by the fairies, attended witches sabbats, travelled _astrally_ to the Himalayas
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Adverts To Aliens From: Diana Cammack <cammack.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:29:08 +0200 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:51:21 -0500 Subject: Adverts To Aliens Source: CNN.Com http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/03/23/craigslist.space/index.html 03-24-05 Craigslist Gets Beamed Into Space By Ker Than Special to SPACE.com (SPACE.com) - Aliens will be glad to know that if ever they need to find an apartment here on Earth, someone has got them covered. On March 11, a company called Deep Space Communications Network beamed the first commercial transmission of a Web site into space. The message? Over one hundred thousand separate postings from craigslist.com, the popular community Web site that includes classified listings for jobs, housing and other goods. The transmission included a date and time stamp, as well as an audio track identifying the message as originating from Earth. "It's very fitting that the first [commercial] transmission into space is by a community Web site like craiglist because it represents a wide cross section of society," said Jim Lewis, vice president of Deep Space Communications Network. The company is an offshoot of Communications Concepts, Inc., a company based in Cape Canaveral, Florida, that produces live television coverage of shuttle launches. That same equipment is now being used to give the public a chance to send messages out to any intergalactic neighbors that might be listening in a service slated to become widely available within the next month. Lewis told SPACE.com that the company is currently in talks with craigslist to broadcast another transmission on to coincide with the planned Discovery launch, NASA's first post-Columbia shuttle mission. Commercial messages have long been transmitted into space, inadvertantly since the first radio and television signals were generated, but the Deep Space Communications Network joins a short list of intentional transmissions aimed at contacting someone - anyone - out in the Universe. Another company, talktoaliens.com, offers a similar service but with an added twist: users can send a text message or they can dial a phone number and have their voices beamed live into space via a custom designed parabolic dish antenna dubbed the "Intergalactic Transmitter". The service has been available since March 7, and the antenna is operational 24-hours a day. Talktoaliens.com is operated by a small group of radio and broadcast engineers who were part of the Civilian Space eXploration Team, or CSXT, a group that made news in May of last year when they successfully launched the first amateur rocket into space. The company is headed by Eric Knight, CSXT's former avionics manager. Neither of the companies target specific stars or particular points in space for their transmissions. Deep Space Communications Network aims their antenna at coordinates where there are no known satellites, and they estimate that their transmissions will travel approximately 1-3 light years. Talktoaliens.com states that their antenna is designed to sweep through as much of the Milky Way Galaxy as possible. The two services are the latest in a long tradition of radio CETI or Communications with ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence attempts. The first, known as the Arecibo Message, occurred in 1974 when two Cornell University scientists beamed an encoded radio message that included an image of a human figure and the structure of DNA toward the great globular cluster M13, 25,000 light years away. In 1999 and 2003, a more elaborate set of messages known collectively as the Cosmic Call was sent out from a radio telescope in the Ukraine to nearby star systems deemed likely to harbor life. In 2001, another message, composed by Russian teens and called the Teenage Message to the Stars, was also transmitted from the Ukraine radio telescope. Knight describes his company as a public service. "The goal is to give every citizen on planet earth who has access to phone or computer an equal opportunity to use this service," he said. "If you leave it to only a select few, it will end up being some sort of elite processed message."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:33:48 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:55:09 -0500 Subject: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' List, The recent introduction of broadband tactile interfacing inspired the following short essay on the "control panels" shown in the alien autopsy debris footage: Remember the "control panels" from the "alien autopsy"? If they're real - alien or otherwise - they could be more than simple touch-interface panels; they might be sophisticated computers in their own right, able to "converse" by swapping massive files through the user's skin. Given current advances in neural prosthetics, it's not impossible to foresee a complimentary device grafted to the user's brain. Using a system architecture that exploits the nervous system, thoughts themselves might be compressed and transferred like common computer files. I'm reminded of Dr. Robert Sarbacher's allusion that bodies taken from UFO crashes were artificial. Could he have been describing cybernetic beings specifically created to pilot UFOs? If so, the "control panels" might be a vital piece of the mystery. (According to the "cameraman" who viewed the alleged crash site, the beings had emerged from their wreck clutching these things - implying they were much more than flight instruments.) You can view the post in its entirety by clicking here: http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2005/03/new-technology-uses-human-body-for.ht ml Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Website: 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 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:00:02 -0800 Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:56:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDdates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:54:20 -0600 >Subject: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor >Source: Dallas University News >http://tinyurl.com/4nrxh >03-23-05 >Life On Mars Not Possible, Oklahoma Professor Says >By Ashley Wolford .. Contributing Writer >Scientific research so far suggests that Mars cannot sustain >life as known on Earth because Mars lacks characteristics that >allow for life on Earth, Dr. Gordon Emslie, associate research >vice president and graduate college dean at Oklahoma State >University, said in a speech last week. <snip> >"Many planets have moons. Mars has a moon. But the Earth's >moon is fairly unique," he said.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 25 Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 00:24:38 +0000 (GMT) Fwd Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:58:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDdates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:54:20 -0600 >Subject: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor >Source: Dallas University News >http://tinyurl.com/4nrxh >03-23-05 >Life On Mars Not Possible, Oklahoma Professor Says >By Ashley Wolford >Contributing Writer >Scientific research so far suggests that Mars cannot sustain >life as known on Earth because Mars lacks characteristics that >allow for life on Earth, Dr. Gordon Emslie, associate research >vice president and graduate college dean at Oklahoma State
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Secrecy News -- 03/25/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 05:08:38 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:01:09 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/25/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 27 March 25, 2005 ** CONFRONTING EXECUTIVE BRANCH PROPAGANDA ACTIVITIES ** IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER (CRS) ** AN OVERVIEW OF THE US PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM (CRS) ** REOPENING GOVERNMENT CONFRONTING EXECUTIVE BRANCH PROPAGANDA ACTIVITIES The Bush Administration's repeated use of taxpayer funds to engage in unacknowledged public relations advocacy in possible violation of laws that are supposed to constrain such activity is the subject of a detailed Congressional Research Service analysis, newly updated this week and obtained by Secrecy News. See "Public Relations and Propaganda: Restrictions on Executive Agency Activities," updated March 21, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32750.pdf Last month, the Comptroller General issued a legal opinion stating that "several prepackaged news stories produced and distributed by certain government agencies violated [the] prohibition" on the use of appropriated funds for purposes of "publicity or propaganda." See: http://www.gao.gov/decisions/appro/304272.htm But two weeks ago, a White House memo rebutted that opinion with a Justice Department memo declaring that "simply because an agency's role in producing and disseminating information is undisclosed or 'covert'" does not mean that it is propaganda prohibited by law. "Our view is that the prohibition [against propaganda] does not apply where there is no advocacy of a particular viewpoint, and therefore it does not apply to the legitimate provision of information concerning the programs administered by an agency," the White House stated. The March 11 White House memo from Joshua B. Bolten of the Office of Management and Budget, with an attachment from the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel, was first cited by the New York Times on March 13 and reported in detail in the Washington Post on March 15. A copy is here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/03/omb031105.pdf IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER Ambiguities in the conception of the new National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) may lead to complications in its implementation, a new report from the Congressional Research Service says. The NCTC was initially established by executive order in August 2004, and then enacted into law by Congress in December 2004. But there are inconsistencies between the order and the statute, the CRS explains, mainly concerning the duties of the NCTC director. Although technically a statute trumps an executive order, these inconsistencies may nevertheless "complicate the inevitable growing pains associated with establishing an effective, nationally coordinated counterterrorism intelligence effort" the CRS said. See "The National Counterterrorism Center: Implementation Challenges and Issues for Congress," updated March 24, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL32816.pdf At congressional direction, most CRS reports are not made directly available to the public. A copy was obtained by Secrecy News. AN OVERVIEW OF THE US PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM The infrastructure of the U.S. public health system and its limited capacity to respond to public health emergencies are explored in another new report from the Congressional Research Service. "The biggest challenge for federal policymakers is to move beyond planning for each worrisome scenario toward a strategy based on analysis of threats and vulnerabilities -- in short, to understand which are the top priorities in a sea of competing urgent priorities," the report says. See "An Overview of the U.S. Public Health System in the Context of Emergency Preparedness," updated March 17, 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL31719.pdf REOPENING GOVERNMENT A Washington Post editorial yesterday provided a measured endorsement of legislation that would strengthen the Freedom of Information Act. The Post noted that the executive branch "has aggressively sought to withhold material -- even such obviously nonsensitive data as aggregate intelligence spending from the late 1940s," and that the need for corrective action is therefore clear. The editorial also correctly advised that the pending bipartisan legislation introduced by Senators Cornyn and Leahy would not by itself remedy inappropriate agency withholding practices or defects in the judicial review process, but that "it would make useful improvements." See "Reopening Government," Washington Post, March 24: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61684-2005Mar23.html _______________________________________________ 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 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:39:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:03:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs - >From: Gord Heath <gheath.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:45:38 -0800 >Subject: Re: Pilot/USA Today Columnist Up Front On UFOs >I have been following the response to Greg Boone's initial post >on UFO Updates with some interest as I have noticed that all >responder's to the column seem to have missed a key point. >As far as I know, airline pilots have specific reporting >procedures they are required to follow in the event that they >witness a UFO. I remember talking to my brother about this a few >years ago - he is a pilot for a Canadian airline. I recall that >he told me that the regulations require that these sightings be >reported and that the reporting procedures for UFOs are the same >as those for suspicious aircraft (such as high flying foreign >military aircraft). I assume these regulations are in place to >ensure that potentially hostile air traffic incursions are >properly documented. >If a pilot sees a meteor, this is not a UFO and certainly there >is no reason why they would not be free to report it to an >Astronomy professor or the media as they are clearly not going >to get in trouble for doing so. >On the other hand, if a pilot sees something that looks like it >might be a spaceship that looks like it is probably advanced >beyond earth originating technology, then the pilot faces a >dilemma. Should the pilot report the sighting taking into >account that the report will likely get you in trouble because >such spacecraft/aircraft aren't officially supposed to be there? >Therefore the witness is either lying, crazy or maybe just >trying to stir up trouble for his/her superiors who also want to >avoid getting associated with those pesky flying saucer reports. >I make reference to the Japan Airline sighting of the massive >UFO over Alaska as a case in point. >I don't know for certain whether the reporting procedures for >UFOs are the same for US airline pilots as Canadian airline >pilots, but I suspect that they are if anything, probably more >onerous and cloaked in military secrecy. >I hardly believe anyone who knows about this would feel >compelled to congratulate the pilot travel columnist on her >"frank, up front" response to the question about what she would >do if she witnessed a UFO (not a meteor). >Maybe she is answering truthfully in a way, the subtext being, >if I witnessed a meteor, I might report it to someone who might >be searching for meteors, but if I saw a truly unidentified >aerial phenomena, then you can bet your bottom dollar that I >would pretend I saw nothing. >What would you do to protect your career? There was (and is now, sort of) a requirement to report items which in the opinion of the reporter may require investigation or defensive action by the US and Canada. It is the Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings (CIRVIS) It use to be contained in JANAP 146 which was recinded years ago, but is still a reference in many other current regulations. CIRVIS and MERINT (the marine version of the reporting procedure) grew out of a successful system used by US and UK in World War II to immediate report enemy contact or other enemy military activity. (CIRES) During an investigation of an airline pilot report over Edwards AFB to Peter Davenport, it was found that all FOIA requests were answered negatively. However, it was possible to do some back door checking using a Project 1947 member who worked on Edwards AFB. After talking to the air control personnel, my source was told that they knew of the incident, but no one wanted to make an entry in the tower log with their name on it. Interesting but not conclusive. A number of years ago, I wrote a short history of the CIRVIS system and UFOs for VSD magazine. It was what I knew as of that date. Since then, I have reviewed thousands of pages of new documents which indicate my history had mistakes (some real whoopers) and was incomplete. The article isn't completely useless, but it definitely needs updating. Next year, I will probably be able to say the same thing about anything new I write on the subject. Bernard Thouanel, editor of the VSD special UFO editions, carried a draft copy of my article to NORAD when he interviewed the Commander and other officers for an article about NORAD for VSD. He was told by several officers that they were surprised at the extensive history of the system. Briefly, the War time system worked well and the main proponent, US Naval Reserve Commander Bernard Baruch, Jr., son of the famous financier and presidential adviser, met with the Joint Chiefs after the war to modify the reporting system for peace time. Implementation languished until about 1947 when a first draft was circulated. USAF Headquarters recommended that Col. McCoy at Wright Field look at the system to do something similar on UFOs. UFOs were added to the reporting scheme sometime in 1948, probably under the stimulus of the Chiles-Whitted case. USAF Intelligence wanted nothing to do with the system and raised various objections which they were assigned to fix. After much heel dragging, the first reports started through the system in 1951. Almost immediately there were objections from Wright Field on this from Col. Harold Watson which were never completely resolved, but again under the stimulus of another UFO incident this time at Fort Monmouth, NJ a fix was attempted. In 1953 furhter modifications of the system were introduced including the MERINT addition. This is when Major Keyhoe detected the system which he cliamed was an attempt to silence pilots, military, air traffic controlers and others on UFOs. Probably, this was not the intend, but it was the effect to a certain extent. The purpose of the CIRVIS system was to give warning of a possible attack, if there was no hostile acition, then the report was discarded. Ruppelt complained that most CIRVIS reports involving UFOs were useless to him. Attempts were made to improve the UFO component of the system. In some cases CIRVIS reports did lead to extensive investigations, but generally they are not very detailed just containing few basic facts. It was difficult to get airlines' and others' compliance, so constant training and publicity within the aviation community was necessary. Baruch was active in this area until his retirement from the Naval Reserve. An Air Defense staff officer dubbed him "The Father of CIRVIS." Are UFOs still reported through the system? Good question, I don't know. They are still on the reporting list as are nuclear explosions. You can find airline pilots on the web laughing at these requirements. Tony Rallan noticed in his study of MERINT reports that most were probably satellites and of low interest. Could the best reports be pulled out? Maybe. General Charles Cabell when he was at the CIA contacted General Robert Taylor, III, at the Air Defense Command, Cabell wanted all reports of high flying radar and visual contacts pulled from the system as they might compromise the U-2. It is possible, and in my opinion probably, that the same was done for UFO reports. We have only to look at statements in the press, the wire services in 1954 and the Newark Star-Ledger was able to compile a list of 400 airline pilots who had reported UFOs, but could not talk about them in 1959. Such actions indicate that not all CIRVIS UFO reports reached Project Blue Book. More in time.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 12:50:58 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:07:00 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:27:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:23:19 -0000 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>Anyway, in summary I don't think they would have used rear >>>projection in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. I >>>see no compelling reason in this film. >>>Bob Shell >>And if rear projection had been used in a shot which, as far as >>I can make out, contains no background motion (putative UFO >>excluded) wouldn't a static slide projection have been easier, >>cheaper and much less problematic than a movie? >I don't think static slide projection would have been done. >This has its own problems. They would use a painted background. >The studios all had painting crews skilled in producing such >backgrounds. <snip> >I'll have to get the DVD again and look at this scene and the >next one with the flowing river. It could be that this scene was >on a soundstage and the following scene on location. That would >not be unheard of. I'll try to look again this weekend. Highly unlikely that they would have gone to all of that trouble to match the studio shot [the foreground set] to a location shot when they could have just used a static shot projected on a rear screen. If there's a flowing river in the shot, then so much for a slide and background painting, and that other special effect, foreground painted glass matts matched into the natural background and shot through by the camera to make buildings or mountain vistas appear without actually constructing the building facades or going to the mountains for example. I'M NOT suggesting that as a possibility here. But it has been done since the first silent film of Ben Hur. Also, I don't subscribe to rear screen projection effects being rare. Particularly so in the 50s when this movie was shot. They were very common. In any event, the technicalities of movie making are not the issue. Rear screen projection was done as an effect in many movies. There's a flowing river in the shot in question, according to Dave Rudiak. There is an unusual "effect" occurring in the background of either the rear projection footage or possibly in the background of an actual location shot. So the original footage is required for examination. If the scene was actually shot on location then the master negative or a good copy of the positive would be needed. If it was a rear screen footage, then again the negative footage would be the best to have. If only the positive footage is available then you have to go with that and be careful then that the positive wasn't printed in reverse to make it work out right when rear projected. Again, I doubt that the original footage will be found some 50 years later. If by some miracle it is found it's doubtful that it would be of any real value anyway.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:14:33 -0500 Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:59:16 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:51:10 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>It also doesn't necessarily discredit that MJ-12 or something exactly like= >>it by another name existed. >Obviously, although, as there is no evidence of "something >exactly like it" existing, to suggest that there is would be >nothing more than speculation (note that I did not say "idle" >speculation). Quite unlike your blog, Wilbert Smith's _documents_ are not "speculation." They state quite plainly that Dr. Robert Sarbacher (plus perhaps other sources) stated that flying saucers were real, they were classified higher than the H-bomb, and that Vannevar Bush was in charge of a small group looking into the modus operandi of the saucers. >Would this be a good time to point out the following that David is >conveniently omitting the following comment I made in my blog? >"None of this means that the United States did not take the >subject of flying saucers seriously. It does not mean that there >were no top secret programs in place to study the phenomenon. It >does not even preclude the possibility of the recovery by the >United States military of a crashed alien spacecraft - perhaps >even several. It does however, provide logical reasons to doubt >that the information as provided by Sarbacher to Smith was >genuine." It would be a good time to point out that what Paul calls "logical reasons to doubt" amounted to little more than with a long list of flimsy rationalizations to ignore the very obvious implications of Smith's papers. Since he can't say Smith's papers lack provenance or were faked, he instead has to dream up some theory to flippantly dismiss them. Smith was hoodwinked. Sarbacher was used to feed him disinformation, thus feeding the Canadians disinformation, which would eventually get back to the Russians and make the Russians think the U.S. had alien technology. Does Paul provide a single shred of evidence to support this, say Sarbacher admitting 30+ years later that he had played Smith? Or how about a document to that effect? Nope. Actually when Sarbacher was reinterviewed by William Steinman, Stan Friedman, Jerry Clark, Bruce Maccabee, etc., he reaffirmed the substance of the Smith memo summarizing Sarbacher's original briefing. >>From the get go, I think we can see that David missed my whole >point. This kind of critical myopia often happens when one gets >one's blinkers attached too tightly. But, I digress... Read on, >gentle Listers, and be amazed... >>E.g., I don't see how hoaxed MJ-12 papers discredit Wilbert >>Smith's documents from 1950 again pointing to a small, >>ultrascret group headed by Dr. Vannevar Bush within the Research >>and Development Board looking into the modus operandi of the >>saucers. Yet that is also your conclusion, according to a recent >>blog of yours. >Alas, you must not have read my blog very closely, for I never >said any such thing, nor made those connections. My writings on >Smith were separate from my writings on MJ-12, although there >was some incidental overlap. For example, nowhere in "Oh Canada >- Wilbert Smith & UFOs" does the term "MJ-12" pop up. Stop using lawyer tricks Paul. The idea of MJ-12 and Smith's documents are obviously joined at the hip. >>According to you, Wilbert Smith was perceived as a googly-eyed >>"UFO believer" by Dr. Robert Sarbacher and deliberately misled >>for disinformation purposes. As an ex-lawyer, you say you demand >>good evidence that meets at least a legal standard, yet where is >>your evidence to support your claim? >Never said what you state I said (I would never - ever - use the >term "googly-eyed"). >I also love the term "ex-lawyer." As it may have been used as a >slight, as in to imply that I may not be quite up to snuff, let >me just say, for the record, that I am still a member of the >Nova Scotia Barristers Society, non-practising status. That >makes me, as much as I occasionally like to pretend otherwise, a >lawyer. As I worked hard for to earn that distinction, I'm a bit >touchy when people suggest otherwise. Just for the record, it was never meant as a slight. You have often stated you used to be a lawyer, then quit practicing to do documentary film-making. That's all I meant by "ex-lawyer." One of your points often made here is that you were trained in legal rules of evidence and that you felt that Ufology in general used shoddy rules of evidence. My point was that your blog is inconsistent with your stated lofty ideals. While demanding high standards of evidence, your position on Smith is nothing but speculation with _zero_ evidence to back it up. What it does remind me of is a lawyer tasked with defending a client with overwhelming evidence pointing to guilt. Unable to come up with evidence to the contrary, the lawyer instead tries to create reasonable doubt by creating an alternate theory of events. In the TV show "The Practice" this was called the Plan B defense. Nevermind that there was no evidence to back it up. >>If Smith's documents were introduced in a court of law and you >>were put on the witness stand as a rebuttal witness, would your >>testimony be accepted into evidence? I think not, since it is >>nothing but unsupported conjecture on your part. It doesn't even >>rise to the level of hearsay evidence. >Now I have to take lessons from David Rudiak (now there's a non- >lawyer) about what a court would and would not accept? Watching >a bit of Court TV, or the Michael Jackson trial, or Law & Order, >does not a lawyer make. The fact remains you have _zero evidence_ to support your conspiracy theory that Smith was a patsy of an elaborate disinformation scheme ultimately aimed at the Russians. >Rather than simply cut and paste the entire Wilbert Smith blog, >I suggest anyone who wants to find out what I really said, and >how David (for whom, ironically, I had heretofore had a great >deal of respect) is distorting what I wrote. You can find it at: >www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/03/oh-canada-wilbert-smith-ufos.html >As for whether I would be an expert witness, I should point out >that I never claimed I would be. However, I suggest that a >careful read of the blog, and its references to the evidence, Please note as you read Paul's blog, that he has no evidence, just another conspiracy theory built on a questionable, often broken chain of reasoning. >indicates that I would indeed be qualified - perhaps more so >than those who simply accept that everything about Smith is as >we have always been lead to believe it was. Like, apparently & >alas, David Rudiak. >"Unsupported conjecture?" David, that's just not accurate, and, >with respect, it's beneath you. Is the following, as just one >example, "unsupported conjecture?" I wrote (as this is a long >passage, I have added a "<" in front of the sections I am >quoting from my own paper, as opposed to David's post here, >which I hope does not confuse anyone): That's exactly what it is, unsupported conjecture. There is no real evidence to support your conspiracy theory. >"[Grant] Cameron and others have claimed that Project Magnet was >far more than a part-time endeavor by Smith, and implied that >[Dr. Omand] Solandt and others were just part of a cover-up, but >this assertion is undermined by Smith's own words. In his 1950 >memo he suggested that: "... a PROJECT be set up within the >frame work of this section to study this problem and that the >work be carried on a part time basis until such time as >sufficient tangible results can be seen to warrant more >definitive action."[emphasis added - PK note: I had emphasized >the phrase "part time basis"] >Further, the 'problem' that Smith refers to was not flying >saucers, per se, but geo-magnetic energy, which Smith theorized >was related to flying saucers (hence his intitial interest in >Behind the Flying Saucers). This is made clear by the following >passage from the memo: "Doctor Solandt agreed that work on geo- >magnetic energy should go forward." [emphasis added - PK note: I >had emphasised "geo-magnetic energy"] Maybe Paul should also quote what Smith wrote immediately preceding this and afterwards instead of quoting out of context: "I discussed this matter fully with Dr. Solandt... on Nov. 20th and placed before him as much information as I have been able to gather to date." What is the information that Smith had gathered to date? Why what he wrote in the rest of the memo, namely the flying saucers exist, they were classified higher than the H-bomb, and that Dr. Vannevar Bush headed a small group in a concentrated effort to understand their modus operandi. Does Paul really think Smith wouldn't have told Solandt this and that Solandt was so ignorant that he thought Smith was only talking about geomagnetic energy? Then comes the part about Solandt agreeing that the work on geomagentic energy should go forward, followed _immediately_ by "_as rapidly as possible_ and _offered full cooperation of his Board_ in providing laboratory facilities, acquisition of necessary items of equipment, and specialized personnel for incidental work in the project." That would suggest that Solandt agreed the work had some urgency, doesn't it, and undercuts Solandt's claims 30+ years later that he had no knowledge of Bush and his group and that Solandt and the RDB had only minimal involvement with Smith's work and never sanctioned it. It also makes rubbish of Paul's claims that the "problem" Smith referred to had nothing to do with flying saucers. It had _everything_ to do with flying saucers. Further Solandt had to have known Smith's geomagnetic energy work was intimately connected with the question of the flying saucers. As to the "part time basis" part, Paul seems to be insinuating that even Smith thought the work unimportant. But Smith was just approaching the subject cautiously, saying going big-time wasn't warranted until they had some proofs-of-concept first. He also states that for that reason the project should be maintained within the Dept. of Transport instead of the DRB: "I do not feel that we have as yet sufficient data to place before Defence Research Board which would enable a program to be initiated within that organization, but I do feel that further research is necessary..." Again, this is all very cautious, hardly the writing of some mad "believer" scientist. In should also be noted that 6 weeks after Smith wrote his famous geomagnetics/saucer memo, he also wrote the following to the Canadian Embassy: "I would like to bring you up to date in our magnetic program... We have three engineers working _full time_ on the program, together with two technicians, with _concentrated effort_ on the magnetic sink." Thus, at least for this period, Smith was devoting a lot of time and energy to the project. >In 1961, SMith re- >confirmed the true nature of Project Magnet; in a presentation >to the Vancouver Area UFO Club, he stated: >"May I point out that the Project Magnet I was associated with, >which received much publicity, was not an official Government >project. It was a project that I talked the Deputy Minister into >letting me carry out, making use of the extensive field >organization of the Department of Transport. No funds were spent >on it and we merely had access to the very large field >organization and opened a number of files." [emphasis added - PK >note: I emphasized "was not an official government project" and >"No funds were spent on it."] And there are official documents that say exactly the opposite, including the first memo where Solandt offers "full cooperation" of the DRB. Perhaps Paul should have a look at Arthur Bray's "The UFO Connection," where Bray details some of this in his chapter on Project Magnet. E.g., the file's of the DOT covering the 1950s contained an undated statement for the Minister of Transport to deliver in the House of Commons. It says: "The entire program --- is being carried on ... with _official approval and authority_ to make use of existing facilities." Paul should at least consider the possibility that Smith was playing along with usual game of denying official government interest. Perhaps at some time, Paul will also tell us what any of this has to do with the validity of information in Smith's first memo: Bush heading a small group, etc. >That Project Magnet never moved beyond part-time status is >understandable, given that the results were less than >impressive. In a 1952 draft status report Smith wrote that, "The >results to date have hardly been spectacular." Further, he noted >that, "The initial group was quite small to start with and was >further depleted during the year by two resignations in favour >of more lucrative positions elsewhere." This latter comment is >particularly revealing: presumably, if Project Magnet had been >cutting edge research, people would have been trying to get >involved with the project, not leaving it. Dr. Solandt >elaborated on the failures of Project Magnet and Wilbert Smith >decades later: News flash for Paul. This is extremely common in any field of research, including the sciences. Initially promising leads turn into dead ends. E.g., 99% of drugs investigated for medical use never reach market. Does this mean the drug companies didn't initially support the research, the scientists who did the research were incompetents, mavericks, or crazies, etc.? These are exactly the sort of things that Paul is implying with this whole line of argument. Currently there are scientific groups around the world trying to derive energy from the zero point field, i.e. vacuum energy. This sounds very similar to what Smith was attempting to do 50 years ago. Are all these scientists also crackpots or incompetents? And again, I fail to see what this has to do with what Sarbacher told Smith. >"The Defence Research Board... gave Smith some facilities on DRB >property for his [UFO] radio watch and offered to have some >experts repeat his experiments which were the basis of his claim >to have found a mechanism for the magnetic propulsion of UFOs. >Frank Dawes, head of our telecommunications research Lab and an >authority on terrestrial and other magnetism repeated the >experiments with Smith and showed that the results obtained by >Smith were due to sloppy measurements with uncalibrated >equipment. There was nothing in the theory." [emphasis added - >PK note: I emphasizes "the results obtained by Smith were due >to sloppy measurements with uncalibrated equipment. There was >nothing in the theory."] And this has what to do with what Sarbacher told Smith? >Smith, concluded Solandt, was "not a good scientist." His >experiments with geo-magnetic energy, which is what would have >been of interest to someone like Dr. Solandt, who was a strong >proponent of applied science, came to nothing, and so were of no >interest to the Canadian Defence Research Board. This is just typical Smith debunkery. It is also off point. It has nothing thing to do with the validity of Smith's papers from 1950 and 1951 which fingered Vannevar Bush as running a group within the RDB looking into the modus operandi of the saucers, and from whom Donald Keyhoe had to obtain clearance to publish a magazine article on Smith's propulsion theories. >Finally, if Project Magnet had really been important, the >government would have provided appropriate levels of funding for >it. The fact that it did not is further evidence that the >Project was not accorded a high level of priority. As Smith himself wrote in his first memo, Solandt thought the work should go forward "as rapidly as possible," which in fact _does_ indicate priority. Why didn't Paul quote that part? A lawyer trick perhaps. Smith deliberately kept the initial effort small until he had data to justify a larger effort, which is actually typical of how real R&D usually proceeds. It's all there in the first memo, if Paul would bother to read it carefully. >In fact, >Smith, in his memo seeking support for the Project, stated >explicitly that it would only cost a few hundred dollars >initially, but also that this money would not be new money, but >would come from the Department of Transport=E2?Ts existing >appropriation. Without being facetious, this may be the first >time in the history of the Canadian government when a civil >servant did not ask for new money - no doubt because >Smith knew he would not get it." No Paul. Smith wanted to prove the concepts first before asking for money and scaling the project up. What's wrong with that? Instead Paul ridicules Smith for showing common sense and integrity. That tactic is straight out of the debunker's handbook. That Smith never obtained the data he hoped for and the project fizzled out is besides the point. Happens all the time in R&D. >You can disagree with me as to interpretation. Fair enough. But >don't say my conclusions are "unsupported conjecture." I would say Paul's interpretations amount to typical debunking hatchet jobs on Smith that I've seen before, little more than snide cartoon sketches. I would have expected far better from Paul. And yes, I would label it "unsupported conjecture," practically every damn bit of it. What eventually happened with Project Magnet really has nothing to do with the contents of Smith's first memo, or subsequent correspondence which clearly fingers Vannevar Bush heading a small group inside the RDB looking into the modus operandi of the saucers. ><snip> >>For "evidence," your statement also makes little sense and is >>filled with omissions. E.g., Smith's original memo isn't the >>only document stating that flying saucers were top secret. So >>did an FBI document from Jan. 1949, after the FBI was briefed by >>military intelligence on the green fireball and other >>unexplained aerial phenomena in New Mexico. >None of which, if you actually read my blog, is on point; >indeed, it is not even remotely relevant. As Sir Alfred might >say, it is positively Kalsskurtzian in its Pelicanism... or >something like that. Paul's claim is that Smith was deliberately fed bunk by Sarbacher, which included Sarbacher telling Smith that flying saucers were classified higher than the H-bomb. Paul also claims that Sarbacher never would have told a "lowly" Canadian civil servant such sensitive information. Yet some "lowly" civil servant FBI agent was also told that flying saucers were classified top secret just the year before. Paul for some reason doesn't see the connection. >>Another thing you left out was that Sarbacher's interview was >>arranged through the Canadian embassy in Washington, involved >>the military attache, the Canadian ambassador, the liaison with >>the Canadian Defence Research Board, and ultimately the DRB >>itself. So if Sarbacher was yanking Smith's "true-believer" >>chain, he was also deceiving many in the Canadian government as >>well plus wasting Canadian time and money that eventually went >>into supporting Smith's research. To what end? Was the United >>States afraid of an invasion from Canada, so we had to make them >>believe we had highly advanced alien technology in our hands? >>Isn't the point of disinformation to fool your enemies, not your >>friends? >Back to history class for Mr. Rudiak. Not to sound too >nationalistic a note (what is it about nationalism being the >last refuge of the scoundrel, or some such) but... The United >States has a long and less than storied history of yanking (no >pun intended) Canada's chain around (and this comes from a guy >who genuinely likes and admires the United States). Your >comments above betray a fundamental lack of knowledge about the >intricacies of your country's relationship with mine, and the >tensions that existed, even back in the good old 1950s. Well that settles it. Who can argue with logic like that? The U.S. likes to yank Canada's chain, therefore Sarbacher must have been yanking Smith's chain, the Canadian Embassy's chain, the Canadian DRB's chain, and all other chains in this clever chain of deception. >Of course, David is being disingenuous here (alas, again). He >conveniently omits mention of the following, which addresses his >off-hand comments above: >"The question then arises - what was the true reason for the >disinformation spread by Sarbacher to Smith in 1950? >One may reasonably posit a couple of possibilities. The first is >the theory that the disinformation was ultimately aimed at the >Soviets, designed to convince Stalin that the United States had >access to advanced alien technology. If so, it would make sense >that Sarbacher would pass along disinformation to Smith, in a >seemingly innocuous manner, that the Americans undoubtedly knew >would quickly wend its way up to Smith=E2?Ts superiors - as it did >- and from there quite possibly on to the Soviets. Canada would >be a logical place to plant this information - a close ally of >the United States, so that the Soviets would believe the >information had at least the possibility of being genuine, but >also a proven center of Soviet espionage, as evidenced by the >Gouzenko affair in 1946, where a young Soviet NKVD clerk >defected and exposed a large Soviet spy ring in Ottawa, in the >process helping to set off the Cold War. As Stanton Friedman is >fond of saying, rule number one for security is that "you >can't tell your friends without telling your enemies." In >intelligence matters, with disinformation, sometimes this is >exactly what you are attempting to accomplish. Perhaps it was >even part of an overall campaign to distract both allies and >enemies, and maybe even other elements of the United States >government, from the truth about flying saucers; maybe even a >real crashed saucer retrieval. Or maybe it was for some reason >the nature of which we cannot yet surmise." >Note that, unlike David, I'm willing to let the facts fall where >they may. Even my speculation is grounded in evidence and logic, >even as I admit that there may be other possibilities of which I >(or we) know nothing. I'm sorry, but I must have missed the "evidence and logic" in the above statement. Could you point out where it is? I see some "perhaps"and "maybes" in there, in other words it's entirely speculation. But the actual "evidence" that Sarbacher deliberately misled Smith and the Canadians seems to be invisible. As for "logic," it seems to amount to collosal leaps from one or two historical examples of the U.S. deceiving Canada, or some such thing, to the U.S. _always_ deceiving Canada and playing those poor dumb Canadians for complete patsies. >>Furthermore, those involved in such a deception would have >>extended well beyond Sarbacher to Vannevar Bush and the RDB >>itself, as follow-up correspondence indicates. >David again ignores and misrepresents my thesis, in this case as >to why Bush would be nowhere near this subject. Paul's thesis is that Bush had completely fallen into disfavor with Truman by 1947 and therefore Truman would never, ever have Bush head up something like MJ-12. That's really his entire argument. Everything else flows from that one _assumption_. True, Bush never enjoyed the level of trust with Truman that he had with Roosevelt. But does that mean that Bush became a nonperson during the Truman administration? Nope. When the Research and Development Board became official with the passage of the National Security Act in July 1947, Truman appointed Bush chairman, even though it wasn't the RDB that Bush had wanted. When the Soviets exploded their first A-bomb in 1949, Bush was on the select committee of four (along with Robert Oppenheimer) reviewing all the evidence, before presenting their findings to Truman for public announcement. Paul points out that Bush resigned as Chairman of the RDB in 1948 in frustration. Does that means he was no longer involved with the RDB? Nope again. See for example this document placing Bush at a major meeting of the RDB in November 1950. http://archives.aaas.org/golden/doc.php?gold_id=3D87 Obviously Bush remained involved at some level. >>This concerns a magazine article by Donald Keyhoe on Smith's theories >>of saucer propulsion which had to be cleared by Bush and the RDB with >>other possible censorship from the Canadian government. >A red herring. No, another _fact_, however inconvenient for Paul's debunkery. It was clearly stated tat Keyhoe's article had to go through clearance with Bush and the RDB. Why would it have to go through clearance, and why would Bush and the RDB be involved? It also had to go through clearance with the Canadian DRB. In fact Chairman Omond Solandt personally approved it (just more evidence that Solandt knew damn well that Smith's geomagnetics work had everything to do with the flying saucers). The article was in part ghost-written by Smith, and reflected the work of Project Magnet to date. As Arthur Bray notes in his book, "The matter of security clearances puts an official stamp of approval on the contents of the article which stated that saucers operated on a magnetic principle." As it turned out, Keyhoe's article was never published in True magazine as intended, though the article can be found in one of Keyhoe's books. >>Documents like that further undercut other dismissive statements >>from you that Bush couldn't possibly have headed such a group >>because he had supposedly fallen out of favor with Truman, which >>amounts to little more than, "I don't believe Bush could have >>headed such a group because I don't believe he could have headed >>such a group." >David, David, David... this is just silly. Is this how far your >intellectual rigour has fallen - misquotes, inaccurate >(deliberately??) summarisation's? My statement is actually a pretty good summation of your entire argument. >What I wrote, for those with a scorecard at home, was: >"The question which naturally follows on from this conclusion is: >are there indicators in the information that Sarbacher provided >Smith that the information was not genuine? A careful review of >the information indicates that there were. The most significant >is Sarbacher's claim that a "small group" had been established >under the direction of Vannevar Bush to study their "modus >operandi." Stanton Friedman, in his book Top Secret / Majic, >correctly identifies Bush as a world-renowned research scientist >who had been, in essence, the "science czar" during the Second >World War under President Roosevelt. Indeed, if such a group had >been established during the Roosevelt administration, Bush would >have been a likely choice to be part of it. >However, given that the flying saucer incidents did not become a >serious concern to the United States government until 1947, well >into the Truman administration, it is highly unlikely Bush would >have played a role in such a group at that time. Bush's role in >government was on the wane, and Truman did not consider him a >close advisor. There were a number of reasons for this, the >first being an inherent distrust of any holdover from the >Roosevelt administration who had been close to the President, >particularly those, like Bush, who had kept him in the dark >about the development of the atomic bomb. For Bush, notes >historian Pascal Zachary, Roosevelt's death was a "professional >catastrophe" which dealt a "huge blow to his plans for the >postwar period" and "reduced his influence on atomic policy." >Beyond this, however, was the fundamental difference between the >two men's personalities and styles - Truman was a skilled >politician, proud of his ordinariness and skeptical of >"experts"; Bush could mix it up in the back room if he had to, >but he was, at his core, an elitist intellectual. He fit much >better with Roosevelt than Truman. >Evidence of this diminishment of Bush's role abounds, but it can >perhaps best be seen in Truman's rejection of Bush's "Endless >Frontier" report in 1945, a major blow to Bush. As Zachary >notes, "while not quite a rift, the non-endorsement signaled >stormier times to come." The policy differences between the two >were profound. Instead of Bush, in 1946 Truman chose John >Steelman, a man Bush disliked, as Chairman of the Scientific >Research Board, one of the goals of which was to further blunt >Bush's influence on civilian science policy. Bush was passed >over for the position of the first Secretary of Defense in 1947, >which he wanted "in the worst way" and had to settle for the >position of Chairman of the newly formed Research and >Development Board (RBD), against the better judgment of some of >Truman's closest advisors, who were wary of Bush's ambition. >Bush hoped that he would still be able to influence policy while >with the RBD, but these hopes quickly proved illusory. As >Zachary observes, the "RBD post was like a slow-motion train >wreck. Bush saw the crash coming but was helpless to stop it." >The problem was with the charter of the RBD, which left it >without real power. The Board could advise the Secretary of >Defence, James Forrestal, on "major policy" , but could not >direct or control the internal research and development >activities of the various military services, which left it >powerless to affect change. This resulted in constant battles >between Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which Bush lost time >and again. In 1948 he resigned, citing the disregard the Joint >Chiefs had for his Board. He wrote to Forrestal, "There is now a >general impression that, since the Joint Chiefs can invade the >affairs of the Board without notice, the latter is in some >manner secondary or subsidiary. I find my ability to serve you >in connection with the responsibilities you have placed in my >hands seriously impaired." By 1950, Bush was, by his own >admission, finished as a force in Washington. >Given this reality, there is no reason to believe that Truman >would have tapped Bush for any role related to flying saucers. FACT (not speculation): On the morning that the Roswell Incident blew up (July 8, 1947), acting AAF chief of staff Vandenberg cancelled a previously scheduled meeting and instead met with Bush's Joint Research and Development Board for 2-1/2 hours. Vandenberg was briefed beforehand by Gen. LeMay, vice chief of staff for AAF R&D, and Dr. Edward Bowles of MIT, an adviser to the Sec. of War and an old acquaintance of Bush's. The previous day Vandenberg's log also explicitly mentions LeMay briefing Vandenberg on the flying disc situation. (speculation part) Is this just an amazing coincidence? I think not. Instead it is strongly suggestive to me that Bush and the incipient RDB were in on it from the beginning. The Smith documents from 3+ years later merely confirm this. >And yet, to those who were not Washington insiders in the late >1940s, unaware of his rapidly diminishing stature within the >administration and his battles with the Joint Chiefs (or, one >might add, to UFO researchers similarly unaware of these events >decades later), Bush would have seemed a logical choice based on >their knowledge of his wartime record and influence. >Accordingly, his was the perfect name to use in a disinformation >campaign - believable to an outsider, but not a name that would >in any way compromise security on real secret projects, because >Bush by this time was not involved in any such projects. It was >a rumour-limiting detail that could be used to control the >spread of the disinformation in the event that it >went too far." Sorry, but this theory about Bush's name being used as "disinformation" is exactly that. It is a theory, speculation, and currently unsupported by any concrete evidence. You say you are evidence driven, so I ask you again, where is your actual evidence to support your statements? Speculation is fine for brain-storming ideas and confusing juries. But speculation is not evidence. >>Further, when Sarbacher was contacted and interviewed 30+ years >>later by other people on the List like Stan Friedman and Jerry >>Clark, he would have had to continue the "deception" for >>unexplainable reasons. >A. Those reasons are not "unexplainable"; and The fact is, Sarbacher never retracted a bit of the story. >B. It never ceases to amaze me how certain ufologists can state, >with absolute certainty, that the government has been covering >this all up for over fifty years, and then turn around and >state, "but, of course, Dr. Sarbacher was not involved in the >cover-up; it must have been somebody else." Sarbacher when reinterviewed, provided additional information which implicated Dr. Eric Walker, who was Executive Secretary of the RDB back in 1950 when Sarbacher first spoke to Smith. When William Steinem called Walker out of the blue in 1987, Walker initially admitted knowing about MJ-12 for the last 40 years, i.e., since 1947. He also admitted attending meetings at Wright Patterson concerning military recovery of flying saucers and their occupants, but said he would have to review his notes to refresh his memory. After this initial contact, Walker clammed up. Thus Walker initially admitted to the existence of MJ-12 and attending crashed saucer meetings. Another person with the DRB who independently fingered Bush and Walker was Dr. Fred Darwin, who named them as _hypothetical_ participants in March 1984. I.e., _if_ such a group existed, who would have been involved? (Others named as likely participants were Dr. Karl Compton, Dr. Lloyd Berkner, Dr. John von Neumann, and Dr. Robert Rinehart.) One could easily dismiss Darwin's hypotheticals, except witnesses sometimes answer questions this way because they want to talk but feel that can't give direct answers. They drop hints instead. >Why wouldn't he continue to lie if he had been part of a >disinformation ploy, or a cover-up? >The illogic is staggering... But, I stagger on nonetheless..... My illogic is staggering? ><snip> >>So the MJ-12 papers could be fake, yet a supersecret group just >>like MJ-12 headed by Vannevar Bush could have, and according to >>Smith's papers, was very real. The MJ-12 papers appeared just >>_after_ the Smith documents and Sarbacher. In fact, one of the >>more plausible _theories_ behind the MJ-12 papers was that they >>were deliberately put out to discredit the recently discovered >>Smith documents plus the corroborating testimony of Sarbacher >>when he was reinterviewed in the early 1980's. >Now who's speculating without any evidence? The above is wishful >thinking in it's purest form, even as I admit that, hey, could >be (and pink elephants may exist). First the sequence of events in my theory: 1. 1979: Canadian researcher Arthur Bray obtains a copy of Smith's memo summarizing Sarbacher's briefing from the Canadian government. Bray first makes this public in his book "The UFO Connection" (1979), with other documentation that made it very clear that Smith's work on possible saucer propulsion was sanctioned by the Dept. of Transport and Dr. Omond Solandt of the Canadian Defence Research Board. 2. July 1980: Bray contacts Leonard Stringfield, and provides Stringfield with Sarbacher's name, which he didn't give in the book. 3. July 1982: Stringfield attends MUFON meeting in Toronto and meets Bray and Mrs. Wilbert Smith. They confirm Smith's famous Geomagetics memo was an official government document. Stringfield writes this up in Status Report III, Sept. 1982. Smith's memo about Sarbacher telling him Vannevar Bush was heading up a small group looking into the modus operandi of the saucers is now becoming widely known in the UFO research community. 4. August 1983. William Steinem writes Omond Solandt. Solandt writes back, tries to minimize Smith's work, but does admit that he discussed the work with Vannevar Bush. 5. November 1983. William Steinman writes Sarbacher. Sarbacher confirms the briefing and the contents of the Smith memo, including Bush being definitely involved. Sarbacher was subsequently interviewed by others such as Stan Friedman, Jerry Clark, and Bruce Maccabee. 6. December 1984. The MJ-12 briefing document shows up in Jaime Shandera's mailbox. So the MJ-12 docs show up _after_ the Smith memo came to light and Sarbacher was reinterviewed confirming the memo. This is all actual fact, not speculation. _If_ the MJ-12 docs were faked, then a very plausible reason for them showing up when they did was to sow confusion in the UFO ranks and eventually discredit Smith's document and Sarbacher's testimony. The main assumption here was that Sarbacher _wasn't_ lying (whereas Paul assumes that Sarbacher was necessarily lying). This is backed up by the fact that Eric Walker initially corroborated Sarbacher's testimony. Even Dr. Solandt, while desparately trying to distance himself from Smith and the flying saucers, confirmed that he discussed Smith's work with Vannevar Bush "informally," i.e. well after 1950 when Paul claims Bush would have been completely out of the picture. The second assumption is that the Smith/Sarbacher revelations caused apoplexy amongst those in charge of keeping this quiet. When such leaks occur, counterintelligence steps in. Various tactics are employed to discredit the information. Of course there are other possibilities. But "pink elephants" and "wishful thinking?" Come on. "Pink elephants" is a more apt description of a conspiracy theory that the Canadian government was the target of a highly coordinated disinformation scheme, using Smith, officials of the Canadian embassy, the Canadian Dept. of Transport and the Defence Research Board as patsies. This disinformation scheme was still going over 30 years later when Sarbacher was recontacted, who then drags Eric Walker's name into it. Several years later when Walker was finally contacted, he also initially admitted involvement, including knowledge of MJ-12 and crash recoveries. Omond Solandt also admitted to talking to Vannevar Bush about the saucers and Smith's work. Thus the criminal masterminds who put this disinformation scheme together apparently gave Walker and Solandt the heads up as well to keep jerking people's chain. To Paul this isn't "pink elephants" but "the most reasonable conclusion." But it's an incredible stretch no matter how you look at it. >This also ignores the fact that the Smith documents were not >"recently discovered," unless one has a strange definition of >"recently" that means "several years later." If so, I suggest >you notify Oxford that they need to update their dictionary. Smith's documents implicating Bush were indeed "recently discovered" and only started to become widely known in the early 1980's. The MJ-12 papers emerged immediately after that. >>Besides Smith papers, there is other evidence of an MJ-12 type >>group, such as various hints dropped by Edward Ruppelt in "The >>Report on Unidentified Flying Objects" of parallel UFO >>investigations being carried out by some very secret group (or >>groups) in addition to the Air Force's semi-public >>investigations. E.g., at the end of Chapter 3 describing the >>demise of Project Sign after their Top Secret interplanetary >>Estimate got spiked by Gen. Vandenberg: "Even though the UFO >>reports were getter better and more numerous, the enthusiasm >>over the interplanetary idea was cooling off. ...More and more >>work was being pushed off onto _the other investigative >>organization_ helping ATIC. So who was "the other investigative >>organization?" >Who knows? It may even have been MJ-12, a possibility, if you'd >really read my writings, that you'd know I have not, entirely, >discounted. Again you'll accuse me of misrepresenting your work, but from what I've read of your recent highly skeptical comments about MJ-12, it appears you have 95% if not 100% discounted it. You are of course welcome to do so, and would no doubt find yourself in the UFOlogical majority. But is it really necessary for you to maintain the pretext that you are somehow sitting on the fence? Why not just admit that you do not believe in Majic and be done with it? >>Karl Pflock may speak of "the will to be believe." But there is >>also the flip coin of that, which is "the will to disbelieve," >>cloaked as supposed hard-nosed skepticism. >>Yes, we should all be skeptical to some extent. But true >>skepticism is not seizing on on one or two questionable bits of >>evidence and then using this as a rationale to flippantly >>dismiss all other evidence which is not obviously tainted. >>That's not skepticism. That's the will to disbelieve in action. >David, why you have chosen me to be your whipping boy today is >beyond me. Still, when one presents a point of view, a thesis, >if you will, that is bound to be controversial, and to ruffle a >few feathers, one should expect, indeed, welcome, debate. I know >that I do. Well Paul, so far you've accused me of totally misrepresenting your work, of disingenuousness, of mugging you, of ad hominem attack because I used the word "ex-lawyer," etc. I would also say your recounting of Wilbert Smith history is not only grossly inaccurate in part but verges on character assassination at times, such as the incompetent scientist bit. He who is free of sin cast the first stone. >Alas, what you have provided is not a debate. It is, sadly, one >of the worst examples I have seen of intellectual dishonesty >from a respected ufologist. It involves: >(a) extremely selective quotation; Oh, good grief Paul. My post was relatively brief compared to your blog-attack on Smith. I have already pointed out in this rebuttal that you yourself seriously quoted out of context from Smith's original memo and misrepresented it. You made a big point about the "part time" bit and small amounts of money spent, to make it appear that Project Magnet was always a nothing project and never had any priorty, leaving out the parts when Smith said Solandt wanted it to go ahead as rapidly as possible and gave Smith "full cooperation", and also Smith deliberately keeping it small until he had supporting data to warrant bigger expenditures. >(b) incorrect summarisations of my arguments; Allow me to quickly "incorrectly" summarize your main arguments. 1. Vannevar Bush postwar had fallen out of favor and not completely trusted by Truman (actually based on fact) 2. Therefore no way would he have been appointed head of some supersecret saucer study group. (semi-logical speculation based on point 1 but still speculation) 3. Therefore Smith and the Canadians _must_ have been misled by Sarbacher about Bush and the supersecret team as part of a deliberate disinformation scheme ultimately aimed at the Russians. (wild-assed speculation based on nothing more than previous speculation, not actual evidence or fact, i.e. circular reasoning) To bolster his claim that Sarbacher _must_ have lied, Paul also claims that Sarbacher never would have revealed such secret information to Smith. What Paul doesn't tell the readers of his blog, is that Smith didn't just walk up to Sarbacher and ask him. The whole interview was arranged by the Canadian embassy in Washington after Smith asked them make discrete inquiries concerning what the U.S. government knew about the flying saucers. In other words, clearance was granted ahead of time from somewhere within the U.S. government for Sarbacher to talk, and also clearance was granted for Smith and others in the Canadian embassy (such as Lt. Bremner, the military attache, who might have been the one to actually interview Sarbacher) to be privy to this information. Since Smith was saying he might have some insight into how the saucers worked (but was reluctant to proceed without having more definite information as to whether the saucers were real), it might make perfect sense to bring the Canadians into it to infuse some fresh thinking. In fact, Smith's original memo suggests this is the reason he was brought into it: "I was further informed that the United States authorities are investigating along quite a number of lines which might possibly be related to the saucers... and I gather that they are not doing too well since they indicated that if Canada is doing anything at all in geo-magentics they would welcome a discussion with suitably accredited Canadians." Would "furriners" be brought into such a secret project? They certainly were during the Manhattan Project. They practically ran it, people like Fermi, Teller, etc. There were even a few of those untrustworthy, gullible Canadian scientists involved. Another point is that who gets cleared for what is not a black and white issue. Paul states, e.g., that Dr. Solandt had a higher security clearance than Smith, yet wasn't cleared for nuclear weapons. Therefore what chance was there for Smith to be cleared for a program that Sarbacher said was classified higher than the H-bomb? Let me give an example of where that argument falls apart. An uncle of mine worked on the Manhattan Project. You've never heard of him, just like you've never heard of the vast majority of scientists who worked on various aspects of the bomb. He was a complete nobody, 22 years old, never held a security clearance before, had just gotten his bachelors degree, yet there he was in the Manhattan Project with a top secret security clearance doing very important work. Why? He was a protege of Glen Seborg and considered one of the world's experts in metallurgy, particularly titanium. In other words, the reason he was brought in was because he had expertise in a field that was thought to be important to the project. According to Paul's logic, however, this couldn't possibly be. He never would have been made a part of the program, much less told about it, because he was a nobody without even a security clearance. If we extend Paul's logic even further, thousands of other lowly, nameless scientists would have been excluded as well, along with all foreigners. There would have been no Manhattan Project. >(c) mixing and matching different papers (MJ-12 with Smith); I honestly don't see how Paul can treat the two issues as completely separate: * MJ-12 =3D Bush heading small, select, supersecret committee studying the saucers * Smith papers =3D Bush heading small, select, supersecret committee studying the saucers. Add to this the fact that the MJ-12 papers emerged within a year after Smith's papers started to get widely known and Sarbacher was reinterviewed. To me there is obviously a connection, though it is debatable exactly what the connection might be. It could be the MJ-12 docs are the real thing and confirm the Smith papers, or they were faked as a government counterintelligence sting to discredit the papers and Sarbacher, or they were cooked up by Bill Moore and AFOSI cronies after being inspired by Smith's papers. But there is a connection. >(d) ignorance, whether selective or deliberate, it matters not, >of the facts that I present to support my position; and, just >for good measure, apparently, I guess I missed the facts that >are supposed to support point 3, the elaborate disinformation >theory. Basically Paul is making a giant leap from Bush falling out of favor to the conclusion that Smith _must_ have been misled, and therefore his papers are worthless as evidence of some supersecret saucer group led by Bush. Paul's disinformation theory is just another conspiracy theory, all of which are based on various interpretations of "facts", which doesn't necessarily make them plausible, logical, or true. Paul exaggerates his conspiracy theory as being the "most reasonable conclusion," as he does in his Smith blog, but it wouldn't pass muster in logic class. It is a logical house of cards with three-quarters of the cards missing. It would make a good plot for a movie, however. At least in the movies one can overlook the huge gaping plot holes. Maybe the story could be punched up by starring Will Smith as a black, smart-ass Wilbert Smith caught up in a swirl of Cold War political intrigue. Sounds like a winner. >(e) ad hominem labelling (ex-lawyer? Really. How would you feel >if someone called Stan an "ex-physicist"? The same, I suspect, >as I did when some have, in the past). It wasn't meant as an ad hominem. I was, however, criticizing you for not being consistent about your demands for evidence that rise to at least a legal standard, the standard you have repeatedly stressed you were trained in. There is no real evidence to support your point 3 above. It's pure speculation. Instead what I see is an attempt to rationalize away the obvious implications of the Smith papers using typical debunkery tactics. >You have provided, in reverse, a perfect example of Stan's four >rules for debunkers (well known, so I won't repeat them here). Well actually I'd say your blog on Wilbert Smith and his documents adheres pretty closely to Stan's four rules of debunkery. He who is without sin cast the first stone. >I don't mind the debate. I welcome it. I revel in it. This, >however, is not a debate. It is an intellectual mugging. Ufology >deserves better. OK, Paul. Maybe I was a little hard on you. Believe it or not, I actually have a lot of respect for you and what you've done. But quite honestly, weren't you just trying to debunk Wilbert Smith's papers and the whole notion of MJ-12 along with it?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:09:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:23:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >Bruce, >See: >http://www.geocities.com/jorgeconesa/Paralysis/sleepnew.html >for a discussion of sleep paralysis, which despite its name can >occur in non sleep states. David Hufford gives examples of >occurances in a library and sat on an airliner. Henry James Snr, >the father of William the psychologist and Henry the novelist >had a particularly shattering sleep paralysis episode while sat >reading in his study. >False awakening is also a well established experience which has >been discussed by Keith Basterfield and Jenny Randles among >others, and is discussed in Celia Green's "Lucid Dreaming". The >line between SP episodes and false awakening is very blurred, >and it seems likely that SP episodes can occur on a continuum >from, at least a subjective sensation of, being wide awake to >obvious sleep. >See also: >http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/70/visions.html >for a classic case of a ufo themed sleep paralysis episode and >incidences of hypnogogic and hypnopompic hallucination >Conesa also suggests that SP can be associated with micro rem >states such as occur to fatigued drivers (think of the Hills >here folks), and it may well account for some otherwise >inexplicable accidents (the terrible Moorgate tube train >disaster comes to mind). > >Abduction narratives fit well into the tradition of the secret >night adventure, which have included belief that one has been >turned into a horse and ridden round the fields by the fairies, >attended witches sabbats, travelled _astrally_ to the Himalayas >to be instructed by the _Masters_, being a werewolf etc as >culture and personal preference dictates. Peter: Sleep paralysis, narcoleptic episodes, and other dream/sleep states can explain fully, as your links above help indicate, the alien abduction phenomenon. Those who take the time to actually peruse the extant literature, which is extensive, cannot but come away with psychological explanations for all, and I mean total, alien abduction stories available. This, again, is where "ufology" goes awry: a continuing "debate"
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:51:17 -0600 Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:24:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor - >From: Colin Stevenson <colsweb.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 00:24:38 +0000 (GMT) >Subject: Re: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor >>From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >>To: UFO UpDdates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:54:20 -0600 >>Subject: Life On Mars Not Possible Oklahoma Professor >>Source: Dallas University News >>http://tinyurl.com/4nrxh >>03-23-05 >>Life On Mars Not Possible, Oklahoma Professor Says >>By Ashley Wolford >>Contributing Writer >>Scientific research so far suggests that Mars cannot sustain >>life as known on Earth because Mars lacks characteristics that >>allow for life on Earth, Dr. Gordon Emslie, associate research >>vice president and graduate college dean at Oklahoma State >>University, said in a speech last week. >Why does this post bring to my mind a vision of an Ostrich with >its head in a bucket of sand? Emslie certainly has his head stuck somewhere... but I don't think it's a bucket of sand.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:25:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >>>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>>Source: Scientific American.Com http://tinyurl.com/6y37m >>>>Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>>>By Michael Shermer <snip> >>>What I don't understand is how she hallucinated when in a >>>perfectly good state of health in May 1991 while wide awake >>>reading a book just after turning the television off for the >>>night! >>>I am sure Shermer has an additional explanation for that. <snip> >Bruce, >See: http://www.geocities.com/jorgeconesa/Paralysis/sleepnew.html >for a discussion of sleep paralysis, which despite its name can >occur in non sleep states. David Hufford gives examples of >occurances in a library and sat on an airliner. Henry James Snr, >the father of William the psychologist and Henry the novelist >had a particularly shattering sleep paralysis episode while sat >reading in his study. >False awakening is also a well established experience which has >been discussed by Keith Basterfield and Jenny Randles among >others, and is discussed in Celia Green's "Lucid Dreaming". The >line between SP episodes and false awakening is very blurred, >and it seems likely that SP episodes can occur on a continuum >from, at least a subjective sensation of, being wide awake to >obvious sleep. One of the most outstanding chracteristics of dreams is their incompleteness - they are incompletely dreamed because of sleep state interruptions and other mechanisms, and they are incompletely remembered. Very few dreams tell an entire story from start to finish, they are just snippets. Yet UFO abductions always have a start and a finish, the person is abducted, then returned, like a real event really remembered. Few if any abductions involve memory of just suddenly being inside the "spaceship" and not remembering how the abductee got there, and not recalling how they got back home. Yet most dreams have no clear beginning or end, just episodes in the middle, sometimes they are part of a "recurring dream" pattern, like the "chase" nightmares which never end. One would expect the UFO abduction statistics to show the same pattern of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:38:13 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:28:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing <snip> >Bruce, >See: >http://www.geocities.com/jorgeconesa/Paralysis/sleepnew.html >for a discussion of sleep paralysis, which despite its name can >occur in non sleep states. Also see this link -- http://www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/3549/pa_sp3.html -- for a paper by Simon J. Sherwood, Department of Psychology, The University of Edinburgh. Here is the abstract: "A whole range of anomalous experiences have been reported during the borderline hypnagogic or hypnopompic states which surround periods of sleep (e.g., Gurney, Myers, & Podmore, 1886; Rose, Hogan, & Blackmore, 1997). The question is whether these states are conducive to anomalous processes or agencies, whether normal features are being misinterpreted, or both. This paper outlines the main physiological and psychological features of these hypnagogic/hypnopompic states and considers some of the evidence to address this question." Personally, I favor what Remo Roth and John Mack noted, which was that alien encounters seem to involve altered states of consciousness. Not that the experiences are fantasy, but that the experiences require a person to be "tuned" a bit differently. Every once and awhile we got letters from people who were stunned to see an alien or two on the streets of New York, while everyone (except the person who wrote the letter) passed right by them as if they couldn't see them. Sure, that kind of report is just a letter, and the person could be "bonkers" (to use the preferred expression), but personally, I doubt it. It sure helps to muddy the field that our natural range of altered states of consciousness includes a great many states which result in internal fantasies. But to assume they're all that is to make a very safe, but I suspect incorrect, assumption. (It is an odd assumption to make, since we already are aware that some of our states of consciousness are not fantasies -- the range we use every day to detect our surroundings!). And this is of course why this debate remains in existence. A quarter century or more after sleep paralysis was proposed as an explanation for alien encounters, the people who have had alien encounters still say that isn't quite it. But there's a similarity there which should be investigated. Maybe someday we'll be able to spot aliens reliably, and finally get the kind of verification and replicability that some need to be sure. (For example, induce two or three people into particular states,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:34:26 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> Yes, I've got some news about the film and what exactly happened. I've achieved this remarkable feat by doing something simple most investigators overlook: I asked the people who were _there_. Wasn't difficult to find them either. They have these things called phone numbers and email addresses and websites and calendars of events where they make appearances. So I says to myself, "I wonder what screen legend Ms. Maureen O'Hara and Western hero Harry Carey Jr. have to say?", since both of them were actually _in_ the film and Ms. O'Hara _in_ the scene in question. Mr. Carey has yet to respond - probably too busy signing autographs but Ms. O'Hara's fan club and webmasters did. So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most principle shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes including the scene in question: Were shot on soundsages! The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? Arc light being moved and adjusted. Fits the pattern considering the top special effects talent they had on the film. So being part Irish myself, and the good part at that, I'll leave it up to Ms. O'Hara to put the shenanigans to rest. She's still just as pretty today as we all remember her and quite busy giving of herself to charities and parades etc. It would be wise for everyone of Celtic heritage to go back and study the the folklore of the leprechauns - who I believe were behind this diversion from the start! You can only become enriched by it. Oh, and one final note. Ms. O'Hara is beloved by millions and I for one won't stand for any UFO Gangup nonsense! Leave her be and let her decide what, when, she'll speak if she wants to.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 26 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:28:42 EST Fwd Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:36:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II <snip> >>You can disagree with me as to interpretation. Fair enough. But >>don't say my conclusions are "unsupported conjecture." >I would say Paul's interpretations amount to typical debunking >hatchet jobs on Smith that I've seen before, little more than >snide cartoon sketches. I would have expected far better from >Paul. Aw, so sorry to disappoint you David. Alas, I do not spend my days figuring out how to make you happy, or how best to reinforce your rigid view of all things ufological. It must be handy, though, when someone raises points that you cannot answer based on the evidence, to be able to resort to comments like "snide cartoon sketches." Wowee. I am overwhelmed by your logic. >And yes, I would label it "unsupported conjecture," practically >every damn bit of it. In the words of the immortal George Harrison, I again encourage all to read what I actually wrote, pause, and then "think for yourself" as to who makes more sense, who is really engaged in a search for the truth here, and who is running around spewing rampant speculation. I have used the available evidence. David (and others) can disagree with the conclusions, but to accuse me of unsupported conjecture is both insulting and ridiculous. It is worthy, in every sense of the word, of the epithet "Klasskurtzian." <snip> I have massively snipped here, because David has made his points clear, and I have made mine clear. Let the chips fall where they may. If one wants to accept David's arguments, devoid of logic as I think they are, that's fine. But, again, read what I wrote, read what David has written, then read the relevant documents for yourselves, and come to your own conclusions about who is looking at the evidence, and who is just repeating the same old dogma, mixed in with heaping amounts of his own speculation, plenty of misrepresentation, and more than a few personal brickbats. Of course, I've read back through UpDates for a number of years, and I'm not the first person, nor, I suspect, will I be the last, to get "Rudiaked" just because my interpretation of the evidence differs from David's.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Kimball BlogPost On Wilbert Smith From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:29:35 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 10:54:22 -0500 Subject: Kimball BlogPost On Wilbert Smith List: EBK has emailed recently stating that, if there was to be a discussion about things that might be at my blog, those things should be available here, rather than asking people to wander over to the blog all the time. He's quite right (although I would point out that, in the case of the W. B. Smith blog post, it was David Rudiak, not I, that first raised the subject here). Accordingly, here is the entire blog post, for your edification, and so we all know to what David is referring (I'll respond to David's most recent missive in a second post here, to follow): ----- In 1950 Dr. Robert I. Sarbacher, an American scientist, claimed to Canadian government engineer Wilbert Smith that the "facts reported" in Frank Scully's 1950 best-seller Behind the Flying Saucers were "substantially correct." When asked by Smith if the UFOs were extraterrestrial in nature, Sarbacher replied, "All we know is we didn't make them, and it's pretty certain they didn't originate on the earth." When Smith inquired as to the classification level assigned to flying saucers, Sarbacher answered, "It is classified two points higher even than the H- bomb. In fact it is the most highly classified subject in the US government at the present time." At first glance, this seems pretty definitive. Skeptics have quibbled over the years that Sarbacher's account is second-hand testimony, which is borne out by Sarbacher himself, who, in confirming Smith's memo to UFO Crash at Aztec author William Steinman in 1983, added that he had never personally seen any aliens, or wreckage, or anything else to do with crashed flying saucers. "Relating to my own experience regarding recovered flying saucers," he wrote. "I had no association with any of the people involved in the recovery and have no knowledge of the dates of the recoveries." However, it is important to note that he then went on to state that "I did receive some official reports when I was in my office at the Pentagon" and that "I had been invited to participate in several discussions associated with the reported recoveries." He also told Steinman, Stanton Friedman, and Dr. Bruce Maccabee that he had been offered a chance to view wreckage and bodies at Wright Patterson Air Force base, but had been unable to go. This revelation is cited over and over again as evidence that UFOs are extraterrestrial in nature, and that the American government is covering up the truth about them. Stanton Friedman called it "amazing" and concluded that the "value of the testimony by Sarbacher and Smith is in the substantiating of rumours of the involvement of Wright Field as a place where materials and / or bodies were located, at least temporarily... [Sarbacher's] stature makes the confirmation of government knowledge of crashed UFOs more impressive than any previous testimony." Timothy Good called the Smith memo "one of the most important official documents on UFOs ever released." Canadian researcher Grant Cameron has used Smith's memo as the starting point in the construction of a theory that Canada was involved in Top Secret research into flying saucers in the 1950s. But is any of this true? First, one has to examine what resulted in Canada because of this supposedly "amazing" memo. Contrary to what some ufologists have claimed, there has never been any evidence put forward of a Top Secret UFO study program created under the auspices of the Canadian government as a result of the Smith memo. Instead we have Project Magnet, a part-time project, which was undertaken by Smith from 1951 until 1954. A few resources were provided by the Canadian government, but it was not given much serious consideration by Smith's superiors, and was shut down when its existence was revealed to the public and became an embarrassment for the government. Dr. Omond Solandt, who was the first Chairman of the Canadian Defence Research Board, from 1947 until 1956, explained that, while Canadian scientists often informally discussed the subject of UFOs, including with American counterparts like Solandt's friend Vannevar Bush, Smith's work was "never really classified top secret, or anything else", and that "he never had any institutional base which gave him authority to classify a document. He just put TOP Secret on his personal papers." Solandt went on to state that while the Defence Research Board may have temporarily classified some of his work, it was quickly declassified. There was no Top Secret Canadian UFO program, noted Solandt, nor was there, as far as he knew, an American one. Cameron and others have claimed that Project Magnet was far more than a "part-time endeavor" by Smith, and implied that Solandt and others were just part of a cover-up, but this assertion is undermined by Smith's own words. In his 1950 memo he suggested that: "... a PROJECT be set up within the frame work [sic] of this section to study this problem and that the work be carried on a part time basis until such time as sufficient tangible results can be seen to warrant more definitive action." Further, the "problem" that Smith refers to was not flying saucers, per se, but geo-magnetic energy, which Smith theorized was related to flying saucers (hence his initial interest in Behind the Flying Saucers). This is made clear by the following passage from the memo: "Doctor Solandt agreed that work on geo- magnetic energy should go forward." In 1961 Smith re-confirmed the true nature of Project Magnet, in a presentation to the Vancouver Area UFO Club, Smith stated: "May I point out that the Project Magnet I was associated with, which received much publicity, was not an official Government project. It was a project that I talked the Deputy Minister into letting me carry out, making use of the extensive field organization of the Department of Transport. No funds were spent on it and we merely had access to the very large field organization and opened a number of files." That Project Magnet never moved beyond part-time status is understandable, given that the results were less than impressive. In a 1952 draft status report Smith wrote that, "The results to date have hardly been spectacular." Further, he noted that, "The initial group was quite small to start with and was further depleted during the year by two resignations in favour of more lucrative positions elsewhere." This latter comment is particularly revealing: presumably, if Project Magnet had been cutting edge research, people would have been trying to get involved with the project, not leaving it. Dr. Solandt elaborated on the failures of Project Magnet and Wilbert Smith decades later: "The Defence Research Board... gave Smith some facilities on DRB property for his [UFO] radio watch and offered to have some experts repeat his experiments which were the basis of his claim to have found a mechanism for the magnetic propulsion of UFOs. Frank Dawes, head of our telecommunications research Lab and an authority on terrestrial and other magnetism repeated the experiments with Smith and showed that the results obtained by Smith were due to sloppy measurements with uncalibrated equipment. There was nothing in the theory." Smith, concluded Solandt, was "not a good scientist." His experiments with geo-magnetic energy, which is what would have been of interest to someone like Dr. Solandt, who was a strong proponent of applied science, came to nothing, and so were of no interest to the Canadian Defence Research Board. Finally, if Project Magnet had really been important, the government would have provided appropriate levels of funding for it. The fact that it did not is further evidence that the Project was not accorded a high level of priority. In fact, Smith, in his memo seeking support for the Project, stated explicitly that it would only cost a few hundred dollars initially, but also that this money would not be new money, but would come from the Department of Transport's existing appropriation. Without being facetious, this may be the first time in the history of the Canadian government when a civil servant did not ask for new money - no doubt because Smith knew he would not get it. It is clear that nothing much came of Sarbacher's comments to Smith in 1950, at least in Canada, and at least as far as Wilbert Smith was concerned. But that is not the end of it: there is still the question of whether Sarbacher was being truthful with Smith in the first place. This seems unlikely. Consider that Sarbacher states that "flying saucers exist [and] are the most highly classified subject in the United States." Assuming this to be true, does it make sense that he would reveal these facts, and others, to a mid-rank Canadian civil servant? It is difficult for ufologists to have it both ways - to assert on the one hand that the government is engaged in a massive cover-up of the truth about UFOs, but then maintain on the other hand that someone like Sarbacher, who supposedly had knowledge of the "truth", and who worked under tight security, would be so cavalier about revealing it to someone like Smith, an act which would have been in clear violation of his security oaths, the penalties for which, as any number of ufologists have pointed out, were severe. This seems even more unlikely when one considers the time period - international tensions were escalating, war was underway in Korea, the McCarthy communist hunts were underway, and the Soviets had the atomic bomb - and the subject and purported level of classification. As Dr. Solandt noted in 1983, "As far as I was aware no non-U.S. citizen was allowed access to any material classified higher than top-secret." How likely, then, is it that Sarbacher would have revealed true, super secret classified information to Smith, or that Smith would eventually have access to alien bodies and crashed flying saucers, as he claimed a few years later? The answer must be "not very likely at all." The question which naturally follows on from this conclusion is: are there indicators in the information that Sarbacher provided Smith that the information was not genuine? A careful review of the information indicates that there were. The most significant is Sarbacher's claim that a "small group" had been established under the direction of Vannevar Bush to study their "modus operandi." Stanton Friedman, in his book Top Secret / Majic, correctly identifies Bush as a world-renowned research scientist who had been, in essence, the "science czar" during the Second World War under President Roosevelt. Indeed, if such a group had been established during the Roosevelt administration, Bush would have been a likely choice to be part of it. However, given that the flying saucer incidents did not become a serious concern to the United States government until 1947, well into the Truman administration, it is highly unlikely Bush would have played a role in such a group at that time. Bush's role in government was on the wane, and Truman did not consider him a close advisor. There were a number of reasons for this, the first being an inherent distrust of any holdover from the Roosevelt administration who had been close to the President, particularly those, like Bush, who had kept him in the dark about the development of the atomic bomb. For Bush, notes historian Pascal Zachary, Roosevelt's death was a "professional catastrophe" which dealt a "huge blow to his plans for the postwar period" and "reduced his influence on atomic policy." Beyond this, however, was the fundamental difference between the two men's personalities and styles - Truman was a skilled politician, proud of his ordinariness and skeptical of "experts"; Bush could mix it up in the back room if he had to, but he was, at his core, an elitist intellectual. He fit much better with Roosevelt than Truman. Evidence of this diminishment of Bush's role abounds, but it can perhaps best be seen in Truman's rejection of Bush's "Endless Frontier" report in 1945, a major blow to Bush. As Zachary notes, "while not quite a rift, the non-endorsement signaled stormier times to come." The policy differences between the two were profound. Instead of Bush, in 1946 Truman chose John Steelman, a man Bush disliked, as Chairman of the Scientific Research Board, one of the goals of which was to further blunt Bush's influence on civilian science policy. Bush was passed over for the position of the first Secretary of Defense in 1947, which he wanted "in the worst way" and had to settle for the position of Chairman of the newly formed Research and Development Board (RBD), against the better judgment of some of Truman's closest advisors, who were wary of Bush's ambition. Bush hoped that he would still be able to influence policy while with the RBD, but these hopes quickly proved illusory. As Zachary observes, the "RBD post was like a slow-motion train wreck. Bush saw the crash coming but was helpless to stop it." The problem was with the charter of the RBD, which left it without real power. The Board could advise the Secretary of Defence, James Forrestal, on "major policy" , but could not direct or control the internal research and development activities of the various military services, which left it powerless to affect change. This resulted in constant battles between Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which Bush lost time and again. In 1948 he resigned, citing the disregard the Joint Chiefs had for his Board. He wrote to Forrestal, "There is now a general impression that, since the Joint Chiefs can invade the affairs of the Board without notice, the latter is in some manner secondary or subsidiary. I find my ability to serve you in connection with the responsibilities you have placed in my hands seriously impaired." By 1950, Bush was, by his own admission, finished as a force in Washington. Given this reality, there is no reason to believe that Truman would have tapped Bush for any role related to flying saucers. And yet, to those who were not Washington insiders in the late 1940s, unaware of his rapidly diminishing stature within the administration and his battles with the Joint Chiefs (or, one might add, to UFO researchers similarly unaware of these events decades later), Bush would have seemed a logical choice based on their knowledge of his wartime record and influence. Accordingly, his was the perfect name to use in a disinformation campaign - believable to an outsider, but not a name that would in any way compromise security on real secret projects, because Bush by this time was not involved in any such projects. It was a rumour-limiting detail that could be used to control the spread of the disinformation in the event that it went too far. A review of the evidence therefore leads to the logical conclusions that: (a) Sarbacher would not have revealed truly super secret information to Wilbert Smith, and (b) that the information he did reveal to Smith was false. The question then arises - what was the true reason for the disinformation spread by Sarbacher to Smith in 1950? One may reasonably posit a couple of possibilities. The first is the theory that the disinformation was ultimately aimed at the Soviets, designed to convince Stalin that the United States had access to advanced alien technology. If so, it would make sense that Sarbacher would pass along disinformation to Smith, in a seemingly innocuous manner, that the Americans undoubtedly knew would quickly wend its way up to Smith's superiors - as it did - and from there quite possibly on to the Soviets. Canada would be a logical place to plant this information - a close ally of the United States, so that the Soviets would believe the information had at least the possibility of being genuine, but also a proven center of Soviet espionage, as evidenced by the Gouzenko affair in 1946, where a young Soviet NKVD clerk defected and exposed a large Soviet spy ring in Ottawa, in the process helping to set off the Cold War. As Stanton Friedman is fond of saying, rule number one for security is that "you can't tell your friends without telling your enemies." In intelligence matters, with disinformation, sometimes this is exactly what you are attempting to accomplish. Perhaps it was even part of an overall campaign to distract both allies and enemies, and maybe even other elements of the United States government, from the truth about flying saucers; maybe even a real crashed saucer retrieval. Or maybe it was for some reason the nature of which we cannot yet surmise. In any event, the question arises - why Wilbert Smith? Smith had one quality that critical, and made him a logical candidate for a disinformation campaign - an intense interest in flying saucers, to the point of being a "believer." As he noted in a 1961 interview: "I suppose I have always known that there were other intelligent beings in the universe other than ourselves, and that sooner or later they would visit us. In 1947 when the first wide-spread publicity on flying saucers came about, I thought this was something worth thinking about and maybe investigating." Dr. Solandt was on the mark with his observation that Smith, "was out to prove that there were UFOs and that the 'Establishment' was dedicated to suppressing all knowledge about them." Smith's later public activities confirm this impression, including involvement with the discredited contactee movement, to the point of claiming to have been in contact with aliens himself. His unsupported conclusions in the final report for Project Magnet, where he stated, with no substantive evidence to support his conclusion other than his own belief, that "It appears then, that we are faced with a substantial possibility of the real existence of extra-terrestrial vehicles, regardless of whether or not they fit into our scheme of things. Such vehicles of necessity must use a technology considerably in advance of what we have," also give an accurate indication of Smith's mind-set. He was, in other words, pre-disposed to believe information that the Americans fed to him if it related to flying saucers, super secret programs, and a cover-up. It was his fascination, not the Canadian government's, as he made clear repeatedly, such as the following comments made during a speech in 1959: "During the past ten years I have made a serious and extensive study of the phenomena of flying saucers. I have covered every aspect that I could come to grips with, and have arrived at some conclusions, which, I might say, are entirely my own and do not represent any views which might be held officially or unofficially by the Canadian government." But how would the Americans have known about him? Smith himself provides the answer: "In 1950 I was attending a rather slow-moving broadcasting conference in Washington, D.C., and having some free time on my hands, I circulated around asking a few questions about flying saucers, which stirred up a hornet's nest." That "hornet's nest" would have alerted whoever was in charge of the disinformation campaign to a perfect opportunity to seed a flying saucer story, for whatever reason, that might eventually make its way, as Friedman would say, from a "friend" to an "enemy," or sow confusion amongst the Canadians and distract them from something else. Implausible? Not when one examines the evidence critically. What is implausible is the conclusion that a man like Sarbacher would make such an egregious breach of a super-secret project to someone like Smith? Which is more likely? Solandt had a much higher security clearance than Smith, but even his clearance did not extend to nuclear weapons. How could it, then, have extended to a project allegedly "two points higher" than nuclear weapons in terms of security classification? As Solandt noted, if there had been a super-secret program to deal with UFOs in the United States, "it is unlikely that I would have heard about it." None of this means that the United States did not take the subject of flying saucers seriously. It does not mean that there were not top secret programs in place to study the phenomenon. It does not even necessarily preclude the possibility of the recovery by the United States military of a crashed alien spacecraft - perhaps even several. It does, however, provide logical reasons to doubt that the information as provided by Sarbacher to Smith was genuine. Indeed, as Solandt concluded, "I assume Smith got the story from someone in the [United States] who fabricated it." A careful and objective review of the facts surrounding Wilbert Smith and Robert Sarbacher indicates that this is the most reasonable conclusion. Proponents of the reality of the extra-terrestrial hypothesis
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 10:56:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing <snip> >One of the most outstanding chracteristics of dreams is their >incompleteness - they are incompletely dreamed because of sleep >state interruptions and other mechanisms, and they are >incompletely remembered. Very few dreams tell an entire story >from start to finish, they are just snippets. Yet UFO abductions >always have a start and a finish, the person is abducted, then >returned, like a real event really remembered. Few if any >abductions involve memory of just suddenly being inside the >"spaceship" and not remembering how the abductee got there, and >not recalling how they got back home. >Yet most dreams have no clear beginning or end, just episodes in >the middle, sometimes they are part of a "recurring dream" >pattern, like the "chase" nightmares which never end. One would >expect the UFO abduction statistics to show the same pattern of >dreams being almost entirely fragmentary episodes and not full >stories with a beginning and an end back home (or back in the >car or wherever they were abducted). If abductions were dreams >one would expect most cases to have no memory of how or when >abducted and no memory of how or when returned. Brad: The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' category. The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, which you can find delineated at the National Library of Medicine (and other venues). Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and "take them away." The mechanism is psychological, and complex, and it is not a dream state that is being recounted, but something unique. (I, however, do have one caveat. The Betty/Barney Hill episode seems, and I accent the word "seems," to be a real abduction, but even their terrifying account might be explained by psychology rather than aliens, and there should be some
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:36:06 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:01:03 -0500 Subject: Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Friedman >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:59 -0800 (PST) >Subject: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? >The latest issue of UFO Review (#9) mentions a website: >http://www.seekingmoinfo.com/ >that presents details of an alleged UFO crash in Missouri in >1941. In looking at the site, I noticed all of the usual >problems with such stories - records mysteriously missing, >principals conveniently dead. Are any of our Listers aware of >any compelling evidence that would lead us to believe this event >is anything more than just another campfire tale? Len Stringfield had told Charlette Mann's story but would not tell anybody where she was. Some few years after his death, I asked Len's wife if she would provide contact information. She refused. She was saving Len's files for a grandchild who might be interested at some time in the future. I started with the church in Cape Girardeau and evntually located people who had know Reverend Huffman, a copy of his obituary and then Charlette herself. She was most cooperative. I also managed, with considerable effort, to locate the person to whom Charlette's father had loaned the picture that her grandfather had taken of the being. He was quite a mysterious guy. I passed that information to Ryan Wood who spoke with him in New Mexico. Charlette has been filmed. I have no good reason, now, to doubt her story. Obviously I have no information on the location of the wreckage or bodies. I should note that it is well known that the Military Personnel Records Center in St. Louis had a major fire. One must recall that, according to the GAO, outgoing messages
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:11:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Actually when Sarbacher was reinterviewed by William Steinman, >Stan Friedman, Jerry Clark, Bruce Maccabee, etc., he reaffirmed >the substance of the Smith memo summarizing Sarbacher's original >briefing. In the interest of having all the facts on the table... Here is how the conversation with Stan went, re: the Smith memo ('F' obviously being for Friedman, and 'S' obviously being for Sarbacher): "F: Let's see early fifties now the notes that I sent you from Wilbert Smith, do you remember, you do remember talking to him. S: Ya vaguely F: The Canadian. S: Ya vaguely F: Okay, that, his notes were, ah 1950 and let me see exact date September 15th where his notes 1950. He asked you a question that you didn't answer at that time which was rather fascinating (??) maybe you've just given me the answer in a sense, ah he quotes you as saying " Yes it is classified two points higher even than the H Bomb. In fact the most highly classified subject in the US government at the present time." and S: I don't have the slightest idea why. F: Well S: It seems silly to me. F: Well, his next comment, that was supposedly what you said and then his next comment was ah "May I ask the reason for the classification" and you said " You may ask but I can't tell you." Well think that (cut off) S: Well probably cause I didn't know. F: Oh, okay not because of this crash, you see there is no mention of a crash per se in this note. Do you think it could have happened after this? S: I don't know there may have been several of them. Ah there was some talk that there were." I will let all and sundry draw what conclusions they want from this. As for Steinman, here are the relevant bits of his Q & A with Sarbacher, which was conducted by letter: "Sarbacher: 'I recall the interview with Dr. Brenner of the Canadian Embassy. I think the answers I gave him were the ones you listed. Naturally, I was more familiar with the subject matter under discussion, at that time. Actually, I would have been able to give more specific answers had I attended the meetings concerning the subject... I still do not know why the high order of classification has been given and why the denial of the existence of these devices.'" As for Bruce, here is how he related his conversation with Sarbacher, at pp. 185-186 of UFO FBI Connection (St. Paul, Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications, 2000): "Several UFO investigators interviewed Dr. Sarbacher in the early 1980s before he died. I was one of those investigators. He told me that, although he had never seen a saucer himself, he did know some engineers who worked at Wright-Patterson AFB in the late 1940s, and they told him there was wreckage and bodies! Furthermore he told me he had gained the impression from their descriptions that these creatures were lightweight and composed somewhat like insects. He said he did not know why the subject was still secret in the 1980s. He also recalled that Dr. Vannevar Bush, Dr. John von Neumann, and Dr. Robert Oppenheimer were among the scientists working on the saucer problem. These men were, of course, top scientists of the day, with Bush being the 'top of the top' as far as political connections were concerned, having organized virtually all of the U.S. military research carried out during the Second World War." Obviously, I disagree with Bruce's comments about Bush, in that he was nowhere near the 'top of the top' during the time period in issue here, but that, for the present, is not the point. Finally, here's what Jerry said: "Robert Sarbacher, a physicist who before his death in 1986 spoke with me and several others about his alleged knowledge of crashed and recovered spacecraft, learned during the period he spent as a consultant to the Defense Department's Research and Development Board. Sarbacher, a scientist with undisputed credentials, provided me (as well as Bruce Maccabee and Stanton Friedman, in separate interviews) with only sketchy information reflecting his reported only indirect involvement in research on the crash materials. The word "Roswell," which I mentioned when I interviewed him inearly 1985, rang no bells. Sarbacher seemed to know little about UFOs and crash lore. He acted puzzled even when I mentioned "Blue Book", whose meaning I had to explain to him." See: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m23-012.shtml If any of the above feel I have quoted them out of context, or misquoted them, let me know. In Jerry's case in particular I used what I considered to be the most pertinent remarks, but Jerry might think otherwise, and I would defer to his judgment, as he is the one who made the comments originally. Best regards,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 April UFO/ET Congress Near Bordentown NJ From: Tom Benson <sparkle.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:11:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:16:17 -0500 Subject: April UFO/ET Congress Near Bordentown NJ Dear List: Space Odyssey UFO/ET Congress April 16 & 17 2005 Near Bordentown, New Jersey The event continues at the same famous location since 1990. After Jim Moseley's NUFOC and MUFON, this is the longest running Con in the country. Confirmed speakers include Jan Aldrich, Nicholette Pavevsky, Raymond Cecot, Capt. James "Jet" Courant, John C. Sherwood, and Dr. T. Peter Park. For speaker bios, directions, acommodations and costs see Pat Marcattilo's website at: www.DrUFO.org
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Hatch From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:07:43 -0800 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:18:16 -0500 Subject: Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Hatch >From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:59 -0800 (PST) >Subject: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? >The latest issue of UFO Review (#9) mentions a website: >http://www.seekingmoinfo.com/ >that presents details of an alleged UFO crash in Missouri in >1941. In looking at the site, I noticed all of the usual >problems with such stories - records mysteriously missing, >principals conveniently dead. Are any of our Listers aware of >any compelling evidence that would lead us to believe this event >is anything more than just another campfire tale? Hello Joe: Personally, I would put this in the darker end of the grey box. A weenie roast might be nice. I have nothing listed in Missouri for that entire year, nor the previous or following years, and no UFO crash retrievals.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:07:55 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:47:27 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO ><snip> >Yes, I've got some news about the film and what exactly >happened. >I've achieved this remarkable feat by doing something simple >most investigators overlook: >I asked the people who were _there_. > >Wasn't difficult to find them either. They have these things >called phone numbers and email addresses and websites and >calendars of events where they make appearances. >So I says to myself, "I wonder what screen legend Ms. Maureen >O'Hara and Western hero Harry Carey Jr. have to say?", since >both of them were actually _in_ the film and Ms. O'Hara _in_ the >scene in question. >Mr. Carey has yet to respond - probably too busy signing >autographs but Ms. O'Hara's fan club and webmasters did. I though Harry Carey was deceased. What makes you think either he or O'hara would knoew anymore about caused the glitch than we do? >So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most principle >shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes including the >scene in question: >Were shot on soundsages! What's your point. That's what everyone has been saying. >The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >Arc light being moved and adjusted. You're kidding right? They were moving an arc light while there was a scene being shot? Did your expert mention whether the lighting grip was fired? >Fits the pattern considering the top special effects talent >they had on the film. What does?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:40:46 -0600 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:49:50 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - King >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> >So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most >principle shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes >including the scene in question: >Were shot on soundsages! >The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >Arc light being moved and adjusted. Hi Greg, The thing in the clip is obviously not an arc light, in motion or otherwise. But it very likely is a reflection of such a light. I assume this is what the expert was asserting. Based on Dave Rudiak's comments about a moving river, I'll further assume that the "river" was a special effect, as well. I haven't seen the full scene, but can easily imagine an undulating plastic or cellophane sheet being blown by a fan from
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:26:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:52:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' - Maccabee >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:33:48 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' >I'm reminded of Dr. Robert Sarbacher's allusion that bodies >taken from UFO crashes were artificial. Could he have been >describing cybernetic beings specifically created to pilot UFOs?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:41:08 -0400 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:57:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Friedman >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:28:42 EST >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >>Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II ><snip> >>>You can disagree with me as to interpretation. Fair enough. But >>>don't say my conclusions are "unsupported conjecture." >>I would say Paul's interpretations amount to typical debunking >>hatchet jobs on Smith that I've seen before, little more than >>snide cartoon sketches. I would have expected far better from >>Paul. >Aw, so sorry to disappoint you David. Alas, I do not spend my >days figuring out how to make you happy, or how best to >reinforce your rigid view of all things ufological. >It must be handy, though, when someone raises points that you >cannot answer based on the evidence, to be able to resort to >comments like "snide cartoon sketches." Wowee. I am overwhelmed >by your logic. >>And yes, I would label it "unsupported conjecture," practically >>every damn bit of it. >In the words of the immortal George Harrison, I again encourage >all to read what I actually wrote, pause, and then "think for >yourself" as to who makes more sense, who is really engaged in a >search for the truth here, and who is running around spewing >rampant speculation. >I have used the available evidence. David (and others) can >disagree with the conclusions, but to accuse me of unsupported >conjecture is both insulting and ridiculous. It is worthy, in >every sense of the word, of the epithet "Klasskurtzian." ><snip> >I have massively snipped here, because David has made his points >clear, and I have made mine clear. Let the chips fall where they >may. >If one wants to accept David's arguments, devoid of logic as I >think they are, that's fine. But, again, read what I wrote, read >what David has written, then read the relevant documents for >yourselves, and come to your own conclusions about who is >looking at the evidence, and who is just repeating the same old >dogma, mixed in with heaping amounts of his own speculation, >plenty of misrepresentation, and more than a few personal >brickbats. >Of course, I've read back through UpDates for a number of years, >and I'm not the first person, nor, I suspect, will I be the >last, to get "Rudiaked" just because my interpretation of the >evidence differs from David's. I for one, having talked to both Sarbacher and Omond Solandt, can find no evidence to support the notion that Sarbacher was lying to Smith. Grant Cameron's conclusions, it seems to me, are besides the point. Solandt admits that he and Bush discussed UFOs. They were in similar positions on opposite sides of the border. They didn't spend a lot of time together and both were very busy. I doubt it was just idle chit chat based on some newspaper coverage of a sighting. The Canadian government sent letters in response to questions from the public saying it was doing nothing about UFOs when in fact meetings were being held of an official UFO committee. The Canadian government lied to the public just as J. Edgar Hoover lied to the American public about the FBI's role in UFO investigation. The notion that Sarbacher lied to Smith hoping the info would get to the Soviets, seems to me to have no foundation at all. Paul you haven't provided any evidence so far. I can't say it was impossible. But what reason is there to say it happened? A general desire to get rid of MJ-12 by trying to get rid of Bush, by trying to get rid of Smith, by trying to get rid of Sarbacher as reliable? Are we to believe that Solandt was a spy? That Solandt couldn't be trusted? That Smith was not to be trusted or a spy and that Sarbacher was aware of this despite having been connected with Smith by the military attache?. Bush's background and positions clearly indicate that he would have worked closely with Forrestal on the Modus Operandi question. We know Bush was tight with Twining. We know Twining was at the High Security briefing for Ike on Nov. 18, 1952 at the Pentagon. None of this means that Truman and Bush were buddy-buddy, or that any major DRB or RDB effort would have involved Smith, or that Don Menzel was a nice guy or wasn't a money grubbing arrogant, egotistical character who also happened to be an outstanding astronomer, a long term cryptography specialist, a highly trusted (with high level security clearances) consultant to the CIA, NSA and dozens of companies... and also a writer of science fiction. It seems to me that you have started with a conclusion and tried to demonstrate its accuracy by very selective choice of interesting scenarios having no basis other than a fertile
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:48:58 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:00:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >See: >http://www.geocities.com/jorgeconesa/Paralysis/sleepnew.html >for a discussion of sleep paralysis, which despite its name can >occur in non sleep states. I'm afraid this is entirely false. One of the defining criteria of sleep paralysis is that it occurs near the onset of sleep or awakening. Conesa is actually quite explicit about this. So anything which might resemble sleep paralysis, but occurs during a "non-sleep state" is by definition not sleep paralysis. >David Hufford gives examples of >occurances in a library and sat on an airliner. I take it what you mean here, is that there is some causal mechanism which produces sleep paralysis which is also responsible for phenomena which resemble sleep paralysis, but occur in "non-sleep states". That's a perfectly reasonable hypothesis, but without some clearly testable theoretical mechanism (which currently doesn't exist) it's no more than speculation. You also have the problem that certain other conditions, such as migraine attacks and epileptic seizures, often present phenomenology which is superficially similar to the symptoms often identified as sleep paralysis. I looked through Conesa's website, and also skimmed his sample chapter, and I note two things - firstly, that Conesa offers no references to peer-reviewed articles delineating testable theoretical mechanisms (not that I would have expected him to) and secondly, that he clearly states he is an agnostic on the question of causal mechanisms. In other words, as Conesa uses the term, "sleep paralysis" is simply a category identifier, and not an explanation at all. >Henry James Snr, >the father of William the psychologist and Henry the novelist >had a particularly shattering sleep paralysis episode while sat >reading in his study. There is a real problem with this practice of "archeodiagnosis" (the diagnosing of historical personages with conditions on the basis of what we believe is our superior knowledge). Such attributions are inherently untestable and apt to be little more that inkblot tests, in which we see whatever we are looking for. This is probably why Van Gogh, for example, has variously been descibed as having either bipolar disorder or temporal lobe epilepsy, on the basis of exactly the same evidence. (As far as I know, no-one has so far suggested that he had both.) >False awakening is also a well established experience which has >been discussed by Keith Basterfield and Jenny Randles among >others, and is discussed in Celia Green's "Lucid Dreaming". Celia Green is one of those writers who has a rather cavalier attitude to trivial matters like actual evidence. She's also liable to accuse anyone who disagrees with her of being part of a liberal conspiracy to prevent elite superintelligences like hers from being recognized for what they are. >The >line between SP episodes and false awakening is very blurred, >and it seems likely that SP episodes can occur on a continuum >from, at least a subjective sensation of, being wide awake to >obvious sleep. Peter, if you define your categories sufficiently loosely, then the line between any two can always be made arbitrarily blurred. As I understand it, "false awakening" (which I've experienced myself, btw) is so loosely defined that any case in which some one appears to wake in unfamiliar circumstances can retrospectively be defined as false awakening. By that definition, near-death experiences are also false awakenings. What does this tell us about the underlying causal mechanisms, and the types of phenomena they can generate? >See also: >http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/70/visions.html >for a classic case of a ufo themed sleep paralysis episode and >incidences of hypnogogic and hypnopompic hallucination I've been reading through some of the articles on the Magonia website, and I think Magonia is at its strongest when collecting the kind of raw data on which Ufology ultimately depends, and at its weakest when it tries to come up with ad hoc 'explanations' like this. There are really two problems with your "false awakening" explanation for the case you mention: One is that, as I indicated above, false awakening riskes being a competely empty category which accounts for everything and predicts nothing - which amounts to saying that it actually explains nothing, that to use your own phrase, it is indefinitely elastic and unfalsifiable. It also amounts to what is sometimes pejoratively referred to in psychology as "explanation by naming". But your article also suggests that, as I've indicated previously, you don't really understand the scientific method. In science we proceed by constructing theoretical explanations which generate predictions which can then be tested against observation and experiment. By contrast the Humanities (including many of those Humanities disciplines which represent themselves as "social sciences") tend to work according to a process which might be termed "narrative attribution", in which phenomena are "explained" by constructing narratives and attributing the phenomena to the narratives. And the type of reasoning you present in your article is clearly narrative attribution, not science. >Conesa also suggests that SP can be associated with micro rem >states such as occur to fatigued drivers (think of the Hills >here folks), and it may well account for some otherwise >inexplicable accidents (the terrible Moorgate tube train >disaster comes to mind). Possible, but once again it's pure speculation in the absence of testable causal mechanisms. >Abduction narratives fit well into the tradition of the secret >night adventure, which have included belief that one has been >turned into a horse and ridden round the fields by the fairies, >attended witches sabbats, travelled _astrally_ to the Himalayas >to be instructed by the _Masters_, being a werewolf etc as >culture and personal preference dictates. Same problem again. This is narrative attribution, not science. To turn this into science, you would have to show, firstly, that the match between abduction narratives and "secret night adventures" is statistically significant (and replicable) and also that "secret night adventures" represent some identifiable
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Kelly Freeman <Khfflsciufo.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 08:30:34 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:01:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:09:19 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing <snip> >Sleep paralysis, narcoleptic episodes, and other dream/sleep >states can explain fully, as your links above help indicate, the >alien abduction phenomenon. Sleep paralysis, narcoleptic episodes, and other dream/sleep states explain_partially some aspects of the alien abduction phenomenon, in which, they are not alien abduction episodes at all, but just as described above. Alien abductions are not just some mundane aberrant brain function as you believe. However, whatever the "aliens" use in any abduction scenario could cause the brain to behave in ways we have yet to understand. But there still has to be a cause to induce the desired effect. >Those who take the time to actually peruse the extant >literature, which is extensive, cannot but come away with >psychological explanations for all, and I mean total, alien >abduction stories available. Except for those who are actually alien abductees or those who have actually interviewed them and did their homework. >This, again, is where "ufology" goes awry: a continuing "debate" >of bizarre activities which have been settled, conclusively, one >way or another.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:01:13 EST Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:03:58 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO ><snip> >Yes, I've got some news about the film and what exactly >happened. >I've achieved this remarkable feat by doing something simple >most investigators overlook: >I asked the people who were _there_. >Wasn't difficult to find them either. They have these things >called phone numbers and email addresses and websites and >calendars of events where they make appearances. >So I says to myself, "I wonder what screen legend Ms. Maureen >O'Hara and Western hero Harry Carey Jr. have to say?", since >both of them were actually _in_ the film and Ms. O'Hara _in_ the >scene in question. >Mr. Carey has yet to respond - probably too busy signing >autographs but Ms. O'Hara's fan club and webmasters did. >So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most principle >shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes including the >scene in question: >Were shot on soundsages! >The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >Arc light being moved and adjusted. >Fits the pattern considering the top special effects talent they >had on the film. >So being part Irish myself, and the good part at that, I'll >leave it up to Ms. O'Hara to put the shenanigans to rest. She's >still just as pretty today as we all remember her and quite busy >giving of herself to charities and parades etc. >It would be wise for everyone of Celtic heritage to go back and >study the the folklore of the leprechauns - who I believe were >behind this diversion from the start! You can only become >enriched by it. >Oh, and one final note. Ms. O'Hara is beloved by millions and I >for one won't stand for any UFO Gangup nonsense! Leave her be >and let her decide what, when, she'll speak if she wants to. Dang it! Just when you think you've got the answer another one pops up. Lo and behold Mrs. Marilyn Carey wife of western movie legend Harry Carey Jr. will be providing an article about the Rio Grande UFO soon. According to Mrs. Carey the scene was indeed filmed outside and that the UFO was actually a special effect from another movie being filmed about UFOs. Now, I know that seems far fetched and that Mrs. Carey is a- pullin' our leg but we'll wait and see.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 UK National Newspaper UFO Articles From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:22:32 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:04:54 -0500 Subject: UK National Newspaper UFO Articles The third issue of The Experiencers - an e-zine devoted to the alien abduction/alien contact phenomenon - is now available. It includes reproductions of two recent national newspaper articles that I have not seen available online. The first is a full page article I was commissioned to write for the Daily Mail, dealing with UFO documents, the UK's new Freedom of Information Act, and the British Government's UFO Project. This appeared on February 2. The second article is a more general feature on UFOs that appeared in the Sunday Express on January 30. Click here for details of The Experiencers: http://www.experiencers.net/eZines/No3/eZine3.htm And here for the text of the newspaper articles: http://www.experiencers.net/eZines/No3/UKnews.htm
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 27 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Rogerson From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 Fwd Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:44:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Rogerson >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing ><snip> >>One of the most outstanding chracteristics of dreams is their >>incompleteness - they are incompletely dreamed because of sleep >>state interruptions and other mechanisms, and they are >>incompletely remembered. Very few dreams tell an entire story >>from start to finish, they are just snippets. Yet UFO abductions >>always have a start and a finish, the person is abducted, then >>returned, like a real event really remembered. Few if any >>abductions involve memory of just suddenly being inside the >>"spaceship" and not remembering how the abductee got there, and >>not recalling how they got back home. >>Yet most dreams have no clear beginning or end, just episodes in >>the middle, sometimes they are part of a "recurring dream" >>pattern, like the "chase" nightmares which never end. One would >>expect the UFO abduction statistics to show the same pattern of >>dreams being almost entirely fragmentary episodes and not full >>stories with a beginning and an end back home (or back in the >>car or wherever they were abducted). If abductions were dreams >>one would expect most cases to have no memory of how or when >>abducted and no memory of how or when returned. >Brad: >The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >category. >The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >which you can find delineated at the National Library of >Medicine (and other venues). >Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >"take them away." >The mechanism is psychological, and complex, and it is not a >dream state that is being recounted, but something unique. >(I, however, do have one caveat. The Betty/Barney Hill episode >seems, and I accent the word "seems," to be a real abduction, >but even their terrifying account might be explained by >psychology rather than aliens, and there should be some >investigation of the racial element in their apparent >'kidnapping'.) Quite right. We should also bear in mind that much of the narrative structure in abduction stories is produced by ufologists and therapists who build narratives out of isolated memories and mounds of hypnotic regression material. Re the Hills. The circumstances in which the _abduction_ took place were ideal for micro sleep and micro rem. Despite Barney being already exhausted by his daily community they set off on an ill prepared and under financed marathon drive to Canada, then ended driving back through the night because they couldn't afford to stop and eat. They keep having to stop and walk the dog to stay awake, which accounts for a fair proportion of the _missing time_, and it's in one of these episodes that Barney has his panic attack on seeing a strange light in the sky. His vision of the the pilot is one composed of a mixture of terrestrial threats, morphing from what looks like a Japanese kamikaze pilot (Mongolian features, leather jacket, scarf), into first a Boston Irish policeman then an _evil Nazi officer_. Furthermore the politically aware and active Hills would have been aware that this was a period of multiple crises starting with the erection of the Berlin wall just over a month before on to the death of UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold (remember the Hills were on their church's UN committee) on September 18th. There was a resumption of nuclear testing begun by a massive Soviet nuclear bomb blast on 31 August, fears of radiation were in the air so to speak. There was the persistent racial tension, an attempt on the life of General De Gaulle, the Katanga crisis and a United Auto Workers Strike. Added to this there was Hurricane Clara, the fiercest in 40 years hitting Texas, and strange lights or objects in the sky may have seemed even more threatening following the tragic Hillsdale place crash in which 78 people had been killed. Betty goes home and reads all the ufo books she can get from the local library, including Keyhoe's Flying Saucer Conspiracy which contains tales of aliens attacking people, missing aircraft and other paranoia. Its following this that Betty starts having nightmares about being kidnapped by aliens, though her dream description is clearly influenced by Truman Bethurum's "Aboard a Flying Saucer". You also have to bear in mind that the idea of missing time and abduction is actually put into Betty's mind by a couple of fairly mysterious characters. That brings up an intriguing possibility, for being a biracial couple involved in polticial activism, and given Betty's radical family background, they may well have been under surveillance by the FBI, and the idea of perhaps neutralising them by sending them over the edge into kookdom may well occured to racist elements in the FBI. Perhaps Betty had the last laugh though, for the fearful greys are indeliblily stamped with the image of the very terrestrial 'jobsworth'* bureaucrats who do things to us for our own good, that I suspect Betty spent much of her adult life battling.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:56:36 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:24:23 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:07:55 -0400 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST >>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >><snip> >>Yes, I've got some news about the film and what exactly >>happened. >>I've achieved this remarkable feat by doing something simple >>most investigators overlook: >>I asked the people who were _there_. >>Wasn't difficult to find them either. They have these things >>called phone numbers and email addresses and websites and >>calendars of events where they make appearances. >>So I says to myself, "I wonder what screen legend Ms. Maureen >>O'Hara and Western hero Harry Carey Jr. have to say?", since >>both of them were actually _in_ the film and Ms. O'Hara _in_ the >>scene in question. >>Mr. Carey has yet to respond - probably too busy signing >>autographs but Ms. O'Hara's fan club and webmasters did. >I thought Harry Carey was deceased. What makes you think either >he or O'hara would knoew anymore about caused the glitch than we >do? Thinking ain't investigating. As for people on the scene knowing more than you do you sound like those Air Force investigators into the Roswell Incident that published those government books back in the 90's. Investigate everything but forget to ask the people at the scene. >>So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most principle >>shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes including the >>scene in question: >>Were shot on soundsages! >What's your point. That's what everyone has been saying. No it's not what everyone has been saying. If that was what everyone has been saying there wouldn't be a need for multiple posts of different opinion. >>The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >>Arc light being moved and adjusted. >You're kidding right? They were moving an arc light while there >was a scene being shot? No, if I were kidding I would have inserted an 'I Am Kidding' notice at the top of my post. In case you haven't been up on current events, one of the top visited websites on movies are the blooper sites. There are all sorts of errors from Star Wars - stormtroopers bumping their heads to guys wearing Timex watches during The Ten Commandments starring Charlton Heston. Here on Earth people make mistakes. >>Did your expert mention whether the lighting grip was fired? No, probably because no one cares except you. >>Fits the pattern considering the top special effects talent >>they had on the film. >What does? If I have to explain it, it's worthless time spent. >I though Harry Carey was deceased. What makes you think either >he or O'hara would knoew anymore about caused the glitch than we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels - Tonnies From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:03:14 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:26:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels - Tonnies >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:26:27 -0500 >Subject: Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' <snip> >>I'm reminded of Dr. Robert Sarbacher's allusion that bodies >>taken from UFO crashes were artificial. Could he have been >>describing cybernetic beings specifically created to pilot UFOs? >I spoke to Sarbacher. >As I recall he didn't say they were "artificial", but rather >constructed similar to insects - segmented? Exoskeleton? No >elaboration on this comparison. I was referring to his written notes to Wilbert Smith, where he refers to the aliens as "instruments or people." Instruments _or_ people? Well, which is it? To me, this sounds like it could be a way of describing beings with cybernetic aspects. Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Friedman From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:44 -0400 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:29:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Friedman >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >><snip> >>The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >>category. >>The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >>which you can find delineated at the National Library of >>Medicine (and other venues). How anybody can claim that abductions rest with complicated sleep disorders is beyond me. There are literally hundreds of cases where the people aren't in bed, but are driving, walking etc. There are loads of cases where more than one person is abducted at a time. Now will we hear about a new contagious disease.. sleep paralysis that occurs when people are driving or doing other non horizontal activities? >>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >>eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >>common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >>creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >>"take them away." I have seen no examples that sleep paralysis has produced accounts just like abductions any more than magnetic fields have. >>The mechanism is psychological, and complex, and it is not a >>dream state that is being recounted, but something unique. >>(I, however, do have one caveat. The Betty/Barney Hill episode >>seems, and I accent the word "seems," to be a real abduction, >>but even their terrifying account might be explained by >>psychology rather than aliens, and there should be some >>investigation of the racial element in their apparent >>'kidnapping'.) Gee whiz, the racial aspects have been discussed many times.My dealings with Betty and Barney and Marjorie Fish, and John Fuller, and looking at his papers including Dr. Simon's comments on the book manuscript, long ago convinced me that the experience was real. >Quite right. We should also bear in mind that much of the >narrative structure in abduction stories is produced by >ufologists and therapists who build narratives out of isolated >memories and mounds of hypnotic regression material. Much? What is the basis? Some abduction researchers are very careful about not asking leading questions or creating narrative structure. Evidence please? >Re the Hills. The circumstances in which the _abduction_ took >place were ideal for micro sleep and micro rem. Despite Barney >being already exhausted by his daily community they set off on >an ill prepared and under financed marathon drive to Canada, >then ended driving back through the night because they couldn't >afford to stop and eat. They did stop to eat. >They keep having to stop and walk the >dog to stay awake, which accounts for a fair proportion of the >_missing time_, and it's in one of these episodes that Barney >has his panic attack on seeing a strange light in the sky. His >vision of the the pilot is one composed of a mixture of >terrestrial threats, morphing from what looks like a Japanese >kamikaze pilot (Mongolian features, leather jacket, scarf), into >first a Boston Irish policeman then an _evil Nazi officer_. So why did the medical hypnosis by a non believer remove his symptoms? Why did the stories mesh? >Furthermore the politically aware and active Hills would have >been aware that this was a period of multiple crises starting >with the erection of the Berlin wall just over a month before on >to the death of UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold (remember >the Hills were on their church's UN committee) on September >18th. There was a resumption of nuclear testing begun by a >massive Soviet nuclear bomb blast on 31 August, fears of >radiation were in the air so to speak. There was the persistent >racial tension, an attempt on the life of General De Gaulle, the >Katanga crisis and a United Auto Workers Strike. Added to this >there was Hurricane Clara, the fiercest in 40 years hitting >Texas, and strange lights or objects in the sky may have seemed >even more threatening following the tragic Hillsdale place crash >in which 78 people had been killed. Gee... more fiction in the name of fact. Betty and Barney were two well adjusted, highly respected people in the community. Next someone will say they made the whole story up so they could get on TV..... >Betty goes home and reads all the ufo books she can get from he >local library, including Keyhoe's Flying Saucer Conspiracy which >contains tales of aliens attacking people, missing aircraft and >other paranoia. Just how many books is that supposed to mean besides Keyhoe's book? Do you really think there are no missing aircraft? Better check the literature. There are loads of them >Its following this that Betty starts having >nightmares about being kidnapped by aliens, though her dream >description is clearly influenced by Truman Bethurum's "Aboard >a Flying Saucer". Is there some indication that Betty read this not very widely known tome? >You also have to bear in mind that the idea of missing time and >abduction is actually put into Betty's mind by a couple of >fairly mysterious characters. That brings up an intriguing >possibility, for being a biracial couple involved in polticial >activism, and given Betty's radical family background, they may >well have been under surveillance by the FBI, and the idea of >perhaps neutralising them by sending them over the edge into >kookdom may well occured to racist elements in the FBI. Peter, is this supposed to be something other than a wild speculation having no basis in fact? Did you spend any time with Betty and/or Barney? Radical family background? The Dow family goes back over 300 years in New Hampshire. >Perhaps Betty had the last laugh though, for the fearful greys >are indeliblily stamped with the image of the very terrestrial >'jobsworth'* bureaucrats who do things to us for our own good, >that I suspect Betty spent much of her adult life battling. >* [English expression, as in: "'Scuse me, but you can't do that > sort of thing 'ere - its more than me job's worth... --ebk]
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Allan From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:45:25 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:19:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Allan >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >>Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >>Actually when Sarbacher was reinterviewed by William Steinman, >>Stan Friedman, Jerry Clark, Bruce Maccabee, etc., he reaffirmed >>the substance of the Smith memo summarizing Sarbacher's original >>briefing. >As for Steinman, here are the relevant bits of his Q & A with >Sarbacher, which was conducted by letter: >"Sarbacher: 'I recall the interview with Dr. Brenner of the >Canadian Embassy. I think the answers I gave him were the ones >you listed. Naturally, I was more familiar with the subject >matter under discussion, at that time. Actually, I would have >been able to give more specific answers had I attended the >meetings concerning the subject... I still do not know why the >high order of classification has been given and why the denial >of the existence of these devices.'" >As for Bruce, here is how he related his conversation with >Sarbacher, at pp. 185-186 of UFO FBI Connection (St. Paul, >Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications, 2000): >"Several UFO investigators interviewed Dr. Sarbacher in the >early 1980s before he died. I was one of those investigators. He >told me that, although he had never seen a saucer himself, he >did know some engineers who worked at Wright-Patterson AFB in >the late 1940s, and they told him there was wreckage and bodies! >Furthermore he told me he had gained the impression from their >descriptions that these creatures were lightweight and composed >somewhat like insects. He said he did not know why the subject >was still secret in the 1980s. He also recalled that Dr. >Vannevar Bush, Dr. John von Neumann, and Dr. Robert Oppenheimer >were among the scientists working on the saucer problem. These >men were, of course, top scientists of the day, with Bush being >the 'top of the top' as far as political connections were >concerned, having organized virtually all of the U.S. military >research carried out during the Second World War." >Obviously, I disagree with Bruce's comments about Bush, in that >he was nowhere near the 'top of the top' during the time period >in issue here, but that, for the present, is not the point. >Finally, here's what Jerry said: >"Robert Sarbacher, a physicist who before his death in 1986 >spoke with me and several others about his alleged knowledge of >crashed and recovered spacecraft, learned during the period he >spent as a consultant to the Defense Department's Research and >Development Board. Sarbacher, a scientist with undisputed >credentials, provided me (as well as Bruce Maccabee and Stanton >Friedman, in separate interviews) with only sketchy information >reflecting his reported only indirect involvement in research on >the crash materials. The word "Roswell," which I mentioned when >I interviewed him inearly 1985, rang no bells. Sarbacher seemed >to know little about UFOs and crash lore. He acted puzzled even >when I mentioned "Blue Book", whose meaning I had to explain to >him." >See: >http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/1999/feb/m23-012.shtml >If any of the above feel I have quoted them out of context, or >misquoted them, let me know. In Jerry's case in particular I >used what I considered to be the most pertinent remarks, but >Jerry might think otherwise, and I would defer to his judgment, >as he is the one who made the comments originally. May I add some factual points to the debate on Wilbert B.Smith? 1. Omond Solandt told me in 1989 (without any prompting from me) that none of Smith's work was top secret at all. He merely liked to put 'top secret' on his personal papers. Perhaps to keep them from prying eyes. The Canadian govt. finally downgraded Smith's memo in 1969, but obviously nobody in the UFO movement saw it then (whilst Bush was still alive) which is a great pity. It seems to have gathered dust for 9 or 10 years until Arthur Bray obtained it. Solandt's letter to me is on Grant Cameron's website, where it appeared without my permission, but I do not hold anything against Grant for placing it there. 2. I doubt that Vannevar Bush had to give 'clearance' to the Smith-Keyhoe paper on flying saucers and their propulsion. There is nothing in the other official papers to indicate this. Bush certainly would have liked to review it, but since his name nowhere appears in the paper, there is no reason for him to clear it before publication. If Keyhoe was unable to publish it in TRUE magazine, it was for reasons other than this. Keyhoe later published it in F.S.From Outer Space without any such clearance, so why was it ever needed for TRUE? There is, in fact, nothing to show Bush ever saw this paper. 3. Sarbacher, in his letter to Wm Steinman in Nov 1983, refers at one point to the aliens he had heard about as "like insects". Since in neither the Aztec nor the Roswell UFO crash were any insects recovered it is clear Sarbacher was not talking about either case. He was almost certainly recalling office discussions of long ago about Gerald Heard's 1950 book entitled "Is Another World Watching?", in which Heard postulated that the UFO pilots were intelligent bees from Mars. This book was published soon after Scully's. 4. Sarbacher told Steinman he had "no connection with any people involved in the recovery [of crashed saucers]". Yet he told Jerry Clark in 1985 that Bush & Von Neumann were involved and that they told him about the recoveries. (FATE, March 1988). A clear contradiction. 5. Smith told a researcher in 1959 that official contact with aliens had been established and even said that "every nation on this planet has been officially informed of the existence of space craft and their occupants from elsewhere". (See Tim Good's 'Above Top Secret'). Emotive words indeed. Who did Smith think had done this 'official informing'? The 'people from elsewhere' perhaps? Anyone writing such twaddle hardly deserves that the allegations made in his supposedly top secret paper on geomagnetics should be taken seriously. One could question other writings of Smith for the same reason. 6. Smith was a contactee himself, in the 1950s, and stated this quite openly. His method of communicating with aliens is not given, but presumably involved telepathy. 7. People should read his numerous articles (some taken from his speeches) in FLYING SAUCER REVIEW during 1958-63 to get a feel for his scientific methodology. Some are indeed reasonable, at least in part. Others are plain pseudo-science, as is his claim that his group had recovered one and a half tons of "unidentified metal" in Canada in 1960. The Condon Report, for all its faults, at least put the record straight on this one. (p 90-92) 8. Just who told Smith about Bush and his supposed supersecret project to investigate UFOs? We do not know, but it was not, repeat not, Sarbacher. This is obvious from Smith's handwritten notes made in Sept 1950, where Bush is nowhere mentioned. It was very likely Donald Keyhoe, but again, this is far from certain. 9. Let us not forget that Smith never met Sarbacher directly. He wrote his notes (in 1950) from what Col. Bremner had told him after interviewing Sarbacher in Washington. Presumably Bremner put questions to Sarbacher that Smith had requested him to ask. One point I am curious about: What does "classified two points higher than the H-bomb" mean? (Sarbacher's own words). What would one point be? He did not answer this in the 1980s. 10. Finally, in case anyone says I am making ad hominem attacks,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:55:57 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:22:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Clark >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >>Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Finally, here's what Jerry said: >"Robert Sarbacher, a physicist who before his death in 1986 >spoke with me and several others about his alleged knowledge of >crashed and recovered spacecraft, learned during the period he >spent as a consultant to the Defense Department's Research and >Development Board. Sarbacher, a scientist with undisputed >credentials, provided me (as well as Bruce Maccabee and Stanton >Friedman, in separate interviews) with only sketchy information >reflecting his reported only indirect involvement in research on >the crash materials. The word "Roswell," which I mentioned when >I interviewed him inearly 1985, rang no bells. Sarbacher seemed >to know little about UFOs and crash lore. He acted puzzled even >when I mentioned 'Blue Book', whose meaning I had to explain to >him." >If any of the above feel I have quoted them out of context, or >misquoted them, let me know. In Jerry's case in particular I >used what I considered to be the most pertinent remarks, but >Jerry might think otherwise, and I would defer to his judgment, >as he is the one who made the comments originally. If Sarbacher was lying to me, he was certainly an odd liar. He must have answered a good half of my questions with "I don't know." My experience with liars has told me that they always know _everything_. Sarbacher's account was based on hearsay: on stories he'd heard in the office, on an invitation to attend a presentation at Wright-Patterson (as I recall), which he did not make, on (as he remembered) problems and discoveries associated with research on the recovered materials. Our interview was a pleasant one but frustrating. He continually apologized for not knowing or recalling more. His tone was that of someone who is remembering, and not well, an interesting moment, among competing others, from his long-ago government service. (Sarbacher explained that he hadn't paid as much attention as he might have because he was consumed with his own demanding research projects.) If not for the 1950 Smith memo, I probably would have chalked it up to the confusions of memory and made little of it. As it is, it's just a question mark in my head, one of those things that presumably will be cleared up on that day the U.S. government does a thorough housecleaning of its UFO-related documents and we can start to sort the reality
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Harvat From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 16:06:55 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:27:05 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Harvat >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:01:13 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> >Lo and behold Mrs. Marilyn Carey wife of western movie legend >Harry Carey Jr. will be providing an article about the Rio >Grande UFO soon. >According to Mrs. Carey the scene was indeed filmed outside and >that the UFO was actually a special effect from another movie >being filmed about UFOs. >Now, I know that seems far fetched and that Mrs. Carey is >a-pullin' our leg but we'll wait and see. The Hollywood sci-fi craze really didn't kick in until 1951. There was only one from 1950 that might fill the bill: The Flying Saucer, which was strictly a low-budget affair. Here's a link to the Internet Movie Database: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042469/ I seriously doubt its shoestring budget would have allowed for location shooting much beyond Pasadena. As a result, I believe
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:29:20 -0500 Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Aloha List members, I wish to continue exploring the issue of how whistleblower testimonies might be satisfactorily combined with UFO research by offering the following exopolitical analysis of the Charles Hall case. In my last post I posed the importance of exopolitical analysis where hard evidence is lacking. Of course, those adopting the methodologies and premises of mainstream UFO research see this absence as a critical reason for dismissing or ignoring such testimonies. In contrast, exopolitical analysis precedes dispute this lack of hard evidence since the premises and methodologies of exopolitical research is based on recognizing how distorting factors imposed by government agencies negate making hard evidence a necessary threshold criterion for whistleblower admissibility. Despite my having repeatedly referred to these distorting factors in the data collection process, I've noticed that no researcher on UFO Updates has tried to seriously discuss the extent and parameters of the distorting factors when it comes to hard evidence and whistleblower credibility. It seems that veteran UFO researchers operate under the illusion of transparency in the investigatory process and find it difficult to admit anything to the contrary. Despite the different methodologies and premises of exopolitical research and UFO research, I think there are important ways in which they overlap. One is the analysis of the credibility of a whistleblower/witness, the coherence of their testimony, the credentials of the whistleblower, etc., and how discussion of these can continue simultaneously with exopolitical analysis of their testimony. So let me illustrate this overlap by examining the case of Charles Hall. Hall claims to have served at Nellis Airforce Base as a weather observer from 1965 to 1967. During his service he claims to have run into a group of extraterrestrials he described as the `tall whites'. These tall whites regularly intimidated his predecessors at the weather observation posts, and also generated legends of `high strangeness' at Nellis AFB. Hall claims he had repeated physical interactions with the `tall whites' and was able to communicate with them both using English and telepathically. Most significantly, Hall describes the presence of high ranking US Airforce officials who accompanied the tall whites. Hall describes a Lt General who he saw on several occasions with the tall whites, and that he overheard discussions between the general and tall white dignitaries. Hall also describes the various agreements between the USAF and the tall whites in terms of basing rights in exchange for technology and information passed on by the tall whites in terms of nuclear powered shuttle craft that would travel to the moon and even Mars. For more details of Hall's testimony concerning the tall whites, I recommend taking a look at several of the articles at: http://exopolitics.org/charles-hall.htm . So with that brief overview, what do we make of the Charles Hall case? First, how credible is Hall? Hall comes across as very sincere and likable. He has been interviewed by a range of individuals including myself who find him to be sincere. The impression I get after a number of conversations and face to face discussion, is that he believes everything he is saying. I do not detect any embellishment on his part. Importantly, when one makes eye to eye contact, he meets one directly and doesn't waver which I have found from experience to be an important clue into witness credibility. How coherent and consistent is Hall? His testimony is revealed in a three volume set of books and he has been interviewed on a number of occasions (see: http://www.millennialhospitality.net/ ). I find yet to find any major inconsistency in his testimony and his testimony is highly coherent and basically expresses a story of extraterrestrial-government interaction at the highest level. Hall expresses his story without any hesitancy as one who is revealing what happened without embellishment, as opposed to someone fabricating a story. How credentialed is Hall? He has a Master's Degree in Applied Physics from the University of California at San Diego and has done extensive contractual work with a number of corporations (see: http://www.paolaharris.it/master.htm ). Hall has an ongoing career and no obvious motive for coming forward with such a wild story that might jeopardize the security classification he currently possesses for his employment: Secret. Has Hall supplied documents confirming his service at Nellis? UFO researcher Paola Harris has done the initial field work on Hall and has confirmed his service record. Hall's resume gives details on his service record in his resume which is available at: http://www.millennialhospitality.net/htdocs/Cha rles_Hall_Resume.pdf . Do other servicemen confirm Hall's story? So far one serviceman has been interviewed who served with Hall and confirmed Hall's testimony of having worked at Nellis AFB as a weather observer. The servicemen also confirmed some of the `high strangeness' occurring at Nellis. Airline pilot and UFO researcher David Cootes did this interview and can provide details on this corroborating testimony (for Cootes reflections on the Hall case see: http://www.paolaharris.it/coote.htm . A second servicemen has also come forward to confirm that he worked with Hall at Nellis, but as far as I'm aware, this second servicemen has not yet been interviewed. So with that brief overview of Hall's credibility, consistency, credentials, let me make some comments of an exopolitical nature about the Hall case. First, Hall confirms that agreements exist between the US Airforce and a race of extraterrestrials dating from at least the early 1960s. The first sightings of tall whites at Nellis date from 1954 suggests that agreements were made with tall whites as early as 1954 which points to the validity of testimonies concerning agreements stemming from President Eisenhower meeting with extraterrestrials in 1954 and later. See: http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-8.htm . Second, Hall reveals that an interplanetary trade is occurring where the Tall Whites provide technologies and information to the USAF, and in return gain food, metal, clothing and basing rights. This suggests that the tall whites may in fact be part of a resource extraction program that is unknown in terms of scope and implications. This is a serious exopolitical issue yet has yet to be seriously analyzed. Third, Hall reveals that the USAF has developed shuttle craft able to fly to the moon using a nuclear propulsion system. This confirms that the NASA moon program was a cover for a more extensive space program that remains hidden to the general public. Fourth, Hall reveals that the USAF was using unbriefed servicemen as guinea pigs to study the interaction between the tall whites and humans. This suggests that the tall whites were being given experiences whereby they could feel comfortable in the presence of humans. This apparently was an important goal during Hall's interactions which suggest that the relationship between the USAF and the tall whites is a long term relationship based on vital national interests of the US. In conclusion, I believe the Hall case offers a unique opportunity for UFO researchers and exopolitical analysts to come together to examine what is clearly remarkable whistleblower testimony from a very credible and coherent witness. The Hall testimony would ordinarily fall into gray box for many UFO researchers who might concede the credibility of Hall, yet remain unconvinced by the lack of hard evidence. In contrast, exopolitical analysis makes possible discussion of the most pertinent elements of Hall's case while further research is underway in terms of corroborating testimonies, hard evidence, etc. I believe that the Hall case is part of an acclimation program secretly underway to prepare the general public for disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence and that it's vital to begin exopolitical analysis of his testimony. I look forward to comments and further discussion on the Hall case.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:49:06 EST Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:31:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing <snip> >>>One of the most outstanding chracteristics of dreams is their >>>incompleteness - they are incompletely dreamed because of sleep >>>state interruptions and other mechanisms, and they are >>>incompletely remembered. Very few dreams tell an entire story >>>from start to finish, they are just snippets. Yet UFO abductions >>>always have a start and a finish, the person is abducted, then >>>returned, like a real event really remembered. Few if any >>>abductions involve memory of just suddenly being inside the >>>"spaceship" and not remembering how the abductee got there, and >>>not recalling how they got back home. >>>Yet most dreams have no clear beginning or end, just episodes in >>>the middle, sometimes they are part of a "recurring dream" >>>pattern, like the "chase" nightmares which never end. One would >>>expect the UFO abduction statistics to show the same pattern of >>>dreams being almost entirely fragmentary episodes and not full >>>stories with a beginning and an end back home (or back in the >>>car or wherever they were abducted). If abductions were dreams >>>one would expect most cases to have no memory of how or when >>>abducted and no memory of how or when returned. >>Brad: >>The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >>category. >>The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >>which you can find delineated at the National Library of >>Medicine (and other venues). >>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>of UFO abductees..... <snip> Well this is where we really need specifics and details. My point was that abductions almost always have clearcut starts and finishes, there are very few where there are no memories of being abducted and being returned. Whereas dreams almost always are fragmentary and tell no complete story. Now if you say that "complicated sleep disorders" can do these things then please supply some documentation. What percentage of these "complicated sleep disorders" result in complete abduction and return narratives instead of fragmentary snippets? >Quite right. We should also bear in mind that much of the >narrative structure in abduction stories is produced by >ufologists and therapists who build narratives out of isolated >memories and mounds of hypnotic regression material. <snip> As I understand it, most abduction accounts do _not_ come from hypnotic regressions at all, but from normal waking state memories. I have read quite a few abduction transcripts where the investigator did not lead the witness into asserting an abduction and asserting a return. The witness seemed to have a fully connected narrative with a start, middle, and end. As for the rest I am omitting the speculation about the Berlin Wall and such scaring Betty Hill into confabulating a UFO abduction experience or that perhaps an FBI COINTELPRO-type conspiracy planted these ideas on this rather obscure couple.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Fernando Jimenez del Oso - 1941-2005 From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:05:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:33:45 -0500 Subject: Fernando Jimenez del Oso - 1941-2005 INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 28, 2005 Fernando Jimenez Del Oso: Farewell One of the Spanish-speaking world's best loved parapsychologists, Fernando Jimenez del Oso, passed away on March 27, 2005. Though hardly a household name in the USA, Jimenez del Oso was known throughout Spain and Latin America for his fascinating books, magazines ("Espacio y Tiempo" and "Enigmas") and the television shows that shaped the minds of an entire generation: Mas All=E1, La Puerta del Misterio, La Espa=F1a M=E1gica, Punto de Encuentro, El Imperio del Sol and many others.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:20:54 -0300 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:38:40 -0500 Subject: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico Dear Colleagues: In a recent presentation at the 14th International UFO Congress and Film Festival, Laughlin, March 6-12, Jaime Maussan showed some amazing footage of fleets of UFOs composed of dozens and even hundreds of them. Thew footage was shot by regular citizens in several parts of Mexico in the last 6 months or so and sent to him, as he has a nation-wide weekly TV program. The most amazing one was shot on February 27, about a month ago, in Mexico City neighbouring location, by Arturo Robles Gil. It shows some 200 spheres in movement in the sky, after some time completely still. Other footage was also amazing, as they show fleets in formation and with the spheres changing position, at high speed, between clouds. This material could hardly be faked. I wonder how many of you have info about it and what do you think?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:06:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:25:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >How anybody can claim that abductions rest with complicated >sleep disorders is beyond me. There are literally hundreds of >cases where the people aren't in bed, but are driving, walking >etc. There are loads of cases where more than one person is >abducted at a time. Now will we hear about a new contagious >disease.. sleep paralysis that occurs when people are driving or >doing other non horizontal activities? >>>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>>of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >>>eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >>>common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >>>creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >>>"take them away." <snip> >Gee whiz, the racial aspects have been discussed many times.My >dealings with Betty and Barney and Marjorie Fish, and John >Fuller, and looking at his papers including Dr. Simon's comments >on the book manuscript, long ago convinced me that the >experience was real. Stan: You're famialr with the hysteia among the nuns of Loudon, who thought (or were) possessed by demons en masse. Groups of people can experience the same kind of "abduction" as a group and "sleep paralysis" doesn't mean that the episode happens while a person is asleep. It can happen while they're walking, reading, or riding in a car. The literature is rife with examples. The mechanism, again, is complex and ill-understood, just as UFO events are. That Betty and Barney Hill experienced something bizarre is not in doubt. What exactly they experienced is not clear. I lean toward there being an "abduction" but what or whom did the abducting is open to interpretation. You've checked the Hills and their story out, and I accept your
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:28:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research <snip> >Hall reveals that an interplanetary trade is occurring >where the Tall Whites provide technologies and information to >the USAF, and in return gain food, metal, clothing and basing >rights. This suggests that the tall whites may in fact be part >of a resource extraction program that is unknown in terms of >scope and implications. This is a serious exopolitical issue yet >has yet to be seriously analyzed. <snip> >Hall reveals that the USAF has developed shuttle craft >able to fly to the moon using a nuclear propulsion system. This >confirms that the NASA moon program was a cover for a more >extensive space program that remains hidden to the general >public. <snip> Dr. Salla... If what Hall reports is true, what is the U.S. government waiting for? That is, where is the nuclear shuttle? The advances in medicine that the "Tall Whites" allegedly have passed on? Why hasn't the government taken the option of mineral (oil?) extraction to heart instead of fighting with OPEC or spending millions of dollars to obtain precious metals for military and industrial use? What is the U.S. government waiting for? It's been 50 years, according to Hall's "testimony" since all this took place. Where are the consequences of the "Tall White's" passed-on, advanced knowledge? Why would the military not be using alien technology now or during the Cold War? Why is NASA fighting for funding to send probes to Mars when the government apparently has the knowledge and wherewithall to go there now with advanced technology from the "Tall Whites"? Who in government or the military would let this knowledge fester or remain hidden, knowing that they would never see it come to fruition in their lifetime(s)?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:35:58 -0500 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:59:39 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:49:06 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >abductions almost always have clearcut starts and >finishes, there are very few where there are no memories of >being abducted and being returned. Whereas dreams almost always >are fragmentary and tell no complete story. Now if you say that >"complicated sleep disorders" can do these things then please >supply some documentation. What percentage of these "complicated >sleep disorders" result in complete abduction and return >narratives instead of fragmentary snippets? Brad: For documentation ands case studies that clarify how "sleep disorders' and other psychological manifestations work, and how they replicate UFO abduction scenarios, go to The National Library of Medicine and ferret out the extensive literature. I'll give you my accout name and password if you like so you
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Mel Noel & Dan Burisch [was: Michael Wolf] From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 06:33:44 -0800 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:11:46 -0500 Subject: Mel Noel & Dan Burisch [was: Michael Wolf] >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:2:50 -0500 >Subject: Re: Michael Wolf >>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:52:10 -0800 >>Subject: Michael Wolf [Was: Alpha Committee?] >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:10:42 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Alpha Committee? <snip> >>>He was a bright guy with serious mental health problems, a good >>>imagination. >>>I spoke with his brother, his publisher, his undertaker, Dunn >>>and Bradstreet, several friends from his youth, many university >>>personnel, the NY Acd. of Sci., AAAS, etc. >>>His book is fiction, and self-published at that. >>Not that I can add much to what you have said here except to say >>that Michael sent me a metal sample from an alleged ET >>spacecraft which I had analyzed. It was found to be a highly >>pure piece of silicon slag of terrestrial origin. I found an >>identical piece in a store which I bought for $1.00. Nothing >>exotic to this piece of metal. >>I also have a transcript of his college record. He flunked out >>of Upsala College. No M.D., No PhDs. >>In court documents, his wife sued him saying he had an emotional >>illness and mental disorder. She also alleged that he had >>required 'constant psychiatric treatment' and had been at one >>time hospitalized at the Carrier Clinic, a private mental >>institution located at Belle Mead, N.J. This was during the >>prime of his life in the early 60s when he was allegedly earning >>college degrees. Anyone can check these records. >>I talked with Michael several times over the phone and found him >>engaging on occasion. I talked with his brother once and it does >>seem they had a UFO sighting together during the teen years. >>Perhaps they inspired him to become a member of Alphacom team! >Bill, >I am sure that your investigation in the Michael Wolf matter was >most thorough. Along this line, I have some questions for you. >Why didn't you do the same "due dilligence" on Mel Noel and Dr >Dan Burisch? I have seen Mel Noel's military records and photos of when he was a jet pilot. I have known him for years and his story has been consistent over the years. I do not defend him because he says he is not interested in sharing this with researchers, especially Stanton. Fine, I am done with him. As for Dan Burisch, I collected docs galore, interviewed parents and friends who support his story 100%, and obtained 3 notorized statements and yet told Dan that I could never "prove" his story. Even though I have statements that he flew on the JANIS flights to Area 51, that does not prove he interacted with an alien. Thus the investigation was concluded as inconclusive and I stated that many times. I put more time into that case than many because of some strange occurences every time a meeting was arranged. I concluded it was either a highly orchestrated hoax involving multiple people or a covert project of some kind.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Alien Autopsy 'Control Panels' - Dickenson From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:55:36 +0100 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:38:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy 'Control Panels' - Dickenson >From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:03:14 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:26:27 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Alien Austopsy 'Control Panels' >>As I recall he didn't say they were "artificial", but rather >>constructed similar to insects - segmented? Exoskeleton? No >>elaboration on this comparison. >I was referring to his written notes to Wilbert Smith, where >he refers to the aliens as "instruments or people." >Instruments _or_ people? Well, which is it? >To me, this sounds like it could be a way of describing beings >with cybernetic aspects. Right, what're the probabilities? Given the size and time span of the universe, the law of large numbers says: 1) Any life we go to will be primitive 2) Any life that comes to us (and to the Solar System) will be advanced And the possibilities? Humans already have implanted prostheses and even some primitive processors, so what should we expect of advanced aliens? "Considering how far out, from our parochial organic history, any aliens that we find will be, leads inexorably to the conclusion that we will find them incomprehensible: not only as minds, but also as structures." And the _really_ advanced? "they ... will have left biology behind" (Quotes from "Evolving the Alien" by Profs Jack Cohen & Ian Stewart - UK 2002 ISBN 0-09-187927-2) So any travelers/explorers are almost certain to be cybernetic to some degree. Only question is - what would we recognize as cybernetic?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 28 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:32:35 -0600 Fwd Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:00:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Clark >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:45:25 +0100 >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >>>Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II Christopher, >3. Sarbacher, in his letter to Wm Steinman in Nov 1983, refers >at one point to the aliens he had heard about as "like insects". Not quite. Here's the full sentence, which gives another impression: "I got the impression [from conversations with those either working on the project or cognizant of their findings] these 'aliens' were constructed like certain insects we have observed on earth, wherein because of the low mass the inertial forces involved in operation of these instruments would be quite low." In other words, the entities weighed little, like insects. Beyond that, the meaning of his remarks is at best ambiguous, and your paraphrase is misleading - though I understand why, as we see next:. >Since in neither the Aztec nor the Roswell UFO crash were any >insects recovered it is clear Sarbacher was not talking about >either case. He was almost certainly recalling office >discussions of long ago about Gerald Heard's 1950 book entitled >"Is Another World Watching?", in which Heard postulated that the >UFO pilots were intelligent bees from Mars. This book was >published soon after Scully's. I doubt it. Heard's book was not published in the United States until April 1951. Before then, references to it in the American press and in official documents of the period are scant to nonexistent. (Keyhoe's first book and Scully's work, of course, attracted considerable attention.) The 1950 date you cite is for the British edition of the Heard opus. There is no reason to believe that Heard's eccentric theories (borrowed from astronomer Gerard P. Kuiper, who made a passing statement, probably a joke, in a Los Angeles newspaper) were known to Sarbacher. >4. Sarbacher told Steinman he had "no connection with any people >involved in the recovery [of crashed saucers]". Yet he told >Jerry Clark in 1985 that Bush & Von Neumann were involved and >that they told him about the recoveries. (FATE, March 1988). A >clear contradiction. Your quotes from that letter to Steinman are, shall we say, selective. In Sarbacher's next paragraph, he states, "John von Neumann was definitely involved. Dr. Vannevar Bush was definitely involved...." A quote citation so egregiously misleading can have been done only with reckless carelessness or with deliberate intent. Take your pick. Beyond that, please reread what Sarbacher actually said. He says quite clearly that he had no relationship with the personnel "involved in the recovery" of the discs - in other words, the guys who picked up the pieces. He says that he knew about the incidents because he knew and worked with the scientists who were given the problem to deal with. There is no contradiction, except in your own wishful thinking. >5. Smith told a researcher in 1959 that official contact with >aliens had been established This comes out of Smith's belief in the Straith letter, which many American ufologists suspected, even then, was the creation of Gray Barker and Jim Moseley, but which was widely accepted as authentic in saucerian circles. It is no secret that Smith believed George Adamski's claims and that he defended the Straith letter. It also has nothing to do with the issue at hand - unless you can establish a connection, which you haven't and which I doubt you can do. >Anyone writing such twaddle hardly deserves that the allegations >made in his supposedly top secret paper on geomagnetics should >be taken seriously. One could question other writings of Smith >for the same reason. This is nothing but another kind of twaddle: ad-hominem twaddle. As is well known, as he made no secret, Smith was sympathetic to contactees and took their messages literally. I think he was wrong to do so, and so do you, but so what? People, including scientists and engineers, have all sorts of private mystical and religious beliefs which do not affect their ordinary functioning. Apparently your point, based on nothing except antipathy to Smith and to contactees generally and a desire to discredit Sarbacher through the back door, is this: Smith was crazy and probably dishonest because he felt this way. That's not an argument, just a lazy way of dismissing something you don't want to believe or even think about very deeply. Smith's employers may or may have not thought well of his UFO- related activities. You're more likely to accept at face value bureaucrats' for-public-consumption statements in these matters than I, who am rather more cynical, would. On the other hand, I suppose it is possible that UK bureaucrats are uniquely honest and open. But even if his Canadian government superiors thought he was mistaken, there is no reason to believe - you certainly haven't demonstrated one - that they thought he was nutty or crooked. >6. Smith was a contactee himself, in the 1950s, and stated this >quite openly. His method of communicating with aliens is not >given, but presumably involved telepathy. I did a fair amount of research on Smith for the entry on him in The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 851-54. I encourage interested persons to read it if they're interested in a more fair-minded, nuanced analysis of a complex man than the cartoon figure that Christopher draws as he seeks to discredit Sarbacher. In my judgment, as one of the few who actually spoke with Sarbacher, I fail to see why a rush to judgment is necessary here. While curious, Sarbacher's remarks - in 1950 and again in the early 1980s - don't prove anything in the absence of compelling other evidence which may or may not come to light one day. Debunking efforts as wanting as yours are unwarranted, to say the least, and their failings have the unintended effect of making the case for Sarbacher more robust than it is in fact. Count that as reason #385 I am not a debunker: the stance, which requires a defense of rigid orthodoxy at the faintest hint of a threat to it, ends up undermining its own credibility. A rational skeptical response would be this, I should think. Actually, this happens to be close to my conclusion as well: The Sarbacher affair is curious, and one can't explain why he made these allegations, but in the absence of much better evidence I will continue to doubt the existence of spacecraft wreckage and secret projects. But I suppose that since such a position leaves open a crack, however small, for potential debunker-unfriendly revelations in
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:47:51 -0400 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:09:56 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:56:36 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:07:55 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:12:05 EST >>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:33:59 EST >>>>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>><snip> >>>Yes, I've got some news about the film and what exactly happened. >>>I've achieved this remarkable feat by doing something simple >>>most investigators overlook: >>>I asked the people who were _there_. >>>Wasn't difficult to find them either. They have these things called phone numbers and email addresses and websites and calendars of events where they make appearances. >>>So I says to myself, "I wonder what screen legend Ms. Maureen >>>O'Hara and Western hero Harry Carey Jr. have to say?", since >>>both of them were actually _in_ the film and Ms. O'Hara _in_ the >>>scene in question. >>>Mr. Carey has yet to respond - probably too busy signing >>>autographs but Ms. O'Hara's fan club and webmasters did. >>I thought Harry Carey was deceased. What makes you think either he or O'hara would knoew anymore about caused the glitch than we do? >Thinking ain't investigating. As for people on the scene knowing more than you do you sound like those Air Force investigators into the Roswell Incident that published those government books back in the 90's. Investigate everything but forget to ask the people at the scene. >>>So far one of the film's experts states that yes, most >>>principle shots were done at Moab, Utah but several scenes >>>including the scene in question: >>>Were shot on soundsages! >>What's your point. That's what everyone has been saying. >No it's not what everyone has been saying. If that was what >everyone has been saying there wouldn't be a need for multiple >posts of different opinion. If you read the posts properly you would see that most think the dialogue scene was shot on a sound stage. It's the origin of the background that was being questioned. I think it was B-roll, a static shot, shot by a second unit of the actual vista in Moab, Utah with a flowing river in the back ground. Dave Rudiak says there is a river flowing in background. This footage was then projected on a back screen while Wayne and O,Hara acted on a sound stage in the foreground. Others think the backdrop was painted or again a rear screen projection but with a slide instead of film rolling. Neither of those fit the flowing river scenario. >>>The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >>>Arc light being moved and adjusted. >>You're kidding right? They were moving an arc light while >>there was a scene being shot? >No, if I were kidding I would have inserted an 'I Am Kidding' >notice at the top of my post. In case you haven't been up on >current events, one of the top visited websites on movies are >the blooper sites. There are all sorts of errors from Star Wars >- stormtroopers bumping their heads to guys wearing Timex >watches during The Ten Commandments starring Charlton Heston. >Here on Earth people make mistakes. That's a bit of a simplistic explanation. Of course there are glitches. The lighting would have been set before the scene was shot then everyone would shut up and the actors would take over. Changing the lighting while the scene was being shot would have not only angered the director but the camera director as well. You don't change lighting on the fly. Timex watches inadvertently left on [doubt Timex in the early 50s] or an extra wearing glasses is the kind of mistake which is an oversight, not an overt act during the "action sequence. >>>Did your expert mention whether the lighting grip was fired? >No, probably because no one cares except you. >>>Fits the pattern considering the top special effects talent >>>they had on the film. >>What does? >If I have to explain it, it's worthless time spent. Yeah you wouldn't want to have to explain something. The problem is you are asking the wrong people. Instead of patting yourself on the back for making a few phone calls, find some of the technical crew, the assistant cameraman or the cameraman if he's still alive, or the focus puller or some of the lighting crew or someone who was in on the editing process and ask them about how the scene was shot. The heck with the actors. Some of them might know about the process or what happened [John Wayne actually did some directing] but as for the final product most would have been out of the loop. Anyway, many of us have off-the-wall phone bills from investigating UFOs, and I find it a bit insulting that a Johnny come lately has the sand to berate the rest of us for not making phone calls on a 3rd rate case like this. If you live there then you do the legwork. Find some of the tech crew and the B-roll.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:09:07 -0800 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:12:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research <snip> >Despite the different methodologies and premises of exopolitical >research and UFO research, I think there are important ways in >which they overlap. One is the analysis of the credibility of a >whistleblower/witness, the coherence of their testimony, the >credentials of the whistleblower, etc., and how discussion of >these can continue simultaneously with exopolitical analysis of >their testimony. So let me illustrate this overlap by examining >the case of Charles Hall. >Hall claims to have served at Nellis Airforce Base as a weather >observer from 1965 to 1967. During his service he claims to have >run into a group of extraterrestrials he described as the `tall >whites'. Hi Michael, I think Hall's a BS artist. Not only has he met "Tall Whites" but also, much earlier in his life, he just happened to run into other alien beings. This is funny stuff. How do you expect anyone to consider this joker to be a serious whistleblower? "Yes. In the third book entitled "Millennial Hospitality III, The Road Home" I describe the second race of aliens that I have personally met that are here on earth. In my book I refer to them as The Norwegians. I believe that they are coming here from one of the nearby stars such as, perhaps, Bernard's star, which is approximately 5.5 light years away. They might also be coming from the next star past Barnard's star, which is approximately 6 light years away and located in the same general direction. I encountered them in Cambridge Wisconsin in 1961, and again in Madison Wisconsin in the fall of 1962 and in the very early spring of 1963. They look exactly like people from southern Norway, except that they have only 24 teeth and slightly webbed toes. Humans, of course have 32 teeth. The teeth on these aliens have much shorter roots than human teeth, and they can replace any tooth that they may accidentally lose. This means that they are not limited to only two sets of teeth the way humans are. I would think that there would exist some dentists, both in Madison, Wisconsin, and in northern Europe in other University communities in the colder portions of the world that could verify their existence..."
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:59:29 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:18:27 -0500 Subject: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" Source: UFO-Disclosure - Disclosure Of The Truth About UFOs http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UFO-Disclosure/message/4459 Peter Jennings Defrauding: Inside The Abc News UFO Documentary Hoax [Or Pot Calls Kettle Black --ebk] By Steven M. Greer MD Director, The Disclosure Project March 2005 Note: Permission is hereby granted to post and distribute widely, so long as this article appears in its entirety or is excerpted accurately. Of course, the title of the show was 'Peter Jennings Reporting...' [see http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Primetime/] - if only that were so. This is the story of how, once again, the corrupt Big Media has defrauded the American people, from one who had a front row seat to the spectacle. In the summer of 2004, as founder and director of The Disclosure Project (www.DisclosureProject.org) I was approached by Jennings Productions producer Jordan Kronick. He explained how ABC News was going to make history by doing a serious expose of the UFO matter - for the first time on network news. Initially skeptical - we have seen and heard this song and dance before I agreed to meet with Kronick at our offices in Washington DC. Over the course of several hours, we discussed the subject and how The Disclosure Project had identified several hundred top secret military and government witnesses to UFO events and projects. Kronick expressed great interest and repeatedly stated that this is exactly what Jennings, chief producer Mark Obenhaus and he were looking for. I offered to provide, pro bono, ALL Disclosure Project digital videotape interviews and full access to ALL Disclosure Project witnesses willing to cooperate with ABC News - including those witnesses not yet taped by us. The reader at this point needs to know that these are not fuzzy, blacked-out deep throats anonymously telling stories of the night. These are hundreds of military, government and corporate insiders who have been identified by us over the past 14 years. They range from Generals, to Astronauts, to senior FAA officials who were privy to events, projects and cover-ups involving UFOs. Additionally, we have thousands of pages of uncontested official government smoking gun documents and physical evidence, photos, videos, landing trace events and other unambiguous proof. The ABC News production team claimed to want exactly this type of evidence and especially the high-level government and military insider whistle-blowers who could credibly blow the lid off of decades of secrecy. As a two-hour news special, ABC claimed that they could, at long last, give the subject the focus and rigor needed to achieve this objective. But as discussions continued, it became more and more clear that Obenhaus and Jennings really wanted to do a human interest story including anecdotal civilian witnesses, man-in-the-street interviews and the general silly season and carnival atmosphere surrounding most things ufological. We agreed to cooperate with the filming of a CSETI (Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence) research expedition to Mt. Shasta in August of 2004, at which time we were able to have discussions with Obenhaus, the senior producer in charge of the project. We were incredulous as Obenhaus revealed to us that he was sure the matter was not really being kept secret but had just 'fallen through the cracks' due to lack of follow through, laziness and so forth on the part of the government! It was clear he had not studied the data or evidence given to him, and had his mind made up to do a 'light', human interest piece and not a real expose or research project. This was later confirmed when, as summer turned to fall, the long promised serious research and interviews they claimed they wanted to do with these top-secret government witnesses were never followed up. I spoke a few more times to Kronick, who promised a sit down interview and follow-up with these high- ranking and conclusive witnesses. They never did. Instead, the final ABC News show was weaker in evidence than most tabloid cable channel pieces on the UFO subject - with the bulk of the 'documentary' being interviews with UFO personalities, debunkers and the carnival atmosphere of UFO hotspots like Roswell. They fraudulently appeared to be ' balanced' by having both skeptics and 'believers' - with the clear implication that the skeptics were 'real scientists' and the 'believers' were misguided flakes. Using the ruse of media 'objectivity', ABC News would asymmetrically show, say, a Harvard scientist skeptic juxtaposed against a civilian who thought he had been sexually assaulted by aliens! The few, very brief interviews with pilots and military people were overwhelmed by the spurious, carnival-like pseudo- ethnography of the UFO subculture mixed in with long segments of scientists pooh-poohing the entire matter. While appearing objective and 'balanced' to the general viewer, the project was, rather, a disinformation piece, carefully crafted to give the mere appearance of objectivity. Otherwise, why spend so much air time interviewing UFO personalities, media figures and the like - while completely leaving out ALL high-ranking military, government and scientific witnesses and evidence given directly by us to them? In light of the range and scope of material that we personally gave them, it is incomprehensible why ALL of it would be omitted unless it was their intent from the beginning to do a disinformation and cover-up piece. Why else would Peter Jennings state that the US Government has been out of the UFO matter since 1969, when Project Blue Book was closed, even though he and his team were directly given by us official US government documents, senior government whistle- blower testimony and physical evidence including radar tapes to the contrary? Why would Jennings feature uninformed scientists rhetorically asking 'where's the physical evidence' when abundant physical evidence is available and was offered to him? Why indeed. We have received a CIA document from 1991 that clearly states that the CIA has contacts in the Big Media to chan ge, kill or spin stories. From this document, dated 20 December 1991, and released 1 April 1992, to the Director of Central Intelligence from the Task Force on Greater CIA Openness, on page 6: "PAO [the Public Affairs Office] now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation. This has helped us turn some intelligence failure stories into intelligence success stories...In many instances, we have persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold or even scrap stories..." And from a CIA document regarding the psychological warfare implications of UFOs, we find a reference to Disney Studios, now the parent company of ABC, being used as a source for doing cartoon-like portrayals of the subject for psychological warfare purposes. Can we be surprised ABC News has, again, defrauded the American people - only pretending to do news and real investigative reporting when in reality they are purveying disinformation to an accepting public? Obenhaus, without any research or foundation in fact, went so far as to personally assert to me that the hybrid government - corporate complex is not keeping new energy, propulsion and related technologies hidden from the public! His prejudice on the matter was profound and unwavering: forget the facts, my mind is made up. It is hard to reconcile ABC News' claims to doing a serious expose and investigative report when the senior producer of the project, without any investigation or research, espouses such closed-minded conclusions at the outset. Those who know me know that I like to stay positive, present the affirmative facts and present the promise of an advanced, sustainable civilization on Earth benefiting from the knowledge of these new technologies. But it is time for the American people to wake up to the fact that the Big Media and their corporate masters are the central problem blocking the truth from coming out. As a former board member of Time Warner told me, the Big Media has become scribes taking dictation from the right hand of the king - and the fourth estate is essentially dead. A CALL TO ACTION The American people must demand that ABC News correct its fraudulent assertions - and do a real investigative report on the serious evidence, government documents and courageous military whistle-blower testimony that The Disclosure Project and others have identified. The reader may obtain much of this evidence from www.DisclosureProject.org . Write Peter Jennings and ABC News at: PeterJennings.nul or abc.news.magazines.nul or support.nul and demand an honest investigative report. Additionally, please contact the FCC and register your complaint regarding the transparent fraud perpetrated by ABC News on the American public. Remember: ABC News, as a broadcast network, is given by the FCC access to the public airwaves. In exchange, we have the right to hold ABC News, as well as the other networks, to fairness, accuracy and honesty - and certainly to avoid blatant fraud and corruption. This was not the ABC entertainment division that perpetrated this fraudulent report on the American people, but its news division. That they would sanitize such an important two hour report of nearly all credible evidence and government insider witnesses requires that we demand a hearing on the matter by the FCC immediately. Who induced Obenhaus and Peter Jennings to cover up this important evidence? Why? ABC News cannot claim ignorance on the matter as they were directly given extensive testimony and evidence, none of which appeared in the program. Contact the FCC at www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaints.html and demand an immediate investigation into this matter and demand that the FCC require ABC to retract its false statements and present the evidence which they possess but are hiding from the American public. And lastly, support Disclosure in any way you can. Help us get the truth out. Tell people about www.DisclosureProject.org where they can find the truth about this important matter. And help us identify backers who will help us start a new - and honest - news outlet that will truthfully report on these and related projects that are illegally kept secret from the public. Is it not time for us to form a news network - The Disclosure Network -that will produce and air real investigative reports on a wide range of government and corporate corruption? Matters now left completely hidden by the complicity of Big Media need to be known by the people if we are to renew and protect democracy and disclose the technologies now hidden and suppressed that could replace oil and nuclear power and give us a sustainable, peaceful world. We can no longer trust ABC news or the rest of the Big Media to do this. We, the people, must take on the task of getting the truth out and salvaging what is left of our democracy and planet. Big Media, who have become shills for their corporate masters, are incapable or unwilling to tell the truth. It is time we did it for them. Steven M. Greer MD Director and Founder The Disclosure Project
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Alien Autopsy 'Control Panels' - Tonnies From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:08:02 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:21:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy 'Control Panels' - Tonnies >From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:55:36 +0100 >Subject: Re: Alien Autopsy 'Control Panels' <snip> >Given the size and time span of the universe, the law of large >numbers says: >1) Any life we go to will be primitive >2) Any life that comes to us (and to the Solar System) will be >advanced >And the possibilities? >Humans already have implanted prostheses and even some primitive >processors, so what should we expect of advanced aliens? >"Considering how far out, from our parochial organic history, >any aliens that we find will be, leads inexorably to the >conclusion that we will find them incomprehensible: not only as >minds, but also as structures." >And the _really_ advanced? >"they ... will have left biology behind" >(Quotes from "Evolving the Alien" by Profs Jack Cohen & Ian >So any travelers/explorers are almost certain to be cybernetic >to some degree. Only question is - what would we recognize as >cybernetic? I think the close encounter experience can be best understood as the work of an incredibly advanced artificial intelligence, rather than the comings and goings of mere alien anthropologists. Not having an ET body to examine, I don't know how much of alien anatomy is biological and how much is artificial. Then again, there may be no apparent difference given sufficient technology. As you note, we've only begun to explore mind-machine interfaces. Extrapolate what's on our own drawing board by a million years and the result is truly mind-boggling. Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:16:06 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:24:42 -0500 Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith - Kimball >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:55:57 -0600 >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith Jerry: You raise, as always, some interesting points: <snip> >If Sarbacher was lying to me, he was certainly an odd liar. He >must have answered a good half of my questions with "I don't >know." My experience with liars has told me that they always >know _everything_. Sarbacher's account was based on hearsay: on >stories he'd heard in the office, on an invitation to attend a >presentation at Wright-Patterson (as I recall), which he did not >make, on (as he remembered) problems and discoveries associated >with research on the recovered materials. >Our interview was a pleasant one but frustrating. He continually >apologized for not knowing or recalling more. His tone was that >of someone who is remembering, and not well, an interesting >moment, among competing others, from his long-ago government >service. My experience with liars is different. Both in court (yes, before my "ex-lawyer" status I did conduct some trials), and when I worked briefly with the RCMP as a special constable (and in discussions with a number of RCMP officers I worked with), liars were generally evasive, and often claimed to "forget" or "not remember" things that they should have. You'll note that Solandt, who was roughly the same age as Sarbacher, offered much less evasive answers in his responses to Allan and Steinman. Further, when Sarbacher provided Steinman with a _written_ response, which he presumably took some time to craft, he still claimed to not remember things, and even got, in writing, the details of things he did claim to remember wrong. Of course, you could chalk this all up to his advanced years, but then one can't have it both ways. One can't take the things he said that one likes or agrees with and accept them, and then ignore the fact that he made mistakes. Nowhere is this convenient 'failure of memory' more evident, perhaps, than in a careful review of the Nuremberg Trial records and transcripts, which I have studied extensively, both while a history major and while at law school, where it was the subject of my major paper in legal history. There, the Nazi war criminals routinely mixed outright lies with claims of "not remembering" or "forgetting" particular incidents which they should clearly have remembered. Albert Speer was an expert at this kind of "selective" memory. In fact, Speer is an interesting comparison to Sarbacher, in that the judges were more inclined to believe Speer's sincerity and account, largely because he was educated and came from their own social class, as opposed to someone like Fritz Sauckel, who technically worked under Speer, rounding up the slave labour that Speer used to keep the Nazi war machine running. Sauckel hanged; Speer got twenty years, and lived after to write a number of best-selling books about his career. This, despite the fact that, on the evidence alone, Speer's culpability was at least equal to Sauckel's, and probably greater. >As it is, it's just a question mark in my head, one of those >things that presumably will be cleared up on that day the U.S. >government does a thorough housecleaning of its UFO-related >documents and we can start to sort the reality from the >official fibs and obfuscations. Yep, until that day comes we'll never know for sure. All we can
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:29:56 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:27:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sandow >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:35:58 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >For documentation ands case studies that clarify how "sleep >disorders' and other psychological manifestations work, and >how they replicate UFO abduction scenarios, go to The >National Library of Medicine and ferret out the extensive >literature. >I'll give you my accout name and password if you like so you >don't have to sign up but can still read the literature for >yourself instead of taking my word (or Peter's) for anything. Rich, You've already said that the Old Hag cases and abduction narratives are exactly the same. That's complete, utter nonsense. I've read David Hufford's classic book on the Old Hag phenomenon. And, needless to say (for most people here who know me), countless abduction books, with conversations with abductees added to that. There are superficial similarities between the two things, but that's all. The Old Hag, for instance, doesn't lead to the detailed narratives that abduction cases have. And abduction cases don't have (except maybe in rare cases) a sensation of someone pressing on one's chest, as the Old Hag cases do. You might want to read the proceedings of the abduction conference at MIT, which David Hufford took part in. He was very critical of abduction research (or at least of the conclusions that abduction researchers come to). But he never said that the Old Hag - on which he's the reigning authority - was the same thing. In fact, in his Old Hag book he warns very sternly against this kind of reductive thinking. Hufford wants researchers to take the narratives at face value, for the sake of study and clarification. Not necessarily that, literally, there are Old Hag entitites, but that initially all we know of the phenomenon is that people report that these entities are there. If I understand him correctly, he'd have us start with the simple facts of what abductees and Old Hag experiencers report, and assume that these are different phenomena, because the surface facts are different. So anyway, Rich - since you're so wildly off base on what you said about the Old Hag, why should I assume you've understood
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' [was: Wilbert From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:11:10 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:35:12 -0500 Subject: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' [was: Wilbert >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:32:35 -0600 >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:45:25 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:21:59 -0800 >>>>Subject: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith [was: The UFO Evidence Volume II] >>>>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>>Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:33:48 EST >>>>>Subject: Re: The UFO Evidence Volume II >Christopher, >>3. Sarbacher, in his letter to Wm Steinman in Nov 1983, refers >>at one point to the aliens he had heard about as "like insects". >Not quite. Here's the full sentence, which gives another >impression: >"I got the impression [from conversations with those either >working on the project or cognizant of their findings] these >'aliens' were constructed like certain insects we have observed >on earth, wherein because of the low mass the inertial forces >involved in operation of these instruments would be quite low." >In other words, the entities weighed little, like insects. >Beyond that, the meaning of his remarks is at best ambiguous, >and your paraphrase is misleading - though I understand why, as >we see next: >>Since in neither the Aztec nor the Roswell UFO crash were any >>insects recovered it is clear Sarbacher was not talking about >>either case. He was almost certainly recalling office >>discussions of long ago about Gerald Heard's 1950 book entitled >>"Is Another World Watching?", in which Heard postulated that the >>UFO pilots were intelligent bees from Mars. This book was >>published soon after Scully's. >I doubt it. Heard's book was not published in the United States >until April 1951. Before then, references to it in the American >press and in official documents of the period are scant to >nonexistent. (Keyhoe's first book and Scully's work, of course, >attracted considerable attention.) The 1950 date you cite is for >the British edition of the Heard opus. There is no reason to >believe that Heard's eccentric theories (borrowed from >astronomer Gerard P. Kuiper, who made a passing statement, >probably a joke, in a Los Angeles newspaper) were known to >Sarbacher. <snip> Since Sarbacher was remembering this from a distance of 30+ years in the early 80's I do not see why he has to have the exact memory of a discussion with colleagues about alien "insect" like structures in 1950 rather than say 1951. Be that as it may, the fact is that the McLaughlin TRUE magazine article in March 1950 already has the "insect" speculation as a way to defeat the destructive effects of high accelerations and
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Yturria From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:17 +0000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:39:48 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Yturria From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> To: <ufoupdates.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:20:54 -0300 Subject: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >In a recent presentation at the 14th International UFO >Congress and Film Festival, Laughlin, March 6-12, Jaime Maussan >showedsome amazing footage of fleets of UFOs composed of dozens >andeven hundreds of them. Thew footage was shot by regular >citizens in several parts of Mexico in the last 6 months or so >and sent to him, as he has a nation-wide weekly TV program. >The most amazing one was shot on February 27, about a month >ago, in Mexico City neighbouring location, by Arturo Robles >Gil. It shows some 200 spheres in movement in the sky, after >some time completely still. >Other footage was also amazing, as they show fleets in >formation and with the spheres changing position, at high >speed, between clouds. This material could hardly be faked. >I wonder how many of you have info about it and what do you >think? Dear Ademar, As you know Mexico is the world's most important country in UFO flotilla sightings and the evidences documented on video that we have been gathering since 1992 are simply overwhelming. No other country has been so fortunated like Mexico to have been witnessed such extraordinary, enigmatic and yet unexplained phenomena in our skies and I must say that these kind of massive sightnings have increased in recent months. The most important and trascendental is certainly the March 5, 2004 UFO flotilla encountered by the Mexican Air Force Merlin C26A crew over the Campeche aerial space, a dramatic incident that surprised the international media and the world. A revealling graphic document released by the Mexican Department of Defense itself in an unprecedent historic meassure in favour of Ufology. And you Ademar as a dear friend of the Mexican ufo research, received the scoop for Brazil and conducted a wonderful coverage of the case through your UFO magazine and collague researchers. We both were aware of the deep impact of the story among the people in our countries, a case that trascended frontiers and was published in almost every language in many countries and released by news services and tv networks all over the world. Despite the usless efforts of an extremely reduced number of skeptics who as you know tried unsuccessfully to disqualify, the Mexican Air Force UFO encounter has been undoubtely the top 2004 UFO story. Of course the rest of the Mexican UFO flotilla sightings are important as well and some of them are indeed spectacular, for example the one from Mr. Arturo Robles Gil that you know, taped in October 27, 2004 in Mexico city, a huge formation that looks indeed kind of organic entity, strange and intriguing. I have analyzed this footage and found that the formation resembles a DNA configuration, coincidence or perhaps a sign ? This sighting remains unexplained. You must agree with me that perhaps one of the most impressive is the UFO flotilla taped in Guadalajara, Jalisco by Mr. Miguel Avila and Mr. Miguel Dominguez on July 10, 2004. More than 100 objects in the sky at broad daylight in perfect formations performing synchronized movements. All this is the actual level of sightings that we are experiencing in Mexico and the Mexican people is more aware than ever of this reality. The interest on the phenomena is certainly legitimate even for the military. For us there is no doubt anymore that these objects are real and they're here. We are increasing our efforts in our study to learn more about these presences among us. You have been witnessed yourself the recent UFO events in Mexico
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 The 1967 Ririe Encounters: Beer Cars & Aliens From: Terry W. Colvin <fortean1.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:18:10 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:08:50 -0500 Subject: The 1967 Ririe Encounters: Beer Cars & Aliens [This story originally appeared in slightly different form as part of a longer article by T. Peter Park, Reading The Strangeness: Second-Order Anomalies - The Anomalist, No. 8, Spring 2000] The Ririe Encounters: Beer, Cars, And 'Aliens' Do UFOs and "aliens" sometimes play games to challenge, mock, or deconstruct our prejudices about "reliable" and "unreliable," "sane" and "crazy," "sober" and "impaired" witnesses? A series of roadside UFO alien encounters by slightly beered-up drivers unknown to each other one November night in 1967 near a small Idaho town seems to suggest just this. The 1967 Idaho encounters also suggest that the UFOs or aliens have the ability to "zero in" selectively on certain kinds of witnesses, e.g., drivers who have had a bit to drink. Guy Tossie and Willie Begay were two young Navaho natives, both 23, who worked as farmhands near the little town of Ririe in southeastern Idaho, near Idaho Falls and Pocatello. They were driving south from town on Highway 26 just outside Ririe on the night of November 2, 1967. Begay and Tossie had been drinking beer before starting home from Ririe, but insisted they were not drunk. Their claim was confirmed by their friends and by police. Around 9:30 p.m., when they were a quarter of a mile south of Ririe, they saw a sudden blinding flash of light in front of their car. A moment later, a disc-shaped, domed UFO 5 to 8 feet in diameter appeared, flashing green and orange lights around the rim, bathing the area in a brilliant green light. In the object's transparent dome, they saw two small humanoids. Their 1956 white Buick sedan, driven by Begay, stopped without Begay applying the brakes, and the UFO hovered about 5 feet above the road just ahead of them. The dome opened and one humanoid emerged, floating to the ground. It was 3 or 3 1/2 feet tall, wearing some sort of back-pack. Its face was rough and deeply scarred, with two small, round eyes, a straight, slit-like mouth, no visible nose, and large ears standing high on the hairless head. The creature appeared green - perhaps because the green and orange light from the UFO made everything look green, as Begay and Tossie themselves suggested, though later newspaper accounts quoted them as having seen "little green men." If they really were green in color, they would have been among the relatively few real-life "little green men" actually encountered by CE-3 witnesses outside jokes and cartoons. Approaching the car, the humanoid opened the driver's-side door and slid behind the wheel. The two terrified natives slid over to the right. The car was either driven by the alien or towed by the UFO out into a nearby grain stubble field, stopping about 75 feet from the highway, the UFO keeping a fixed position a few feet in front of it. When the car stopped, Tossie, sitting next to the door, opened it and leapt out, running for the nearby farmhouse of Willard Hammon, a quarter of a mile away. He later reported being followed by a bright light, perhaps carried by the second humanoid. In the car, Begay cowered in the front seat in terror as the first humanoid "jabbered" incomprehensibly, making high, rapid sounds, "like a woman or a bird." Begay later made a warbling sound to show investigators what the creature sounded like. The second entity, seemingly giving up on chasing Tossie, returned to the car. The two humanoids re-entered the UFO, which rose in a zig-zag path, beaming a yellow light from the bottom that played like a flame but did not exactly look like a flame. Meanwhile, at Hammon's farmhouse, the startled farmer scarcely understood Tossie. Hammon later said he met "an incoherent indian" when he opened the door at Tossie's frantic pounding. He smelled beer but as Tossie did not seem obviously acting drunk, let him in. Tossie told Hammon that "a light drove their car off the road, and his friend was dead." After calming Tossie down, Hammon and his teen-age son Bob accompanied him back to the field, where they found the car. Begay was sitting speechless with terror, with closed eyes. The car's engine was running and its lights were still on - the car had been in the field for about 15 minutes. Hammon listened to their story and then followed the frightened farmhands home in his own car. He then drove back to Ririe, stopping in the local bar and grill to see if the bartender knew anything about what had been going on. As Hammon had coffee in the Ririe bar and talked, the local constable and Bonneville County deputy sheriff stopped in for a sandwich, and Hammon told them the story. Tossie and Begay then came by, asking for beer to settle their nerves. They rushed over to the constable and deputy sheriff, voluntarily telling them about a "flying saucer" that "forced them off the road". The Idaho State Police were called, and Corporal Tom Harper arrived at the scene 1 to 1 1/2 hours after the UFO encounter. Harper smelled that the natives had been drinking beer (they had some while waiting), but emphasized that they were not drunk. The "strangest part of the story", he told reporters, was that Begay and Tossie were, "sober". Harper checked the car for dents, burns, and radiation, but found no scratches, burns, or radiation above normal background level. Several local farmers reported that their cattle had panicked and stampeded during the evening for unknown reasons. About two hours after the natives' sighting, Mrs. Elaine Quinn, leaving her Snake River Valley home six miles east of Ririe to fetch medicine for a sick child, saw a rotating, zig-zagging light about two miles away. The late C. Reed Ricks of Idaho Falls investigated the report for NICAP, the now-defunct National Investigations Committee for Aerial Phenomena in Washington, D.C. Ricks conducted two 2-hour interviews with Tossie and Begay, 24 hours and again 8 days after the encounter, and was convinced of their sincerity. Corporal Harper told Ricks that though Begay and Tossie had had some beer before starting for home, they definitely were not drunk. Ricks himself, noting that Tossie and Begay had voluntarily told their story to the constable and deputy sheriff, remarked that "normally, natives who have been drinking do not seek out police to tell a wild story to." He found them "simple honest men and incapable of a perfectly executed hoax." Ricks also was impressed by local residents reporting "numerous experiences that night with wildly frightened or abnormally behaving animals." During his investigation, Ricks heard of a local man claiming a similar encounter with a UFO and two small humanoids on that same night. Ricks tracked him down and confirmed his report. The witness was adamant about not revealing his name, and was reluctant to discuss the details of his encounter, fearing ridicule. This third witness was driving his pick-up truck around 11:30 that night on State Highway #48 from Ririe to Rigby (10 miles West of Ririe) when a small UFO came down in front of his truck and stopped it. A small humanoid got out of the UFO and tried to enter his truck, tapping on the windows and windshield. The terrified witness thought he was losing his mind, but shook the alien and UFO off (or they left), and drove rapidly home. He lay awoke all that night, brooding over the terrifying incident and about the state of his own sanity. At work the next morning, before he had learned of the natives' encounter, he confided in a friend, who reassured him of his sanity. A few hours later, a local radio station mentioned the Tossie-Begay encounter and his co-workers began discussing it. According to his friend, the witness "turned white as a sheet," and talked no more about his encounter. Interviewing the third witness, Ricks learned that coincidentally he, too, had been drinking before his UFO encounter. His wife had just divorced him, and on November 2 he was still emotionally distraught. He rarely drank, but had a few beers by himself in Ririe that evening. It is not clear if he had been in the same bar as Begay and Tossie, but in any case he did not know them. He was reluctant to tell Ricks what he had experienced because "when you are drunk, you sometimes see things." However, the witness's friends and co-workers told Ricks they considered him a honest, reliable person, and Ricks himself found him intelligent, cultivated, and well-read. The witness was a semi-skilled worker, but an avid reader and a lover of classical music. He moved out of Ririe shortly after the encounter. It is not known if he left Ririe to leave behind the area of an unfortunate marriage and divorce, to distance himself from the scene of a frighteningly bizarre alien encounter, or to seek better economic opportunities. His name and identity were apparently never revealed. The fact that the witnesses in both "little men" encounters had been drinking might lead many people to dismiss both stories as alcoholic fantasies. Some members of NICAP's Occupant Panel, who studied the Ririe encounters, however, did not believe so. Psychiatrist Allen S. Mariner found it a "most convincing case." Dr. Mariner cited the witnesses' "very strong emotional reaction," their "consistency under cross-examination," and the "report of frightened animals in the area." That they "may have had a beer or two" did not "impress" Dr. Mariner, as their panic reaction was "not at all typical of reactions to alcohol." Also, "for two men to react with panic and to agree about the cause of their fright if the cause is not something real would be virtually unheard-of." Dr. Mariner added that alcoholic intake "per se does not produce hallucinations." Alcoholics do have hallucinations in delirium tremens ("D.T.'s"), a "gross and obvious psychotic condition," but "the 'pink elephants' of the average social drinker are an old wives' tale." The "man who 'has a bit too much' on his way home from work or at a cocktail party does _ not_ experience hallucinations - not even of flying saucers."Thus, the "almost inevitable question 'Has he been drinking?'" was "less relevant than it might seem." Alcohol "does, of course, dim one's faculties" and "make one a less reliable observer of things in general." but it "simply does not produce the sort of phenomena with which we are dealing." A psychologist on the NICAP panel also found the case "most credible," citing the witnesses' extreme terror, their willingness to talk to the police, and their later avoidance of publicity." NICAP astronomer Walter N. Webb called the report "convincing," despite the "comic-book nature" of some "aspects". Dr. Webb was impressed by "the credibility of the two native witnesses attested to by everyone who had anything to do with the case," by "two possible supporting sightings including another similar contact claim," and by "numerous examples of frightened animals in the vicinity the same night". Dr. Norman S. Wolf, a NICAP radiation biologist, also found the case, "a very convincing report, especially with the indirect confirmation of another contact made that same night." The Ririe story is intriguing because of the curious coincidence of three witnesses (one quite independent of the other two) who on the same night near the same town had UFOs stop their cars on the highway, and an alien enter or try to enter their cars, after they had had a few drinks earlier that evening! Were the aliens trying to send us a 'message' about our habit of associating 'seeing things' with drunkenness? Were they also teasing or rebuking us for our ethnic stereotypes about natives and 'firewater'? The most interesting question is, how did the aliens know which cars and motorists to select and stop? SOURCES USED: Major Donald E. Keyhoe and Gordon I.R. Lore, editors, _ Strange Effects from UFOs: A NICAP Special Report_ (Washington, DC: NICAP, 1969), pp. 23-27; Patrick Huyghe, _Field Guide to Extraterrestrials _ (New York: Avon Books, 1996), p. 36; Materials received September 30, 1998 by T. Peter Park from CUFOS, the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, Chicago): Report of C. R. [Reed] Ricks, Idaho Falls, Idaho, November 13, 1967, to NICAP. Washington, D.C. (4-page report mainly dealing with the Tossie-Begay encounter but briefly alluding also to the possible third witness); "Our Girl Friday' [Marie Anderson], "Believe It or Not...," _The Shelley Pioneer_, Thursday, December 7, 1967 (long newspaper article from a local Idaho paper extensively quoting and citing C. Reed Ricks); Letter of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:44:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:13:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >exopolitical >analysis precedes dispute this lack of hard evidence since >the premises and methodologies of exopolitical research is >based on recognizing how distorting factors imposed by >government agencies negate making hard evidence a necessary >threshold criterion for whistleblower admissibility. Despite >my having repeatedly referred to these distorting factors in >the data collection process, I've noticed that no researcher >on UFO UpDates has tried to seriously discuss the extent and >parameters of the distorting factors when it comes to hard >evidence and whistleblower credibility. It seems that veteran >UFO researchers operate under the illusion of transparency in >the investigatory process and find it difficult to admit >anything to the contrary. So, Michael, do you think you're saying anything new here? Do you think nobody has ever investigated things that are hard to figure out because the principal players lie? You might want to look at the history of research into the Soviet bloc, before the Soviet Union fell. Or, for a more modern instance, take a look at Bradley K. Martin's thorough (and very lively) recent book on North Korea, "Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader." Here we have a country whose government lies about absolutely everything. Its citizens are completely (and effectively) forbidden to communicate with the outside world. No matter how dishonest any of us think the US government is, North Korea is immeasurably worse. And yet scholars and journalists have to figure out what's going on there. How do they do it? They use rigorous standards of evidence. Because if they don't, they're reduced to guessing, or relying on rumors. Sometimes the evidence isn't as good as everyone would like, but when a serious scholar is faced with that situation, he or she says very quickly and honestly that the evidence isn't good. Bradley Martin does this throughout his book. He's forever weighing various assertions about North Korea, and trying to ground all of them in verifiable facts. He relies a lot on testimony from North Korean defectors, but he doesn't always accept it. He's very careful, with everything any defector says, to consider how dependable it seems to be. He doesn't simply say, "Oh! How wonderful that these brave men and women have escaped from Communist tyranny to tell us the truth about what's going on." Some of them might be lying, some might be misinformed, some are only passing on rumors that they've heard. Martin weighs each assertion that any of them make, and tries to assess how reliable it might be.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:35:41 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:14:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:35:58 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >For documentation ands case studies that clarify how "sleep >disorders' and other psychological manifestations work, and how >they replicate UFO abduction scenarios, go to The National >Library of Medicine and ferret out the extensive literature. >I'll give you my accout name and password if you like so you >don't have to sign up but can still read the literature for >yourself instead of taking my word (or Peter's) for anything. Since when did you need a password to browse PubMed?
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:56:51 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:16:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:06:52 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >You're familiar with the hysteria among the nuns of Loudon, who >thought (or were) possessed by demons en masse. Heavens, this is a bit of a stretch. Loudun is usually cited as a historical example of mass hysteria, though once again it's not clear that is anything more than a name. On what basis are you now retrospectively diagnosing this as "sleep paralysis"? The problem with all these retrospective diagnosis is that they are like patterns in the firelight - people see whatever they want to see. For example, the Salem witchcraze was for many years assumed to be a case of mass hysteria, but it now seems at least as likely the real culprit was ergot poisoning. There is a very good reason why medics are trained to diagnose conditions differentially, and not simply by matching symptom clusters to disease templates. Of course there are plenty of people who do match symptom clusters to disease templates - they are called hypochondriacs. >Groups of people >can experience the same kind of "abduction" as a group Although group sleep paralysis is completely unheard of as far as I'm aware. It would appear to presuppose some sort of physiological ESP. >and >"sleep paralysis" doesn't mean that the episode happens while a >person is asleep. Well not strictly, no. Sleep paralysis occurs at the onset of sleep or on awakening. Since we're on the subject of when sleep paralysis does or does not occur, I should add that many of the features rather loosely ascribed to sleep paralysis in the literature, are really hypnagogic or hypnopompic hallucinations - imagery that occurs prior to the onset of sleep or on awakening, respectively. This sort of imagery may often accompany sleep paralysis, but it is strictly a separate phenomenon and frequently occurs by itself (when I was a student I often had the hypnopompic hallucination of loking out of the window at the street below, when in fact I was lying down in bed, from where the street wasn't even visible). >It can happen while they're walking, reading, >or riding in a car. Well, if they happen to fall asleep while walking, reading or riding in a car, possibly. >The literature is rife with examples. Examples of what? >The mechanism, again, is complex and ill-understood, just as UFO >events are. The mechanism of what? If you include Loudun as an example of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' - Allan From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 23:20:39 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:22:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' - Allan >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:32:35 -0600 >Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:45:25 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >>>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >Christopher, >>3. Sarbacher, in his letter to Wm Steinman in Nov 1983, refers >>at one point to the aliens he had heard about as "like insects". >Not quite. Here's the full sentence, which gives another >impression: >"I got the impression [from conversations with those either >working on the project or cognizant of their findings] these >'aliens' were constructed like certain insects we have observed >on earth, wherein because of the low mass the inertial forces >involved in operation of these instruments would be quite low." The last three lines are more or less what Gerald Heard said in his book. >In other words, the entities weighed little, like insects. >Beyond that, the meaning of his remarks is at best ambiguous, >and your paraphrase is misleading - though I understand why, as >we see next:. >>Since in neither the Aztec nor the Roswell UFO crash were any >>insects recovered it is clear Sarbacher was not talking about >>either case. He was almost certainly recalling office >>discussions of long ago about Gerald Heard's 1950 book entitled >>"Is Another World Watching?", in which Heard postulated that the >>UFO pilots were intelligent bees from Mars. This book was >>published soon after Scully's. >I doubt it. Heard's book was not published in the United States >until April 1951. Before then, references to it in the American >press and in official documents of the period are scant to >nonexistent. (Keyhoe's first book and Scully's work, of course, >attracted considerable attention.) The 1950 date you cite is for >the British edition of the Heard opus. There is no reason to >believe that Heard's eccentric theories (borrowed from >astronomer Gerard P. Kuiper, who made a passing statement, >probably a joke, in a Los Angeles newspaper) were known to >Sarbacher. But Sarbacher was recalling these 'insects' in 1983, Jerry. Over 30 years later. It matters not a jot whether Heard's book was published in 1950 or 1951. The point is that Sarbacher was almost certainly recalling those office discussions he had about UFO 'occupants' a long time previously. He had long forgotten exactly when the books were published. He simply recalled these distant discussions. >>4. Sarbacher told Steinman he had "no connection with any people >>involved in the recovery [of crashed saucers]". Yet he told >>Jerry Clark in 1985 that Bush & Von Neumann were involved and >>that they told him about the recoveries. (FATE, March 1988). A >>clear contradiction. >Your quotes from that letter to Steinman are, shall we say, >selective. In Sarbacher's next paragraph, he states, "John von >Neumann was definitely involved. Dr. Vannevar Bush was >definitely involved...." A quote citation so egregiously >misleading can have been done only with reckless carelessness or >with deliberate intent. Take your pick. Yes, a bit selective, but you don't take Sarbacher literally yourself, do you? >Beyond that, please reread what Sarbacher actually said. He >says quite clearly that he had no relationship with the personnel >"involved in the recovery" of the discs - in other words, the guys >who picked up the pieces. He says that he knew about the >incidents because he knew and worked with the scientists who were >given the problem to deal with. There is no contradiction, except >in your own wishful thinking. >>5. Smith told a researcher in 1959 that official contact with >>aliens had been established >This comes out of Smith's belief in the Straith letter, which >many American ufologists suspected, even then, was the creation >of Gray Barker and Jim Moseley, but which was widely accepted as >authentic in saucerian circles. It is no secret that Smith >believed George Adamski's claims and that he defended the >Straith letter. It also has nothing to do with the issue at hand >- unless you can establish a connection, which you haven't and >which I doubt you can do. Did the Straith letter say anything about every nation on the planet being officially told about "the spacecraft and their occupants from elsewhere"? It did not. Therefore, assuming you are correct, Smith has still grossly jazzed up this letter in his reply to the researcher in question. It is relevant because it provides more reason for doubting what Smith writes elsewhere. It is a plain falsehood. I will admit, however, that I have not seen the full text of the letter Smith wrote to Ronald Caswell. Have you? >>Anyone writing such twaddle hardly deserves that the allegations >>made in his supposedly top secret paper on geomagnetics should >>be taken seriously. One could question other writings of Smith >>for the same reason. Twaddle it is. If a man writes obvious trash in at least one place, he comes immediately under suspicion of doing the same in other places. Is this not a valid conclusion to draw? In other words, you cannot take his statements on trust, even if some of them appear sensible. Look at that nonsense about the one and a half tons of "unidentified metal". Some scientist! Now re-read some of his articles or reprinted lectures in FSR, and see if you can separate the reasonable from the garbage. >As is well known, as he made no secret, Smith was sympathetic to >contactees and took their messages literally. I think he was >wrong to do so, and so do you, but so what? People, including >scientists and engineers, have all sorts of private mystical and >religious beliefs which do not affect their ordinary >functioning. Apparently your point, based on nothing except >antipathy to Smith and to contactees generally and a desire to >discredit Sarbacher through the back door, is this: Smith was >crazy and probably dishonest because he felt this way. That's >not an argument, just a lazy way of dismissing something you >don't want to believe or even think about very deeply. >Smith's employers may or may have not thought well of his UFO- >related activities. You're more likely to accept at face value >bureaucrats' for-public-consumption statements in these matters >than I, who am rather more cynical, would. On the other hand, I >suppose it is possible that UK bureaucrats are uniquely honest >and open. But even if his Canadian government superiors thought >he was mistaken, there is no reason to believe - you certainly >haven't demonstrated one - that they thought he was nutty or >crooked. You would hardly expect that anyone's employer would come out and say he was nutty or crooked, unless they wanted to risk a libel action. And no, bureaucrats are no more honest and open in the UK either (as if you ever thought otherwise). >>6. Smith was a contactee himself, in the 1950s, and stated this >>quite openly. His method of communicating with aliens is not >>given, but presumably involved telepathy. >I did a fair amount of research on Smith for the entry on him in >The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., pp. 851-54. I encourage >interested persons to read it if they're interested in a more >fair-minded, nuanced analysis of a complex man than the cartoon >figure that Christopher draws as he seeks to discredit >Sarbacher. Smith not Sarbacher. Perhaps this was an unintentional error on your part. The only problem with Sarbacher (in the 1980s) is likely faulty memory and confusion, as you seem to acknowledge as well. >In my judgment, as one of the few who actually spoke with >Sarbacher, I fail to see why a rush to judgment is necessary >here. While curious, Sarbacher's remarks - in 1950 and again in >the early 1980s - don't prove anything in the absence of >compelling other evidence which may or may not come to light one >day. >Debunking efforts as wanting as yours are unwarranted, to say >the least, and their failings have the unintended effect of >making the case for Sarbacher more robust than it is in fact. >Count that as reason #385 I am not a debunker: the stance, which >requires a defense of rigid orthodoxy at the faintest hint of a >threat to it, ends up undermining its own credibility. >A rational skeptical response would be this, I should think. >Actually, this happens to be close to my conclusion as well: >The Sarbacher affair is curious, and one can't explain why he >made these allegations, but in the absence of much better >evidence I will continue to doubt the existence of spacecraft >wreckage and secret projects. Good. So we agree then - almost! By the way I shall be off until at least mid-April, so you won't get a response to any further posts until then.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 17:22:04 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:28:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sandow >From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >Furthermore the politically aware and active Hills would have been >aware that this was a period of multiple crises starting with the >erection of the Berlin wall just over a month before on to the death of >UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold (remember the Hills were on their >church's UN committee) on September 18th. There was a resumption of >nuclear testing begun by a massive Soviet nuclear bomb blast on 31 >August, fears of radiation were in the air so to speak. There was the >persistent racial tension, an attempt on the life of General De Gaulle, >the Katanga crisis and a United Auto Workers Strike. Added to this >there was Hurricane Clara, the fiercest in 40 years hitting Texas, and >strange lights or objects in the sky may have seemed even more >threatening following the tragic Hillsdale place crash in which 78 >people had been killed. I'm an American who remembers this period quite well, and I just have to giggle when I read this. Take a random assortment of newspaper headlines, and pretend these made an indelible impression on the psyche of two Americans. An attempt on De Gaulle's life frightened people in New Hampshire? People got frightened of lights in the sky because of a plane crash? Two people on their church's UN committee were so unsettled by Dag Hammarskjold's death that they imagined a UFO abducion? A hurricane in Texas struck terror in the hearts of people in New Hampshire? Does Peter have any idea how far apart those places are? It just wasn't like that. America isn't like that. People aren't like that. I really object strongly to Peter's more or less random list, because in fact this was a very frightened time. I remember, for instance, seeing smoke in the distance when I was in summer camp in upstate New York late in the '50s. I was in high school then. I wondered if New York had been hit by a nuclear bomb. Nuclear war was in ingrained fear. The things Peter lists were really tiny, in comparison. What added to daily tension were the ups and downs in American-Soviet relations. Those, after all, were directly connected to the possibility of nuclear war. Likewise something really important that Peter leaves out, the rise of Castro in Cuba. This was a huge source of tension and conflict in America back then. A communist threat 90 miles away! Believe me, that mattered more than any auto strike. But on the other side of this was a surge in vitality and optimism after Kennedy was elected. I've never seen a new president change the atmosphere in the US so much. Suddenly we had young, sexy, vital people in the White House. The entire atmosphere changed. So with plausiblity equal to Peter's I could claim that America in 1961 was a place where people could shrug off fear and face reality - and therefore experience and report a UFO abduction, which previously, in the stifling air of the '50s, they would have been afraid to talk about. All of which is facile bullspit, of course. Life is much more complex than this. Which helps explain why Peter's laundry list is so silly. >Its following this that Betty starts having nightmares about >being kidnapped by aliens, though her dream description is >clearly influenced by Truman Bethurum's "Aboard a Flying >Saucer". >Is there some indication that Betty read this not very widely >known tome? Note Peter's modus operandi here. An honest statement about Betty's dream and Bethurum's book would read something like this: "Betty's dream description reminds me of certain things in Truman Bethurum's book." From this mild truth Peter leaps to "her dream description is clearly influenced by." When symphony orchestras hire me as a consultant (one of the things I'm doing professionally now), I wish I'd make leaps of fantasy like that. I'd give the orchestras such wonderfully confident advice. I could tell them anything I wanted to! And I'd never have to stop to qualify any of it: "By the way, there's actually no evidence for what I'm saying." Of course, I'd never have another client. They'd see through me in an instant. That's what happens when you actually have to operate in the real world. >You also have to bear in mind that the idea of missing time and >abduction is actually put into Betty's mind by a couple of fairly >mysterious characters. That brings up an intriguing possibility, for >being a biracial couple involved in polticial activism, and given >Betty's radical family background, they may well have been under >surveillance by the FBI, and the idea of perhaps neutralising them by >sending them over the edge into kookdom may well occured to racist >elements in the FBI. Well, OK, Peter. There's a fair amount known about covert FBI operations at that time. Let's see if there's any trace of this - or of anything like it. Not, of course, that Betty and Barney were even remotely prominent, on any national or even regional scale. Does Peter think the FBI blanketed the entire U.S. with
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: John Rimmer <jrimmer.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 23:19:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:30:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research ><snip> >>Hall reveals that an interplanetary trade is occurring >>where the Tall Whites provide technologies and information to >>the USAF, and in return gain food, metal, clothing and basing >>rights. This suggests that the tall whites may in fact be part >>of a resource extraction program that is unknown in terms of >>scope and implications. This is a serious exopolitical issue yet >>has yet to be seriously analyzed. ><snip> >>Hall reveals that the USAF has developed shuttle craft >>able to fly to the moon using a nuclear propulsion system. This >>confirms that the NASA moon program was a cover for a more >>extensive space program that remains hidden to the general >>public. ><snip> >Dr. Salla... >If what Hall reports is true, what is the U.S. government >waiting for? That is, where is the nuclear shuttle? The advances >in medicine that the "Tall Whites" allegedly have passed on? Why >hasn't the government taken the option of mineral (oil?) >extraction to heart instead of fighting with OPEC or spending >millions of dollars to obtain precious metals for military and >industrial use? >What is the U.S. government waiting for? It's been 50 years, >according to Hall's "testimony" since all this took place. Where >are the consequences of the "Tall White's" passed-on, advanced >knowledge? >Why would the military not be using alien technology now or >during the Cold War? Why is NASA fighting for funding to send >probes to Mars when the government apparently has the knowledge >and wherewithall to go there now with advanced technology from >the "Tall Whites"? >Who in government or the military would let this knowledge >fester or remain hidden, knowing that they would never see it >come to fruition in their lifetime(s)? >It just doesn't make human (or alien) sense..... Exactly. But this simply demonstrates the fundamental failure of ETH ufology. If there had been any contact with an alien species, in 1947 or whenever, the world would be a very different place than it is today. However, the ETHers seem incapable of understanding this.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The From: Sheryl Gottschall <gottscha.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:18:55 +1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:45:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:34:34 -0800 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >Source: Scientific American.Com >http://tinyurl.com/6y37m >Abducted! Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >By Michael Shermer <snip> Did anybody actually read the paper mentioned in that story? Its titled, Psychophysiological Responding During Script-Driven Imagery In People Reporting Abduction By Space Aliens, at: http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/spacealiens.pdf
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Mars Desert Excavations From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:50:07 -0500 Subject: Mars Desert Excavations They better have a good explanation for what appears in the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:53:50 -1000 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:02:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research ><snip> >>Hall reveals that an interplanetary trade is occurring >>where the Tall Whites provide technologies and information to >>the USAF, and in return gain food, metal, clothing and basing >>rights. This suggests that the tall whites may in fact be part >>of a resource extraction program that is unknown in terms of >>scope and implications. This is a serious exopolitical issue yet >>has yet to be seriously analyzed. ><snip> >>Hall reveals that the USAF has developed shuttle craft >>able to fly to the moon using a nuclear propulsion system. This >>confirms that the NASA moon program was a cover for a more >>extensive space program that remains hidden to the general >>public. ><snip> >Dr. Salla... >If what Hall reports is true, what is the U.S. government >waiting for? That is, where is the nuclear shuttle? The advances >in medicine that the "Tall Whites" allegedly have passed on? Why >hasn't the government taken the option of mineral (oil?) >extraction to heart instead of fighting with OPEC or spending >millions of dollars to obtain precious metals for military and >industrial use? >What is the U.S. government waiting for? It's been 50 years, >according to Hall's "testimony" since all this took place. Where >are the consequences of the "Tall White's" passed-on, advanced >knowledge? Aloha Rich, I believe those who became aware of all the information concerning UFOs/ETs did a threat assessment back in the 1940's and and reached conclusions that continue to maintain secrecy, convuluted security procedures and non-accountable decision making in all the issues you raise. I believe the advances have been kept in the black world as Nick Cook's "Hunt for Zero Point" suggests for advanced propulsion systems that go beyond the nuclear technology. As for the filtering of technology from the black world into into the general public, Phillip Corso described that process and his involvement. I'm surprised that Corso's material hasn't been fully analysed and that his case continues to gather dust in the gray box. >Why would the military not be using alien technology now or >during the Cold War? Why is NASA fighting for funding to send >probes to Mars when the government apparently has the knowledge >and wherewithall to go there now with advanced technology from >the "Tall Whites"? What makes you think that alien technology has not been used far more extensively than you believe? Media coverage of war zones is not exactly a transparent process where journalists can visit the front lines where advanced weapon systems are being used. Without transparency, one can't know anything about what is being used by the US and other militaries. We know that ET technologies have been retreived and reverse engineered for military applications. Without transparency, we only know for certain what the military wants us to know. Investigative journalists don't have a chance of cracking the black world so it remains opaque and subject to much conjecture. As for NASA, I think that the overwhelming evidence of ET technology being secretly developed in black projects suggests that NASA is only using propulsion technologies that are officially approved for public dissemination. The more advanced propulsion technologies remain hidden in the black world so it stands to reason that NASA would slowly be losing funding since it doesn't posses the best technologies. >Who in government or the military would let this knowledge >fester or remain hidden, knowing that they would never see it >come to fruition in their lifetime(s)? >It just doesn't make human (or alien) sense..... It makes much sense from a national security perspective. Think of the precedent of pre-Meiji Japan when the elites discovered that the 'white barbarians' had all this technology that would overwhelm the best samurai military technologies. You'd want start a process of incorporating the white barbarians technologies while maintaining the illusion to your people that your warriors and war making prowess is second to none. I think the analogy holds for much of what is happening currently in the black world where technology is being developed and funding is being provided without much public awareness. If you follow the money trail, you'll find that as much as 1.7 trillion is being annually siphoned into the black world projects. Why would you tell Congress about the true size of the black projects if they would immediately start exercizing oversight that might impede your strategic vision of parity with visiting ET races within 50 years for example? I've written a paper on the true extent of the black budget at: http://www.exopolitics.org/Report-Black-Budget.htm I think the Hall case opens up much of national security issues that were secretly dealt with back in the 1940s and 1950s concerning UFOs/ETs. It's a very logical system that uses cost- benefit analysis in reaching decisions that concern national security. Ethical and constitutional issues are secondary to the national security priorities. I think the logic of the system that has been set up to deal with ETs/UFOs is quite clear once you put the pieces together.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:47 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:09:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:44 -0400 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:31:43 EST >>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:04:53 +0000 >>>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing >>><snip> >>>The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >>>category. >>>The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >>>which you can find delineated at the National Library of >>>Medicine (and other venues). >How anybody can claim that abductions rest with complicated >sleep disorders is beyond me. There are literally hundreds of >cases where the people aren't in bed, but are driving, walking >etc. There are loads of cases where more than one person is >abducted at a time. Now will we hear about a new contagious >disease.. sleep paralysis that occurs when people are driving or >doing other non horizontal activities? The trouble here is that few are claiming that sleep paralysis answers all abduction cases. It does explain some. Besides, there is a type of sleep paralysis that does, in fact, affect people who are wide awake and involved in other "non horizontal activities." It's called cataplexy and before anyone runs off to look it up, I will point out that it is always associated with narcolepsy. No one, as far as I can tell, has ever done any research into the number of abduction witnesses who are also narcoleptic (though I will speculate that the number is quite small). The point is that some abductions, but by no means all, can be explained by sleep disorders. >>>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>>of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >>>eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >>>common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >>>creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >>>"take them away." >I have seen no examples that sleep paralysis has produced >accounts just like abductions any more than magnetic fields >have. Well, then let's take a look around and see if we can find some examples for you. First is Pat Roach, the Utah woman who said that she and a number of her children had been abducted. She said that she awakened, believed there had been an intruder in the house, then called the police. Over the next two years she became convinced that the intruders had been alien creatures. It was after reading another abduction account in a magazine that Roach made contact with me through that magazine and because of the article I had written. It is quite clear to me that Roach was led into her more detailed descriptions by Dr. James Harder who was looking for some validation of the Hill abduction. It is also clear that Roach took cues from the magazine article I had written about another abduction. Her descriptions of the interior of the craft, for example, mirrored those in that article. Between sessions, Harder discussed with Roach other abduction cases. Just before the session in which Roach revealed that she had been "medically" examined on the craft, Harder told her about Betty Hill's examination on board a craft. Harder's leading questions took her into other arenas. So, this would seem to be a case in which sleep paralysis had produced an abduction account, helped along by the witness reading the literature that was available and by a researcher who fed her additional information between the sessions. Harder, I believe, had the best of intentions, attempting to calm the witness with his stories of other abductions, but all he did was contaminate the case. Oh yes - this was a multiple witness abduction. The genesis was the adult's episode of sleep paralysis and then two years of discussing this with her children until some of them believed they had been abducted. Budd Hopkins describes the case of "Philip Osborne. Osborne. had seen an NBC UFO special and one night after that awoke, paralyzed. This experience reminded him of another similar experience he'd while he was in college. He awoke in both cases unable to move or call for help. In the latter case, he felt there was some kind of presence in the room with him. I might point out that in about 80 percent of sleep paralysis cases, the victim believes there is something in the room with them. During the hypnotic regression, Osborne gave few answers that took them in the direction of an abduction experience. According to what Hopkins wrote, Osborne told them that he "had more or less refused to describe the imagery or events that seemed 'too pat,' too close to what he and we might have expected in a UFO encounter." And, during the discussion after the session Osborne told Hopkins that "I would see something and I would to myself in effect, 'Well, that's what I'm supposed to see.'" The point here is that a case can be made that Osborne experienced, not alien abduction, but classic sleep paralysis. It was under the close questioning of hypnotic regression that details were added to make it into an abduction. Finally, the Roper Poll, about alien abduction and commissioned by Robert Bigelow, had a fatal flaw in it. The five critical questions, those designed to identify abductees by examining their experiences, could also point to sleep paralysis. There was no mechanism in the survey to differentiate between sleep paralysis and abduction. Someone answering the questions on the survey, who had not been abducted, but who had experienced sleep paralysis would also answer these five critical questions in the positive. There is no way to know if the answers reflect alien abduction or sleep paralysis. <snip> >>Quite right. We should also bear in mind that much of the >>narrative structure in abduction stories is produced by >>ufologists and therapists who build narratives out of isolated >>memories and mounds of hypnotic regression material. >Much? What is the basis? Some abduction researchers are very >careful about not asking leading questions or creating narrative >structure. Evidence please? The Roach abduction shows leading of the witness, much of it outside the hypnotic regression sessions. The Osborne abduction suggests that Hopkins led him into an abduction, though I believe that Hopkins was unaware of this. Suggesting that there is more to the story, even after the witness has said he or she remembers nothing else, leads to this. The suggestion that the aliens had erected mental roadblocks can also be interpreted to mean that the hypnotist, unsatisfied with the answers, keeps asking the same questions until he or she receives the answers desired. Remember Edith Fiore, interviewing a client about a past life, told the woman, who was unable to recall anything, to "make it up." While this was not an alien abduction, it was in a session using hypnosis to retrieve "lost" or suppressed memories. So we do have some evidence of leading the witness and we have some evidence that not all sessions are benign. But even David Jacobs was aware of the problem with hypnotic regression and wrote about them in The Threat. Jacobs wrote, "When the unskilled hypnotists regress an abductee, they fail to situate him in the event's minute-by-minute chronology. Without links to a temporal sequence, the abductee can interpret events without the facts necessary to guide his thoughts which leads to confabulation and other memory problems." Lest you wish to argue that he does not include the big name researchers in this, Jacobs writes, "While Mack does not lead the witness in the classic meaning, he embraces the 'positive' therapeutic technique that leads to mutual confirmational fantasies and easily steers the abductee into dissociative channeled pathways - it represents the antitheses of scientific research =E2=80=93 to uncover facts= - John Mack accepts 'recollections' at face value." Which is, in fact saying that Mack leads his "experiencers". Jacobs also shows us that he leads the witness. He believes that the abductions are a negative event. He wrote of Pam Martin (a name he invented) and told us, "As a result of her UFO experiences, Pam had come to believe over the years that she was leading a 'charmed' life with 'guardian angels' helping her overcome life's difficulties". After one particularly vivid abduction experience, she decided the aliens were wonderful beings. Jacobs later wrote, "I have had over thirty sessions with Pam, and during that time she has come to have a less romantic idea about what has happened to her. She was initially disappointed that what she remembered under hypnosis [conducted by Jacobs] were not the pleasant experiences she had imagined, but she now accepts the [Jacob's] reality of what has been happening to her." What he has just told us is that an abductee came to him with one set of beliefs and left with another. It is a reality that differs with the one suggested by John Mack. It can be said here that Jacobs led Pam to his negative interpretation of her abduction experience. And John Mack said the same thing. He said, "It seems to me that Jacobs, Hopkins and Nyman may pull out of there experiencers what they want to see." (See Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind by C.D.B. Bryan, p. 271 hardback edition).
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Phoenix Lights Documentary DVD Available From: Lynne Kitei <drlynne.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:30:37 -0700 Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:12:58 -0500 Subject: Phoenix Lights Documentary DVD Available
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 29 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:36:27 EST Fwd Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:22:07 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Boone >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:47:51 -0400 >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:56:36 EST >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> >If you read the posts properly you would see that most think the >dialogue scene was shot on a sound stage. It's the origin of the >background that was being questioned. Oh that's horsecrap and you know it. You're the one who said _everybody_. Now it's_most_? >I think it was B-roll, a static shot, shot by a second unit of >the actual vista in Moab, Utah with a flowing river in the back >ground. Dave Rudiak says there is a river flowing in >background. >This footage was then projected on a back screen while Wayne >and >O,Hara acted on a sound stage in the foreground. I read that and would normally agree but there was a debate about it and the best I could do was ask the people who were there. >Others think the backdrop was painted or again a rear screen >projection but with a slide instead of film rolling. Neither of >those fit the flowing river scenario. >>>>The mysterious light behind the Duke's head? >>>>Arc light being moved and adjusted. >>>You're kidding right? They were moving an arc light while >>>there was a scene being shot? >>No, if I were kidding I would have inserted an 'I Am Kidding' >>notice at the top of my post. In case you haven't been up on >>current events, one of the top visited websites on movies are >>the blooper sites. There are all sorts of errors from Star Wars >>- stormtroopers bumping their heads to guys wearing Timex >>watches during The Ten Commandments starring Charlton Heston. >>Here on Earth people make mistakes. >That's a bit of a simplistic explanation. Of course there are >glitches. The lighting would have been set before the scene >was >shot then everyone would shut up and the actors would take >over. >Changing the lighting while the scene was being shot would >have >not only angered the director but the camera director as well. >You don't change lighting on the fly. That's theory. Let's ask the people who were there. >Timex watches inadvertently left on [doubt Timex in the early >50s] or an extra wearing glasses is the kind of mistake which is >an oversight, not an overt act during the "action sequence. Glasses. That reminds me of Where No Man Has Gone Before, or was it The Menagerie, the first and the second pilots to the original Star Trek series? There was a scene where a transporter tech was wearing horn rimmed glasses in the 24th Century. Only guy wearing glasses in the whole movie. <snip> >The problem is you are asking the wrong people. Instead of >patting yourself on the back for making a few phone calls, find >some of the technical crew, the assistant cameraman or the >cameraman if he's still alive, or the focus puller or some of >the lighting crew or someone who was in on the editing process >and ask them about how the scene was shot. The heck with the >actors. Some of them might know about the process or what >happened [John Wayne actually did some directing] but as for >the >final product most would have been out of the loop. Asking the wrong people? Like asking the people at the scene is asking the wrong people? We looked and are still looking for the technical crew most of whom are legends and long gone and heroes of mine and just about everyone else in sci-fi fandom. If you had read the earlier posts you would have noticed I mentioned this as well as the Lydecker Brothers who pioneered many of the special effects used in Hollywood. They were either on a sound stage or not. That's all I'm asking. >Anyway, many of us have off-the-wall phone bills from >investigating UFOs, and I find it a bit insulting that a Johnny >come lately has the sand to berate the rest of us for not making >phone calls on a 3rd rate case like this. If you live there then >you do the legwork. Find some of the tech crew and the B-roll. >I've already wasted enough time on this thread. The only thing you found insulting is that you insulted yourself. I'm not berating. Believe you me, I can berate with the best of them. Matter of fact I'll see your berate and raise you two contempts. I'm no Johnny come lately and that kind of a response reeks of territorialism. I've been researching UFOs for 30 years or more. I just don't do it to make a living. I don't have to and won't. So don't give me that routine. I've spent a good 6 figures doing research and tens of thousands of hours live discussing and researching with millions so you can take that to the bank. You're starting to make me want to side with Peter Jennings. Yet, we won't go there with Jennings. Some armchair psychiatrist might start making with the 'paranoid' cracks again.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 The Moby Dick [Alien] Abduction From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:00:12 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:56:47 -0500 Subject: The Moby Dick [Alien] Abduction The following is from Chapter Four of Herman Melville's monumental work, Moby Dick. (The narrator, Ishmael, is "abducted" by....?) At last I must have fallen into a troubled nightmare of a doze; and slowly waking from it - half steeped in dreams - I opened my eyes, and the before sun-lit room was now wrapped in outer darkness. Instantly I felt a shock running through all my frame; nothing was to be seen, and nothing was to be heard; but a supernatural hand seemed placed in mine. My arm hung over the counterpane, and the nameless, unimaginable, silent form or phantom, to which the hand belonged, seemed closely seated by my bedside. For what seemed ages piled on ages, I lay there, frozen with the most awful fears, not daring to drag away my hand; yet ever thinking that if I could but stir it one single inch, the horrid spell would be broken. I knew not how this consciousness at last glided away from me; but waking in the morning, I shudderingly remembered it all, and for days and weeks and months afterwards I lost myself in confounding attempts to explain the mystery. Nay, to this very
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:11:37 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:59:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" - Reynolds >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:59:29 -0600 >Subject: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" >Source: UFO-Disclosure - Disclosure Of The Truth About UFOs >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UFO-Disclosure/message/4459 >Peter Jennings Defrauding: Inside The Abc News UFO Documentary >Hoax >[Or Pot Calls Kettle Black --ebk] >By Steven M. Greer MD >Director, The Disclosure Project >March 2005 >Note: Permission is hereby granted to post and distribute >widely, so long as this article appears in its entirety or is >excerpted accurately. >Of course, the title of the show was 'Peter Jennings >Reporting...' [see http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Primetime/] >- if only that were so. This is the story of how, once again, >the corrupt Big Media has defrauded the American people, from >one who had a front row seat to the spectacle. <snip> >A CALL TO ACTION >The American people must demand that ABC News correct its >fraudulent assertions - and do a real investigative report on >the serious evidence, government documents and courageous >military whistle-blower testimony that The Disclosure Project >and others have identified. The reader may obtain much of this >evidence from www.DisclosureProject.org . >Write Peter Jennings and ABC News at: PeterJennings.nul >or abc.news.magazines.nul or support.nul and >demand an honest investigative report. >Additionally, please contact the FCC and register your complaint >regarding the transparent fraud perpetrated by ABC News on the >American public. Remember: ABC News, as a broadcast network, is >given by the FCC access to the public airwaves. In exchange, we >have the right to hold ABC News, as well as the other networks, >to fairness, accuracy and honesty - and certainly to avoid >blatant fraud and corruption. This was not the ABC entertainment >division that perpetrated this fraudulent report on the American >people, but its news division. That they would sanitize such an >important two hour report of nearly all credible evidence and >government insider witnesses requires that we demand a hearing >on the matter by the FCC immediately. Who induced Obenhaus and >Peter Jennings to cover up this important evidence? Why? ABC >News cannot claim ignorance on the matter as they were directly >given extensive testimony and evidence, none of which appeared >in the program. >Contact the FCC at www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaints.html and demand an >immediate investigation into this matter and demand that the FCC >require ABC to retract its false statements and present the >evidence which they possess but are hiding from the American >public. >And lastly, support Disclosure in any way you can. Help us get >the truth out. Tell people about www.DisclosureProject.org where >they can find the truth about this important matter. And help us >identify backers who will help us start a new - and honest - > news outlet that will truthfully report on these and related >projects that are illegally kept secret from the public. Is it >not time for us to form a news network - The Disclosure Network >-that will produce and air real investigative reports on a wide >range of government and corporate corruption? Matters now left >completely hidden by the complicity of Big Media need to be >known by the people if we are to renew and protect democracy and >disclose the technologies now hidden and suppressed that could >replace oil and nuclear power and give us a sustainable, >peaceful world. >We can no longer trust ABC news or the rest of the Big Media to >do this. We, the people, must take on the task of getting the >truth out and salvaging what is left of our democracy and >planet. Big Media, who have become shills for their corporate >masters, are incapable or unwilling to tell the truth. It is >time we did it for them. >Steven M. Greer MD Dr. Greer (et al.)... As I noted at Frank Warren's blog, they (the FCC, media, government agencies, the apathetic public, and ABC) are many; we are few. That Dr. Greer thinks we in the UFO community can get anyone to do anything is a fantasy of great proportion. The UFO community has got to resolve the UFO mystery on its own, and not expect outside help, from anyone in the so- called
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:20:21 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:03:52 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:29:56 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:35:58 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>For documentation ands case studies that clarify how "sleep >>disorders' and other psychological manifestations work, and >>how they replicate UFO abduction scenarios, go to The >>National Library of Medicine and ferret out the extensive >>literature. <snip> >You've already said that the Old Hag cases and abduction >narratives are exactly the same. That's complete, utter >nonsense. I've read David Hufford's classic book on the Old Hag >phenomenon. And, needless to say (for most people here who know >me), countless abduction books, with conversations with >abductees added to that. There are superficial similarities >between the two things, but that's all. The Old Hag, for >instance, doesn't lead to the detailed narratives that abduction >cases have. And abduction cases don't have (except maybe in rare >cases) a sensation of someone pressing on one's chest, as the >Old Hag cases do. >You might want to read the proceedings of the abduction >conference at MIT, which David Hufford took part in. He was very >critical of abduction research (or at least of the conclusions >that abduction researchers come to). But he never said that the >Old Hag - on which he's the reigning authority - was the same >thing. >In fact, in his Old Hag book he warns very sternly against this >kind of reductive thinking. Hufford wants researchers to take >the narratives at face value, for the sake of study and >clarification. Not necessarily that, literally, there are Old >Hag entitites, but that initially all we know of the phenomenon >is that people report that these entities are there. If I >understand him correctly, he'd have us start with the simple >facts of what abductees and Old Hag experiencers report, and >assume that these are different phenomena, because the surface >facts are different. >So anyway, Rich - since you're so wildly off base on what you >said about the Old Hag, why should I assume you've understood >the relationship between sleep paralysis and abductions any >better, no matter how much literature you've read? Greg... I'd usually defer to your erudition in such matters, but The Hag was only used by me as _one_ example. There are others, each fitting the culture and eras in which the "abductions" happened. The abduction scenario changes with the times and the culture. That current "abduction" cases have alien artifacts is not surprising. Again, I suggest that those wanting to see all the literature and case studies go to The National Library of Medicine and other venues (found using Google's Scholar Search engine maybe) to read for themselves the vast amount of literature about this. I know UFO people want others to do the work for them - for me to prove my case for instance - but I prefer that searchers of
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:29:09 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:05:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:35:41 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:35:58 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>For documentation ands case studies that clarify how "sleep >>disorders' and other psychological manifestations work, and how >>they replicate UFO abduction scenarios, go to The National >>Library of Medicine and ferret out the extensive literature. >>I'll give you my accout name and password if you like so you >>don't have to sign up but can still read the literature for >>yourself instead of taking my word (or Peter's) for anything. >Since when did you need a password to browse PubMed? >http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/ Cathy: To see some abstracts (or have them sent to you, in toto), a password is needed.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:38:06 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:07:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:56:51 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumass >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:06:52 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>You're familiar with the hysteria among the nuns of Loudon, who >>thought (or were) possessed by demons en masse. >Heavens, this is a bit of a stretch. Loudun is usually cited as >a historical example of mass hysteria, though once again it's not >clear that is anything more than a name. On what basis are you >now retrospectively diagnosing this as "sleep paralysis"? <snip> >>The mechanism, again, is complex and ill-understood, just as UFO >>events are. >The mechanism of what? If you include Loudun as an example of >sleep paralyisis, then your definition of sleep paralysis is so >wide-ranging as to be meaningless. Cathy... I like that you challenge UpDaters with sensate reasoning, but you haven't, it seems, checked out the literature extant that deals with 'sleep disorders'. I used a few examples, The Old Hag, and the 17th Century nuns of Loudon episodes, to point those with a real interest in the abduction phenomenon. In e-mail from Dr. John Mack to me a year ago - because he thought it was our MediaWatch group that dissed his book - it wasn't - we discussed the matter of culture affecting how abductions are reported. (I'll put that correspondence online at our blog and here, upcoming). Again, I suggest that those who are truly interested in how abductions have been reported over the historical longevity find the literature for themselves so they can discuss it
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Shell From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:40:30 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:10:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Shell >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >for the story. Bruce, These look like digital image compression artifacts to me. I don't know what compression scheme is used for these photos, but I doubt it is garden variety JPEG. What Mr. Skipper thinks is some sort of conspiracy to smooth over and hide evidence is much more likely to be simple image processing.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:44:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:12:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:53:50 -1000 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research <snip> >I think the Hall case opens up much of national security issues >that were secretly dealt with back in the 1940s and 1950s >concerning UFOs/ETs. It's a very logical system that uses cost- >benefit analysis in reaching decisions that concern national >security. Ethical and constitutional issues are secondary to the >national security priorities. I think the logic of the system >that has been set up to deal with ETs/UFOs is quite clear once >you put the pieces together. Dr. Salla... Unlike some here, I find your "methodology" interesting but, again, I observe that if what you (or Hall) say is true (or real), the reaction from politicos and military types is too bland; that is, if alien technology is rife, those who know about it have surely acted blas=E9 these past 57 years. The human condition offers a few mavericks who would expose such a massive influx of alien echnology - someone, somehow, a person with real credentials and credibility, would have come forward by now to tell humans what is going on. (No, not a guy like Bob Lazar.) Diaries or notes of some kind should have surfaced by now, if someone in the vast military/industrial complex had actually experienced or knew about the things you cite. And why? Either those who would like to preserve their name or establish a legacy of some sort (as exampled by Presidents who need libraries to guarantee their "place in history") or persons for whom the truth is more important than loyalty to a transient government should have come forth by now, with irrefutable proof of these things that you say have happened. I'm not discounting the possibility that alien technology has
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - King From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:47:40 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:13:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - King >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >for the story. Hi Bruce, Skipper describes the "secrecy agenda" as using... "map type carpeting image tampering obfuscation"...ad nauseum. What I see in his images are compressed images blown up beyond any reason, and like Hoagland, using the inherent resulting distortion to prove artificial structures. and I must say that a phrase like "map type carpeting image tampering obfuscation" read like "weapons of mass destruction- related program activities"... a similar non-statement. Skipper has a vivid imagination, and perhaps more time on his hands than he asserts. But hey, I could be wrong. There could very well be old cities on Mars, and ESA may very well release images of same with all kinds of "map type carpeting image tampering obfuscation", rather than just not releasing such "provocative" images. But I don't think so. We'll have the answers on Mars in due course. Using highly
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 04:52:06 -1000 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:18:14 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:44:46 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>exopolitical >>analysis precedes dispute this lack of hard evidence since >>the premises and methodologies of exopolitical research is >>based on recognizing how distorting factors imposed by >>government agencies negate making hard evidence a necessary >>threshold criterion for whistleblower admissibility. Despite >>my having repeatedly referred to these distorting factors in >>the data collection process, I've noticed that no researcher >>on UFO UpDates has tried to seriously discuss the extent and >>parameters of the distorting factors when it comes to hard >>evidence and whistleblower credibility. It seems that veteran >>UFO researchers operate under the illusion of transparency in >>the investigatory process and find it difficult to admit >>anything to the contrary. >So, Michael, do you think you're saying anything new here? Do >you think nobody has ever investigated things that are hard to >figure out because the principal players lie? >You might want to look at the history of research into the >Soviet bloc, before the Soviet Union fell. Or, for a more modern >instance, take a look at Bradley K. Martin's thorough (and very >lively) recent book on North Korea, "Under the Loving Care of >the Fatherly Leader." >Here we have a country whose government lies about absolutely >everything. Its citizens are completely (and effectively) >forbidden to communicate with the outside world. No matter how >dishonest any of us think the US government is, North Korea is >immeasurably worse. >And yet scholars and journalists have to figure out what's going >on there. How do they do it? They use rigorous standards of >evidence. Because if they don't, they're reduced to guessing, or >relying on rumors. Sometimes the evidence isn't as good as >everyone would like, but when a serious scholar is faced with >that situation, he or she says very quickly and honestly that >the evidence isn't good. >Bradley Martin does this throughout his book. He's forever >weighing various assertions about North Korea, and trying to >ground all of them in verifiable facts. He relies a lot on >testimony from North Korean defectors, but he doesn't always >accept it. He's very careful, with everything any defector says, >to consider how dependable it seems to be. He doesn't simply >say, "Oh! How wonderful that these brave men and women have >escaped from Communist tyranny to tell us the truth about what's >going on." Some of them might be lying, some might be >misinformed, some are only passing on rumors that they've heard. >Martin weighs each assertion that any of them make, and tries to >assess how reliable it might be. >Do you do that with your whistleblowers? Aloha Greg, Thanks for the analogy which does raise some of the problems we have to grapple with. I think the analogy with North Korean defectors is a very good one. I would say that analysis of whistleblower testimonies from the black world has similar problems as analysing defectors from North Korea in terms of lacking hard evidence aside from their knowledge of what's going on in the North Korean system. However, the analogy breaks down since we have hard evidence of North Korean facilities in terms of spy satellites from the free world. We don't unfortunately have spy satellites telling us what's happening in the 'black world' which is global in scope and controls possible 'spy satellite' analogies such as free media, legislatures, executive governments, etc. I think we have a couple of things things that aid us in working out what is really going on with a 'corrupt' and ''deceptive' system such as occurs in the US with the black world of reverse engineering of ETVs, projects with EBEs, etc. One is the testimony of whistleblowers such as Hall who come forward. As you say, Hall is not the first to come forward with such stories, but he certainly is providing testimony that goes beyond what other whistleblowers have been able to reveal about high level cooperation between EBEs and the US military. The second thing that aids us in understanding what's going on in the black world is our ability to use reason to work out the national security policies put in place to deal with evidence provided by UFO researchers that ETVs have crashed, were retreived, etc., and the EBEs have worked in black projects. Basically, we have to consider that at some point a group of senior national security officials sat in a room and put together a rational process to deal with the ET civilizations that were visiting. We might call this committee MJ-12 as in the 1947 Truman memo but formation of such a committee would have been a rational policy. I think the best clue that this happened are events such as Gen Vandenberg rejecting the initial Estimate of the Situation provided by the Project Sign team back in October 1948. That suggested that a national security system had been put in place to deal with the ET phenomenon by at least 1947/48 if not earlier. The next step would have been (for MJ-12) to organize the development of a 'White Paper' or 'Threat Assessment' of the ET visitors. Part of the Threat Assessment would certainly have contained a 'Strategic Vision' on how to achieve 'parity' with the visitors. This is standard for militaries around the world when they put together White Papers to deal with any security contingencies stemming from new regional powers. The next step would have been to actualize the Strategic Vision with a set of policies to ensure you achieve strategic parity with the visitors in a specified period of 50 years, for example. One of the policies would have been to keep the whole thing secret from the general public to ensure sufficient level of funding and no interference from civilians who are not fully briefed on the 'possible threat' by the visitors. However, somewhere in the process, one realizes that an uninformed public actually has strategic consequences in dealing with the possible threat posed by the ET visitors so you start a program of leaks to prepare that segment of the population that is ready for the truth concerning the ET visitors. You for example create an internet using military and educational resources in case the ET threat leads to a covert takeover. Thus the internet forms a last line of defence in case the 'visitors' assert their influence by covert means. I could go on but basically I believe Hall was given a clearance to come forward with his story. I don't buy his story that he became unemployed in 2001 and wrote Millennial Hospitality because of his wife's prompting. He was told to write it by his handlers who wanted the information to come out. Of course without hard evidence and many witnesses to corroborate his story, many would not be sure of how to respond to Hall's testimony. As you say, we are in a similar position to those investigating stories of a North Korean defector and coming up with the criteria to determine how credible his/her information is. The process has started with Hall with ongoing investigations but already there is sufficient confirmation of his story and basic credibility to look at the political implications which is where exopolitical analysis comes in. For most UFO researchers, they'd put it in the gray box but for those doing exopolitical analysis, Hall's testimony gives an account of what's happening in the black world that meshes with what we've been able to figure out about how the black world operates, and what other whistleblowers have said about the ET visitors and national security policies. Exopolitics is not an exact science but there's enough material we know about to figure out how the national security system has evolved, and assess the validity of testimonies such as Hall with what would have been the most rational policies by national security officials that started more than five decades ago.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 New Image Of Martian 'Glass Tunnels' From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:38:13 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:24:16 -0500 Subject: New Image Of Martian 'Glass Tunnels' List, Malin Space Science Systems has released a new image of some of the controversial Martian "glass tunnels." In my opinion, the image bears out my previous impression of natural - if interesting - formations. http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/publicresults/2005/02/S03-00125p.gif As soon as Blogger's current bug is addressed I'll post more detailed commentary at: http://cydonianimperative.blogspot.com Thanks for reading, and have a great day! Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' - Clark From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:02:22 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:29:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' - Clark >From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 23:20:39 +0100 >Subject: Re: Sarbacher & 'Insect-Likes' [was: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith] >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:32:35 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>From: Christopher Allan <cda.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:45:25 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith >>>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:41:48 EST >>>>Subject: Re: Wilbert Brockhouse Smith Christopher, >>>"I got the impression [from conversations with those either >>working on the project or cognizant of their findings] these >>'aliens' were constructed like certain insects we have observed >>on earth, wherein because of the low mass the inertial forces >>involved in operation of these instruments would be quite low." >The last three lines are more or less what Gerald Heard said in >his book. I don't think so. What I do think is that you're blowing smoke. Heard thought that Mars was populated by superbees, "perhaps two inches in length... as beautiful as the most beautiful of any flower, any beetle, moth or butterfly. A creature with eyes like brilliant cut- diamonds, with a head of sapphire, a thorax of emerald, an abdomen of ruby, wings like opal, legs like topaz - such a body would be worthy of this 'super-mind'..... It is we who would feel shabby and ashamed, and may be with our clammy, putty-colored bodies, repulsive!" The Martians had come to earth, Heard speculated, because they feared the effect humans' aggressive ways and atomic bombs could have on them. What if human beings blew up the earth and huge dust clouds cut off the sun's rays, turning Mars into an even colder planet? It was also possible that earth's "very powerful magnetic field" might generate dangerous sunspots and send deadly radiation into Mars' atmosphere. Perhaps the superbees were here in what amounted to a police action: to stop us from causing further trouble to them and to the rest of the solar system. So far, however, Heard said, the Martians were acting with remarkable patience, in the fashion of "very circumspect, very intelligent gentlemen." So this is "more or less" what Sarbacher said? If you want to argue further along these lines, let's see some evidence - even of alleged two-inch alien corpses, forget Heard's psychedelic flourishes beyond that. Instead of evidence, all we've seen so far are your waving hands. >>I doubt it. Heard's book was not published in the United States >>until April 1951. Before then, references to it in the American >>press and in official documents of the period are scant to >>nonexistent. (Keyhoe's first book and Scully's work, of course, >>attracted considerable attention.) The 1950 date you cite is for >>the British edition of the Heard opus. There is no reason to >>believe that Heard's eccentric theories (borrowed from >>astronomer Gerard P. Kuiper, who made a passing statement, >>probably a joke, in a Los Angeles newspaper) were known to >>Sarbacher. >But Sarbacher was recalling these 'insects' in 1983, Jerry. Over >30 years later. It matters not a jot whether Heard's book was >published in 1950 or 1951. The point is that Sarbacher was >almost certainly recalling those office discussions he had about >UFO 'occupants' a long time previously. He had long forgotten >exactly when the books were published. He simply recalled these >distant discussions. Is Another World Watching? - the American edition of The Riddle of the Flying Saucer - was published in April 1951. The Smith memo, which says nothing of the book or its ideas (though there is a reference to the Scully volume, published the previous September), comes out of December 1950. As to your theory that he picked up gossip and idle speculation from hanging out at the Research and Development Board, forget it. Sarbacher's problem, according to the executive director Fred Darwin, was that RS "had virtually no connection with the activities of the RDB. More's the pity.... He never came to the meetings." Consequently, his service there was brief. The weakness of Sarbacher's account is precisely the opposite of what you would have it to be: that instead of being in the RDB's loop, he seems to have been largely out of it. And if more active RDBers were sitting around obsessed, or even modestly interested, in two-inch Martian superbees, where is the evidence? I suspect nowhere, because it doesn't exist. >>>4. Sarbacher told Steinman he had "no connection with any people >>>involved in the recovery [of crashed saucers]". Yet he told >>>Jerry Clark in 1985 that Bush & Von Neumann were involved and >>>that they told him about the recoveries. (FATE, March 1988). A >>>clear contradiction. >>Your quotes from that letter to Steinman are, shall we say, >>selective. In Sarbacher's next paragraph, he states, "John von >>Neumann was definitely involved. Dr. Vannevar Bush was >>definitely involved...." A quote citation so egregiously >>misleading can have been done only with reckless carelessness or >>with deliberate intent. Take your pick. >Yes, a bit selective.... In other words, you concede - I guess to your credit - that your argument was consciously misleading and crafted to create a false impression. >>>5. Smith told a researcher in 1959 that official contact with >>>aliens had been established >>This comes out of Smith's belief in the Straith letter, which >>many American ufologists suspected, even then, was the creation >>of Gray Barker and Jim Moseley, but which was widely accepted as >>authentic in saucerian circles. It is no secret that Smith >>believed George Adamski's claims and that he defended the >>Straith letter. It also has nothing to do with the issue at hand >>- unless you can establish a connection, which you haven't and >>which I doubt you can do. >Did the Straith letter say anything about every nation on the >planet being officially told about "the spacecraft and their >occupants from elsewhere"? The Straith letter, as you'd know if you were more familiar with 1950s contactee lore, was to contactees and their followers "proof" of high- level contacts by U.S. and other governments with visiting ETs. It was not, as you apparently think, the only expression of that belief; its significance was that it allegedly represented an official affirmation of the truth of Adamski's claims, which included that particular assertion. Stories of high-level interactions between governments and ETs go back to the earlier days of the UFO controversy. For a discussion, see pp. 276-77 of The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed. >It did not. Therefore, assuming you are correct, Smith has still >grossly jazzed up this letter in his reply to the researcher in >question. It is relevant because it provides more reason for >doubting what Smith writes elsewhere. It is a plain falsehood. This makes even less sense than usual. >>>Anyone writing such twaddle hardly deserves that the allegations >>>made in his supposedly top secret paper on geomagnetics should >>>be taken seriously. One could question other writings of Smith >>>for the same reason. Be careful, Christopher, or your twaddle will be used against you for the same reason. One who has just confessed that he deliberately took a quote out of context with intent to mislead is in no position to charge that _others_ are unreliable. Readers will note with amusement the second sentence immediately below: >Twaddle it is. If a man writes obvious trash in at least one >place, he comes immediately under suspicion of doing the same in >other places. Is this not a valid conclusion to draw? In other >words, you cannot take his statements on trust, even if some of >them appear sensible. Look at that nonsense about the one and a >half tons of "unidentified metal". Some scientist! This is just hand-waving. One can hold views that to some others are "obvious trash" and be a good, honest person. I think everybody else who's reading these words knows the difference between foolish beliefs (or what one thinks of as foolish beliefs, not always the same thing) and decent personal character. Is it your view that someone who holds, say, religious beliefs that you deem "twaddle" cannot be trusted to fix your car or to function as a co-worker? >Now re-read some of his articles or reprinted lectures in FSR, >and see if you can separate the reasonable from the garbage. I read those articles probably before you did. For an actually balanced, fair-minded view of the complex man who was Wilbert Smith, I refer interested readers to my long entry on him in the encyclopedia (851-54). There is nothing further in your post that merits continued discussion, so I will snip it. Those who wish to see what they're missing can, of course, look it up in the archives. What strikes me, however, is the urgent enthusiasm in which Christopher Allan plunges into a flimsy argument. It's why I am not a debunker. I have already explained why I do not think Sarbacher's testimony, absent compelling supporting evidence, means all that much, beyond its undoubted curiosity value. It shouldn't be necessary to go beyond that. Sarbacher's testimony is only thinly anecdotal, and the shaking fears of those who worry about such things notwithstanding, it is no threat to the conventional order. So relax, all you debunkers and pelicanists out there. You don't even have to
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:12:45 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:31:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:53:50 -1000 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >Think of the precedent of pre-Meiji Japan when the elites >discovered that the 'white barbarians' had all this >technology that would overwhelm the best samurai military >technologies. You'd want start a process of incorporating the >white barbarians technologies while maintaining the illusion >to your people that your warriors and war making prowess is >second to none. I think the analogy holds for much of what is >happening currently in the black world where technology is >being developed and funding is being provided without much >public awareness. Michael! Don't you know anything about Japanese history? 1853 - U.S. warships show up in a Japanese harbor, visible to all. Japan is forced to open its borders, and determines to adopt Western technology. 1895 - Japan emerges as a world power, by winning the Sino- Japanese war, using Western technology. In that intervening time, Western technology and even Western clothes spread widely inside Japan. Massive Western industries had to be built. Do you imagine the Japanese leaders could do that in secret? The whole point is that they _didn't_ pretend that their old ways were superior. They wanted to avoid being colonized by the West, as other Asian countries were, and did this by turning the entire country around. Western industry, technology, and culture spread widely in Japan. It wasn't secret. Japanese musicians even started to write Western-style music. I've seen a wonderful catalogue from a Japanese music publisher. It features a photo gallery of great composers of past centuries. Along with familiar images of Mozart and Beethoven and Bach, there's a fabulous photograph of a very serious Japanese gentleman, wearing 19th century Western clothes. During this period, Western culture even became fashionable. If you're this careless about Japanese history - which you could learn about in four minutes on the Internet - why should we
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:40:20 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:51:11 -0500 Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO - Ledger >From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:36:27 EST >Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO >>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 12:47:51 -0400 >>Subject: Re: News Group Weighs In On John Wayne UFO <snip> >>The problem is you are asking the wrong people. Instead of >>patting yourself on the back for making a few phone calls, find >>some of the technical crew, the assistant cameraman or the >>cameraman if he's still alive, or the focus puller or some of >>the lighting crew or someone who was in on the editing process >>and ask them about how the scene was shot. The heck with the >>actors. Some of them might know about the process or what >>happened [John Wayne actually did some directing] but as for >>the final product most would have been out of the loop. >Asking the wrong people? Like asking the people at the scene is >asking the wrong people? We looked and are still looking for the >technical crew most of whom are legends and long gone and heroes >of mine and just about everyone else in sci-fi fandom. If you >had read the earlier posts you would have noticed I mentioned >this as well as the Lydecker Brothers who pioneered many of the >special effects used in Hollywood. They were either on a sound >stage or not. That's all I'm asking. So far I've you've posted that you "asked" actors. I say, ask the technical crew. >>Anyway, many of us have off-the-wall phone bills from >>investigating UFOs, and I find it a bit insulting that a Johnny >>come lately has the sand to berate the rest of us for not making >>phone calls on a 3rd rate case like this. If you live there then >>you do the legwork. Find some of the tech crew and the B-roll. >>I've already wasted enough time on this thread. >The only thing you found insulting is that you insulted yourself. ???? >I'm not berating. Believe you me, I can berate with >the best of them. Matter of fact I'll see your berate and raise >you two contempts. I'm no Johnny come lately and that kind of a >response reeks of territorialism. Not from me big guy. 90 percent of it is BS anyway. It stands on its own and should not need defending. >I've been researching UFOs for 30 years or more. I just don't >do it to make a living. Like I do? >I don't have to and won't. So don't give me that routine. I've >spent a good 6 figures doing research and tens of thousands of >hours live discussing and researching with millions so you can >take that to the bank. Well, nail down a few good cases and kick the snot out of them and see what's left. Never mind the shotgun effect. >You're starting to make me want to side with Peter Jennings. I don't understand what this means. >Yet, we won't go there with Jennings. Some armchair psychiatrist
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:43:45 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:55:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research ><snip> >>Hall reveals that an interplanetary trade is occurring >>where the Tall Whites provide technologies and information to >>the USAF, and in return gain food, metal, clothing and basing >>rights. This suggests that the tall whites may in fact be part >>of a resource extraction program that is unknown in terms of >>scope and implications. This is a serious exopolitical issue yet >>has yet to be seriously analyzed. ><snip> >>Hall reveals that the USAF has developed shuttle craft >>able to fly to the moon using a nuclear propulsion system. This >>confirms that the NASA moon program was a cover for a more >>extensive space program that remains hidden to the general >>public. ><snip> >Dr. Salla... >If what Hall reports is true, what is the U.S. government >waiting for? That is, where is the nuclear shuttle? The advances >in medicine that the "Tall Whites" allegedly have passed on? Why >hasn't the government taken the option of mineral (oil?) >extraction to heart instead of fighting with OPEC or spending >millions of dollars to obtain precious metals for military and >industrial use? >What is the U.S. government waiting for? It's been 50 years, >according to Hall's "testimony" since all this took place. Where >are the consequences of the "Tall White's" passed-on, advanced >knowledge? I cannot refrain from commenting on the Charles Hall tale as I was asked to investigate it, but turned down the invitation after interviewing him on the phone for 90 minutes. Beside the fact he had a very peculiar definition for "Dreamland" and did not think it applied to Area 51, it was his explanation of the power source for the Tall White's spaceship that bothered me. Charles described the power coil as a fiberoptic coil. He said he had once seen the White's repairing one of these power coils that overheated. It was this fiberoptic coil which developed a "lifting" field around the craft. He also wrote a paper on this invoking a third photonic field he called "starshine"! Now, fiberoptic coils channel impulses of light a in a fiberoptic lamp or can be modulated for transmission as in fiberoptic cables, but no fiberoptic lamp that I know of is about to lift off the table due to its starshine field nor are any of these susceptible to melt-down from overheating. I have sent his paper (Charles has an M.A. in physics) to two Ph.Ds and they both agreed that his physics is, ahhh well, hokey.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Warren From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:29:48 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:15:09 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Warren >From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:52:01 EST >Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:53:33 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:58:59 EST >>>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula <snip> >>>To extend the analogy even further, I would suggest that, yes >>>indeed, the stake has been driven - repeatedly - into the Aztec >>>"vampire" by a host of ufological Van Helsings, but each time >>>some well-meaning person wanders along and pulls it out without >>>realising what they're doing. >>>As a result, the monster wanders around for a bit, killing some >>>innocents (ie. the reputations of a few UFO researchers), before >>>another group of ufological Van Helsings wanders in and stakes >>>it again. >>>Maybe we should remember to cut off its head this time! >>Bring the stakes <sharpening the canines>, bring the machete and >>give it your best shot. Curious to know who's reputations have >>been hurt by investigating Aztec-you've produced a documentary >>about it; has it caused you any "ill effects?" Good Day Paul, Et Al, >No ill effects here, probably because I took a neutral stance at >the time. As for those who have suffered, one could start with >Frank Scully (but, as that is my "stumbling block" I'll leave >him aside), and move straight to William Steinman and Wendelle >Stevens, neither of whom, to the best of my knowledge, has any >credibility with serious ufologists (anyone out there care to >disagree? stand up and be counted). Scully's book if I'm not mistaken, was a "bestseller." Moreover, most of his "infelicity" came from one man-J.P. Cahn; whose motives are dubious. Additionally, to disparage (saying this while standing) a man or woman's entire body of work because you disagree with a portion of it isn't prudent. What is more, I've never met any "flippant" Ufologists. >>I will cede the fact that the number of witnesses are not "all >>direct eye witnesses," and Scott has wisely not made "all the >>names public; however, if you read Scott's article you'll notice >>much more then two witnesses. >Why is it, whenever I disagree with someone around here (a la >the Ed Gehrman line a couple of days ago, or David Rudiak's >strafing run on me, or Dr. Salla's silliness about Lazar), it is >claimed that my conclusions are either unsupported, or that I >have not actually read the material, or done my homework? >Sigh... Paul, "I only respond, and formulate my thoughts based on what what you've said to me"; for example, you said" "a couple of "eyewitnesses" are not enough to counterbalance the clear evidence that it was all a con." Since there is so much more then that, that statement is indicative of you being "unaware" of the "body of evidence in the Aztec case, more specifically, what Scott has brought to the table. Pardon my confusion, but I only know (in regards to "your familiarity") what you choose to share. >I have Scott's MUFON article in front of me. Scott indeed listed >5 "witnesses". I referred to only two (Farley and Nolan), >because those are the only two that I was willing to grant have >anything, potentially, to offer, for reasons detailed below >(although I ultimately discount their testimony, again for >reasons I outline below). If this led to a misunderstanding on >your part of my level of knowledge, I'm sorry. I'll try to be as >precise as I can in the future. Thank you . . . the fog is clearing. >Scott's other three witnesses were: >1. Virgel Riggs - I discount Riggs for the simple reason that he >is not a witness. He wasn't at the alleged crash, and never >claimed to be. Instead, he offers hearsay testimony about an >airman he claims to have know while in the military who told him >that he was part of the recovery team at Aztec. Said airman has >not been named publicly, nor found by Scott. I met Virgel at >Aztec last year - a lovely fellow. I asked him if it was >possible the airman was joking. He admitted it was, although I >don't think Virgel himself thinks he was. This is not a >"witness" by any stretch of the term. His testimony is useless >until corroborated. If we were in court, your assessment of Riggs' "testimony" would be quite accurate; however, as I have repeatedly said before we're not. I understand that you have a legal background, and a "lawyer's eye"; that certainly is beneficial in Ufology; however, in this stage of the game instead of a "courtroom analogy," think "archaeology," where we are "digging" for the most "minute clues." Riggs by the way has presented "military documents" substantiating the "existence of" as well as "his association with" the "un-named airman." He is very close to being found. >2. Anonymous - He's anonymous. I know you'll disagree, but for >me there's nothing more to be said. His testimony is worthless, >because we can't check it out. Until we know who he is, or have >some corroborating evidence of what he supposedly said to Scott, >it is worse than Bob Lazar, or Wild Bill Cooper. Interestingly, >I never did hear from Dr. Salla in response to my post on Cooper >a couple of weeks ago, but see he has now popped up again. Say >what you will about me - and some of you have lately - but at >least I have the guts to lay my position out, and respond to the >critics. But I digress... See above. What "I" have said about you Paul, is that "I respect your opinion, and your tenacity, as well as your skepticism, which I believe is a 'healthy thing' in Ufology." >3. Fred Reed - Now I will grant that Reed is the one of the >three that claims to have been an actual witness. He maintained >that he was ex-OSS, and then part of the "clean-up team" that >was "sent to Aztec". His account, if it is to be believed (and >one must ask whether Scott or anyone else has done a thorough >background check on Reed) is interesting, but not because it >backs up the Aztec crash theory. Reed states that, "In 1948 they >were ordered to collect any foreign items they found (presumably >parts of a spaceship, if you buy the crash story), [and] bury >them eighteen inches deep." Does this make any sense? Would they >have not carted it all away, (a) so that no-one would ever find >it, and (b) so they could study it? If there was anything alien >on that mesa, then I cannot imagine the military / MJ-12 / the >Unholy 13 (a shout- out there to Major Randle) being so cavalier >/ stupid as to just bury it 18 inches down. Good lord - my dog >could find that! This account gives "crack team" a whole new >meaning, in that they must have been smoking the stuff if this >was the best they could do. So, Fred Reed? Worthless. The "OSS statement" is/was an error on "Scott's part"; it was erroneously published in his article, as well as your documentary. If your argument (to discount Reed's "so-called testimony") is based on the premise that the military is beyond culpability in acting without acumen, then said argument is on the same level of your opinion of the witness's statement. >I don't expect you to agree with me, but you asked for my >opinion, so there it is. >>Please cite a "plausible explanation" of what witnesses >>described as a "large disc shaped craft" that crash landed in >>New Mexico in 1948, along with a military retrieval and cover- >>up. (Please don't say "weather balloon"). >I don't think they saw anything at all, so I won't posit that it >was a weather balloon. >>>Scott also talks about over a thousand pages of documents. I've >>>seen a lot of them - I have yet to see any that are truly >>>relevant to Aztec, or prove that it was anything other than a >>>con. >>I'll reserve comment as I don't know what you've seen. >Fair enough. Let me say, however, that Scott told me in 2003, >and again when I visited him in 2004, that I had access to all >the relevant documents, so I presume that he meant the best ones >in terms of trying to prove the crashed saucer theory. If he >withheld documents that would help prove his case from the guy >who, at his and his investors's urging, was making a film about >the case, I don't know what to tell you. >A note here - never once did Scott interfere in the filmmaking >process. He was an interviewee, and facilitated our access to >documents and locations (El Vado radar base), nothing more. I >had complete editorial control, and I do not mean, in any way, >to suggest otherwise. This is why I like Scott so much, even >though we've wound up on opposite sides of the Aztec fence. >><snip> >>>>>My conclusions (to date) can be found at my blog: >>>>>www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com ><snip> >>>>This is an all too familiar path you're on Paul; if I may, I >>>>would suggest taking Scully, Newton and Gebauer out of the >>>>picture for the moment - look at the other 60 direct and >>>>indirect witnesses that have validated the Aztec Incident. >>>To discount Scully, Newton and Gebauer is to make the fatal >>>error of pulling the stake from the corpse. Aztec researchers >>>make it over and over again. There would be no Aztec story >>>without Scully, Newton and Gebauer. Therefore, the investigation >>>hinges upon their credibility. >>Scott first heard about Aztec during a business trip to the area >>from locals that were going hunting; that story didn't originate >>from Frank Scully. The stumbling block, or more accurately, >>Paul, "your stumbling block, as I see it" is your fixation on >>Scully, Newton and Gebauer, and while we're at it, J.P. Cahn. >>There are "independent witnesses" who don't know each other who >>have described the same chain of events, people, craft etc., and >>they had nothing to do with S, N & G. >The above proves nothing, other than, perhaps, that Scott's >buddies were pulling his leg which, in the absence of any >evidence to the contrary, makes as much sense (more, in my >opinion) than the crashed flying saucer story. And, again, >Scully et al are a stumbling block that the Aztec proponents >have not been able to get over (Scott has tried, as anyone who >read his article, or saw my film, would know, so this criticism >is not directed at him), so they just step around it and pretend >it doesn't exist. That's hardly being objective. Scott's buddies? Are you speaking of the individuals he's uncovered via hard work, research and investigation? I have no doubt that relationships have evolved with some, but making it sound like some of his "old buddies" are the "source" of the "few declarations" that have been publicized is impertinent. >You keep tossing the term "60 direct and indirect witnesses" >around. But where are they? Scott's article laid out five, that >I've dealt with (and, in the case of Farley and Nolan, will >comment on further below). Scott, has rightfully been protective of his work, and hopefully will be until it's completed. >There are no such things as "direct" and "indirect" witnesses, >anyway. There are witnesses, ie. people who saw the event, or >participated in some aspect of it afterwards (like a cover-up), >and then there are people who are, at best, "hearsay" witnesses. >There's a reason that this latter group don't get to testify in >very many trials (although there are very specific, and >carefully constrained exceptions, to the hearsay rule). As much >as I know you don't think we're in a court, I will nevertheless >quote from Black's Law Dictionary (6th edition), about >witnesses, just so, again, I can be clear here, and avoid all of >these misunderstandings I seem to be having as of late: Pardon me, again I was using "lay" terms, not courtroom terminology. Yes, we're not in court, but if it makes you feel better, when Scott "completes" his investigation, I'm sure he will welcome any all "skeptical eyes" to scrutinize his sequitur. >"Witness - In general, one who, being present, personally sees >or perceives a thing; a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness. One >who testifies to what he has seen, heard, or otherwise observed >(note that "heard" refers not to stories told, but to sounds, >like "he heard a gun fired at about 11:57 pm")" >"Hearsay - A term applied to that species of testimony given by >a witness who relates, not what he knows personally, but what >others have told him, or what he has heard said by others... The >very nature of the evidence shows its weakness, and, as such, >hearsay evidence is generally inadmissible unless it falls >within one of the many exceptions which provides for >admissibility." >>As I mentioned earlier, try to omit Scully, Newton and Gebauer, >>doing that will also take Cahn out of the picture, and focus on >>the "eyewitnesses not connected" to those men. Some of Scott's >>witnesses have asked that their names be kept confidential, and >>I know he's been advised not to divulge to many names as to not >>corrupt his investigation. >Frank, it's just a difference between how you and I do things, >but until those witnesses are made public, they are worthless. >For all it's problems, the one thing you can say about Roswell >is that the "witnesses" are not shy. So why so shy about the >Aztec witnesses. Truth and secrecy don't mix. (Note - I place >"witnesses" in quotations here because some, like Marcel, were >witnesses, while most were not, at least not in the proper sense >of the term, as outlined above). The value of a witnesses' testimony is not predicated on whether it's in the public arena or not. Personally, I wish Scott wouldn't have made any witness names public. I don't believe, to use the analogy your so fond of, that he should present his case until he can do so in it's entirety; I present "you" as my "best evidence" in that regard. >>>>Surely, you don't think they were all part of some grandiose >>>>con-game while fighting the precipitates of old age?! >>>No, although one should never discount the possibility that >>>people are either pulling your leg, or telling you what you want >>>to hear, or simply agreeing with leading questions... >>I give Scott more credit then that as a researcher/investigator, >>and the variety of independent witnesses who've retold the same >>account gives credence to the event. >Until we've seen the transcripts of his interviews, which I >presume he taped (a must for any oral historian or interviewer), >we can't know, can we? Further, Nolan and Farley were both in >very bad health, by Scott's own account. Nolan had had six >strokes, and Farley was dying of respiratory disease. I'm not >going to go into a long discussion here about what things like >that can do to your memory, or your competence to offer >testimony, other than to: >a) quote from Heart and Stroke Foundation's, which states in >"Memory Loss After Stroke" that memory loss is a common side >effect of strokes, and that one common reaction to having a >memory problem is "Confabulation, which means trying to 'cover >up' the memory problem. The 'cover up' can take the form of >excuses. Or the person may embellish (make up) stories to >fill gaps in his / her memories. People who confabulate may not >be aware that their stories are not completely true"; and >b) sadly relate that my fiance's father had a stroke (only one) >in November. It's sent a previously strong and articulate man >into a nursing home, where he believes he's still living on the >farm, has trouble recognising his own daughter, has trouble >remembering the simplest things, and has lost track of time and >space (ie. asking where X has wandered off to, when he hasn't >seen X in a year). It's sad, but it's real. Nolan had had six; >Farley was dying. At best, whatever they said is suspect, and >needs corroboration. >I won't even begin to go into the possibility that untrained >interviewers may taint any conversation with witnesses like >these. Again, I know you'll disagree, but there is a methodology >for things like this for a reason. >There is one final reason I am suspicious of these interviews, >but it's personal (nothing to do with Scott!), so I won't go any >further, other than to say that Scott wasn't the only person >involved in the interview, and I have no faith in the >objectivity of that other person (who is, for the record, a >thoroughly nice man who definitely qualifies as a "believer"). So to surmise: Sticking with just the few witnesses mentioned, rather then "consider" the possibility that the "death bed" declarations of "independent witnesses" and corroboration of said declarations by the "similarities" in each account has "something to do with the content," i.e., that a "disc shaped craft" came down in Hart Canyon, you choose to believe it was either some grandiose "conspiracy hoax," or the delusions of "elderly stroke victims?" (Gives a new definition to the term, "believer"). >>>Until some solid evidence can be brought forward that indicates >>>Aztec was anything other than a hoax, a couple of "eyewitnesses" >>>are not enough to counterbalance the clear evidence that it was >>>all a con. ><snip> >>I had assumed that you were more informed of Scott's research, >>particularly since you produced a documentary on the event. >>Might I suggest rereading his article, and sending him a query; >>he might not divulge all the names, but certainly can give many >>accounts; of course, I would imagine "to you" these would be >>"nameless informants" and might even add to the "hoax conspiracy >>theory"; however, I urge you to keep an "open mind" and give it >>a shot-you might be surprised! >Frank, if I didn't believe you to be a good guy - sincere in your >views, no matter how wrong I am convinced they may be - I >would be mildly insulted by the conclusion that, because we >disagree, I haven't done my homework, or that I would make a >film without doing the research. >Hmm... Actually, I do find that last bit insulting, at least the >part that impugnes my professional competency as a filmmaker, >but I'm learning that, in ufology, that's apparently part of the >mix, so I'll move on. Paul - no insult intended; again, I only respond to what you choose to share. With your post here, as well as on Rich's site, I now know, that you are much more "enlightened" about Scott's work on Aztec, then you previously indicated. And I certainly am a "good guy," if you don't believe it, "just ask me!" "Impugning" by the way has nothing to do with Ufology, it is a most "human trait." (Pun intended). >>>I'd love to see a detailed response to my critiques of various >>>critical elements of the Aztec case. So far, nothing. >>Aside from the "all to familiar" digs on S, N & G, what >>critiques do you have? >Frank, the critiques have been there for all to see - for >example, check out my blog on the radar bases, which, >apparently, you haven't bothered to read, but which Scott and >others have claimed provides proof of a crash at Aztec (see >Scott's MUFO paper). >And I'm not the one doing my homework?? Admittedly, I haven't read all of the content in regards to Aztec on your Blog; I respond to "what you say, where you say it." >For those who want to see what I've written, as opposed to what >others say I have, or have not, written, I again direct you to >my blog at www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com. Don't take my word for >it here, or Frank's - look for yourself. >>>And there's the fundamental problem with the Aztec proponents - >>>like Mina, they believe there is good in Dracula, despite all >>>the evidence to the contrary, and even though everyone else can >>>see him for what he is - a monster. >>In the end Paul there is only the data-it is neither good nor >>bad, it just is. >Frank, this is just ridiculous (or, as you might say, >"nonsensical"). Of course there's good data and bad data. The >objective observer is capable of telling the difference - that's >why things like rules of evidence, and oral research >methodology, come in handy. >Of course, to the "believers", to extend (and flip around) the >original analogy of this thread one more time, those things seem >to be the ufological equivalent of holy water to a vampire. Paul given your background, it's no surprise that you think as you do; of course there's nothing wrong with it either; however, this work is very much like archaeology, in the sense that we try to cull bits and pieces of information to assemble the larger picture. Think of Stan at LSU in 1978 when talking to a TV station director when he stumbled across the lead for Jesse Marcel. Think of how the "CT memo" was discovered etc. Think of the "first airing of "Unsolved Mysteries" show on Roswell and the flood of witnesses that responded to it. These little "bits and pieces" at first glance seem trivial, and some are; however, I often wonder where "Roswell" would be, as far as the public's "collective consciousness" is concerned had Stan not called Jesse the next day.....
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:20:38 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:16:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:47 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >The trouble here is that few are claiming that sleep paralysis >answers all abduction cases. It does explain some. Besides, >there is a type of sleep paralysis that does, in fact, affect >people who are wide awake and involved in other "non horizontal >activities." It's called cataplexy and before anyone runs off to >look it up, I will point out that it is always associated with >narcolepsy. No one, as far as I can tell, has ever done any >research into the number of abduction witnesses who are also >narcoleptic (though I will speculate that the number is quite >small). Cataplexy is not a form of sleep paralysis, though it may involve the same neural mechanism (brainstem inhibition of spinal motor neurons). In my admittedly rather old and out-of- date copy of Kandel & Schwartz's "Principles of Neural Science", Dennis D Kelly describes cataplexy as "an abrupt loss of muscle tone, a swoonlike reaction..., during which the patient may fall to the ground and lie there, conscious, for several minutes. Cataplexy usually occurs when the patient becomes emotionally excited, for instance, during laughter or sexual excitement." Kelly then adds: "Two other less frequent symptoms of narcolepsy are sleep paralysis, a brief inhibition of muscle tone during the transition from wakefulness to sleep and vice versa, and hallucinations (visual or auditory) at the beginning of sleep. The latter symptoms occur in many normal people, but are exaggerated in narcoleptics." This should help to illustrate why sleep paralysis, when strictly defined, is phenomenologically separate from cataplexy. It should also illustrate that sleep paralysis and hallucinatory imagery are strictly separate entities, though they may sometimes occur in association with one another. I believe it's important to resist the sort of category inflation which is endemic in the psychological literature, in which categories become ever more loosely defined, encompass an ever greater range of phenomena, are less and less supported by evidence, and have little or no predictive value. >The point is that some abductions, but by no means all, can be >explained by sleep disorders. I agree, provided we adhere to a strict definition of sleep paralysis, and acknowledge that actual explanations will in most cases be multi-factorial - that is to say they will involve two or more additional factors, such as hypnagogic/hypnopompic
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imagery In People Reporting Abduction [was: From: Will Bueche <willbueche.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:07:35 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:21:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Imagery In People Reporting Abduction [was: >From: Sheryl Gottschall <gottscha.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:18:55 +1000 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas Are As Terrifying As The Real Thing <snip> >Did anybody actually read the paper mentioned in that story? >Its titled, Psychophysiological Responding During Script-Driven >Imagery In People Reporting Abduction By Space Aliens, at: >http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/spacealiens.pdf You may also be interested in the longer draft of the paper which was distributed to the media in advance of the publication of the edited version. http://johnemackinstitute.org/0.zip 2.7 MB file size (each page of this PDF was scanned as an image, thus the large size). Save this file if you are at all interested, because I expect with the edited version having been published this original draft isn't widely seen anymore. Just skimming this again makes me angry about the way the paper is written, the way it is spun. Look at the wording on page 10: "All abductees reported at least one episode of sleep paralysis accompanied by hypnopompic hallucinations, usually figures hovering near their beds..." If the study was meant to be impartial, it *should* say "All abductees reported what this researcher believes may be episodes of sleep paralysis accompanied by hypnopompic hallucinations." In the same paragraph he describes beings that were likely described to him as "standing around" as "hovering around." You've got to respect the way he uses connotations (in this case, the connotation of unsubstantiality inherent to the word "hover") to spin the descriptions. There are also assertions in this paper which have been shown to be false or at the very least misleading (not only by me, but by a pair of papers written at Budd Hopkin's organization). For example there is a section where he says that abductees have preexisting new age beliefs (on page 5 of the rough draft). What he doesn't say is that he evidently isn't referring to his own 10-person study sample, which included people who at the time of their first consciously known experiences described themselves as a "recovering Catholic", a right-wing "ditto-head", and a person raised without any religious background whatsoever. And that's just the 3 subjects who we know. If we knew who the other 7 subjects were, I wonder if they would say that their backgrounds were as inaccurately reported? Who fact checked this paper? Why is it that the 3 people who took part in the study who then actually read the study (which was not sent to them, by the way - participants had to hunt it down on their onw) were all surprised that they were misrepresented? (When McNally says that abductees have preexisting new age beleifs he is actually referring to his 2003 book, which evidently refers to some kind of large scale survey - not sure by whom). What can be said about beliefs is that by the time McNally surveyed the subjects in his study, they held beliefs that McNally would call "new age." For example, he includes as evidence belief in "alternative/herbal remedies", which any visit to a Whole Foods Supermarket could tell you is hardly a sign that someone is a dancing naking in the mud. Similarly some categories are combined, and I have to wonder why: 70% (7 of the 10 subjects) believe in "tarot cards/foretelling the future". Thanks to the slash mark they either expressed a belief in the ability to fortell the future, or they expressed a belief in Tarot Cards. He mixes the two together, and that's a rather bold move since one is a widely entertained possibility and the other is, well, flaky. Myself, for example, I believe it is quite likely that precognition is real. I also think it is quite likely that Tarot Cards are bullshit. But lump them together with a slashmark as he did, and he again helps to create an impression that his subjects were not as discriminating as they could be. On the next page he mentions that "with the aid of quasi- hypnotic memory recovery techniques, 80% of the abductees reported recovering further, detailed memories of alien encounters." What he doesn't say is that he had to use the term "quasi-hypnotic memory recovery techniques" because some of the subjects had never been hypnotised. The vague term "quasi- hypnotic memory recovery techniques" which lacks any footnote to explain further, evidently included my use of Reiki, or perhaps it includes people talking to their therapists. Who knows. It doesn't say!
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:27:20 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:23:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Sparks >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:47 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:44 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:42:34 -0500 >>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >>>>The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >>>>category. >>>>The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >>>>which you can find delineated at the National Library of >>>>Medicine (and other venues). >>How anybody can claim that abductions rest with complicated >>sleep disorders is beyond me. There are literally hundreds of >>cases where the people aren't in bed, but are driving, walking >>etc. There are loads of cases where more than one person is >>abducted at a time. Now will we hear about a new contagious >>disease.. sleep paralysis that occurs when people are driving or >>doing other non horizontal activities? >The trouble here is that few are claiming that sleep paralysis >answers all abduction cases. It does explain some. Besides, >there is a type of sleep paralysis that does, in fact, affect >people who are wide awake and involved in other "non horizontal >activities." It's called cataplexy and before anyone runs off to >look it up, I will point out that it is always associated with >narcolepsy. No one, as far as I can tell, has ever done any >research into the number of abduction witnesses who are also >narcoleptic (though I will speculate that the number is quite >small). Cataplexy occurs during normal sleep not in narcolepsy. It is "sleep paralysis." >The point is that some abductions, but by no means all, can be >explained by sleep disorders. Where is _my_ point, all deleted now, that UFO abductions almost always have beginnings, middles, and ends? Whereas dreams are almost always fragmentary with no beginnings or endings like an abductee being abducted by aliens, taken aboard a UFO, then returned to car or home or wherever. >>>>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>>>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>>>of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >>>>eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >>>>common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >>>>creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >>>>"take them away." >>I have seen no examples that sleep paralysis has produced >>accounts just like abductions any more than magnetic fields >>have. >Well, then let's take a look around and see if we can find some >examples for you. First is Pat Roach, the Utah woman who said >that she and a number of her children had been abducted. She >said that she awakened, believed there had been an intruder in >the house, then called the police. Over the next two years she >became convinced that the intruders had been alien creatures. <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Secrecy News -- 03/29/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:36:19 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:27:42 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/29/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 28 March 29, 2005 ** HYUNDAI AND THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM ** A NEW COUNTERINTELLIGENCE STRATEGY ** GAO URGES MORE COMPLETE DOD REPORTING ** SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WMD COMMISSION REPORT HYUNDAI AND THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM The Congressional Research Service made headlines in South Korea last week with a renewed allegation that cash payments provided to the North Korean government by South Korea's Hyundai corporate group between 1999 and 2003 may have been used to support the North's clandestine uranium enrichment program. "Larry A. Niksch of the Congressional Research Service (CRS)... said in his Feb. 22 report [that] Hyundai funds went into accelerating North Korea's secret HEU development program," Chosun Ilbo reported on March 24. See "Hyundai Helped Fund N.K. Uranium Program: Expert": http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200503/200503240018. html Similar allegations have been presented by Mr. Niksch in previous CRS reports. But the February 22 CRS report cited in the Chosun Ilbo story may be found here: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB98045.pdf A NEW COUNTERINTELLIGENCE STRATEGY The National Counterintelligence Executive (NCIX) yesterday unveiled a new counterintelligence strategy, approved by the President on March 1. A copy of the deliberately vague "National Counterintelligence Strategy of the United States" may be found here: http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/cistrategy.pdf The "seven pillars" of counterintelligence strategy were enthusiastically described by NCIX chief Michelle Van Cleave in a March 5 speech here: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/03/ncix030505.pdf GAO URGES MORE COMPLETE DOD REPORTING In a splendid example of intelligent oversight, a Government Accountability Oversight (GAO) study released yesterday identified several defects in the way that the Department of Defense (DOD) reports to Congress on the progress of major weapons acquisition programs, and explained how those defects could be corrected. One of the problem areas flagged by GAO concerned pervasive overclassification by the Pentagon: "DOD classified about 50 percent of the [reports] it submitted to Congress in 2003, involving a total acquisition investment of $454 billion," the GAO noted. "However, only a small amount of data contained in each classified [report] is actually classified." "Because these [reports] are classified, special handling procedures must be used by those congressional staff with the appropriate clearances even to access the unclassified cost and schedule data. This practice also completely blocks access for those staff without clearances to the unclassified cost and schedule data." "As a result, congressional oversight of DOD's adherence to established cost and schedule baselines is unnecessarily constrained," the GAO stated. GAO recommended, and DOD concurred, that classification controls should be much more selectively applied. See "Defense Acquisitions: Information for Congress on Performance of Major Programs Can Be More Complete, Timely, and Accessible," Government Accountability Office Report No. GAO-05- 182, March 2005: http://www.fas.org/sgp/gao/gao-05-182.pdf SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WMD COMMISSION REPORT The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction is supposed to report this week to the President, providing its assessment of U.S. intelligence on WMD and its recommendations for needed reforms. Considering that the recommendations of last year's 9-11 Commission -- notably including intelligence budget disclosure - - have been rejected or not fully implemented, one may wonder about the likely impact of the latest Commission. Several impudent questions about the forthcoming WMD Commission report were posed by myself for the Nieman Watchdog, a project of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. See "The WMD Commission and Intelligence Reform," March 28, linked from here: http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/ _______________________________________________ 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 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:40:18 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:29:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:44:46 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research ><snip> >Martin weighs each assertion that any of them make, and tries >to assess how reliable it might be. Do you do that with your >whistleblowers? Hi Greg, Based on the post by Dr. Salla to which you were replying, the obvious answer is that what you have described is approximately 180 degrees opposite Dr. Salla's approach. Questioning the sincerity or reliability of a whistleblower risks exposing the entire issue to ridicule, and guilt-by- association ad hominem attacks. Nope, one mustn't question the whistleblower... they must all hang together... as it were. <g>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:06:37 EST Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:35:31 -0500 Subject: Re: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" - Sparks >From: Terry Groff <terrygroff.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:59:29 -0600 >Subject: Greer "Peter Jennings Defrauding" >Source: UFO-Disclosure - Disclosure Of The Truth About UFOs http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UFO-Disclosure/message/4459 >Peter Jennings Defrauding: Inside The Abc News UFO Documentary >Hoax >[Or Pot Calls Kettle Black --ebk] >By Steven M. Greer MD >Director, The Disclosure Project >March 2005 <snip> >the corrupt Big Media has defrauded the American people, from <snip> >several hundred top secret military and government witnesses to >UFO events and projects. <snip> >These are hundreds of military, government and corporate >insiders who have been identified by us over the past 14 years. >They range from Generals, to Astronauts, to senior FAA officials <snip> >high-level government and >military insider whistle-blowers who could credibly blow the lid <snip> >Obenhaus and Jennings really wanted to do a human interest story >including anecdotal civilian witnesses, man-in-the-street >interviews and the general silly season and carnival atmosphere <snip> >bulk of the 'documentary' being interviews with UFO >personalities, debunkers and the carnival atmosphere of UFO >hotspots like Roswell. <snip> >Using the ruse of media 'objectivity', ABC >News would asymmetrically show, say, a Harvard scientist skeptic >juxtaposed against a civilian who thought he had been sexually >assaulted by aliens! >The few, very brief interviews with pilots and military people >were overwhelmed by the spurious, carnival-like pseudo- >ethnography of the UFO subculture <snip> >the project was, rather, a disinformation piece <snip> >leaving out ALL high-ranking military, government and scientific >witnesses and evidence given directly by us to them? <snip> >unless it was their intent from the beginning to do a >disinformation and cover-up piece. >Why else would Peter Jennings state that the US Government has >been out of the UFO matter since 1969, when Project Blue Book >was closed, even though he and his team were directly given by <snip> >Why indeed. We have received a CIA document from 1991 that >clearly states that the CIA has contacts in the Big Media to >chan ge, kill or spin stories. From this document, dated 20 <snip> >And from a CIA document regarding the psychological warfare >implications of UFOs, we find a reference to Disney Studios, now >the parent company of ABC, being used as a source for doing >cartoon-like portrayals of the subject for psychological warfare >purposes. Can we be surprised ABC News has, again, defrauded the >American people - only pretending to do news and real >investigative reporting when in reality they are purveying >disinformation to an accepting public? <snip> >courageous >military whistle-blower testimony that The Disclosure Project >and others have identified. <snip> >Additionally, please contact the FCC and register your complaint >regarding the transparent fraud perpetrated by ABC News on the >American public. <snip> >division that perpetrated this fraudulent report on the American <snip> >Steven M. Greer MD Greer is mad that ABC did not foolishly swallow his sugar-coated and attractive poison pill. ABC didn't take the bait. Let's do a psychological warfare propaganda theme analysis. The military is "courageous" and is never criticized here. But the CIA front, ABC/Disney, has "defrauded the American people" with "psychological warfare" and "disinformation" foisted on the "accepting public." What is the underlying message here? Military witnesses are always good and "courageous." But the "civilians" are equated with "silly season and carnival." It is a "civilian" who tells of being "sexually assaulted by aliens!" Pilots (military and ex-military) and military witnesses are credible but the others are "spurious" and "carnival-like." Roswell is equated with a "carnival atmosphere" and that impression is not rebutted or contested here. None of the credible "military" witnesses are said in this message to support Roswell (a very very few might claim to, but we wouldn't know it from reading this message). Is it clear now where this is coming from? Military good. CIA bad. Civilian bad. Roswell bad. Got it? When did all this start? Oh round about 1993 when an ex-CIA man got the gears going for a Congressional investigation of the USAF coverup of the Roswell UFO incident. CIA vs. the Air Force, you see. How was the Air Force to know who was really behind it all? What was the AF to think? Of course, others had been pushing the Roswell USAF coverup theme for some years prior to this. Suddenly lo and behold, who then shows up? The ultimate spoiler and stinker who has ensured that for generations to come there will _never_ be a Congressional investigation or hearing on the Air Force and UFOs or the AF and Roswell, because all the
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:29:31 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:43:20 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Maccabee >From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:17 +0000 >Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:20:54 -0300 >Subject: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >>In a recent presentation at the 14th International UFO >>Congress and Film Festival, Laughlin, March 6-12, Jaime Maussan >>showedsome amazing footage of fleets of UFOs composed of dozens >>andeven hundreds of them. Thew footage was shot by regular >>citizens in several parts of Mexico in the last 6 months or so >>and sent to him, as he has a nation-wide weekly TV program. >>The most amazing one was shot on February 27, about a month >>ago, in Mexico City neighbouring location, by Arturo Robles >>Gil. It shows some 200 spheres in movement in the sky, after >>some time completely still. >>Other footage was also amazing, as they show fleets in >>formation and with the spheres changing position, at high >>speed, between clouds. This material could hardly be faked. <snip> >The most important and trascendental is certainly the March 5, >2004 UFO flotilla encountered by the Mexican Air Force Merlin >C26A crew over the Campeche aerial space, a dramatic incident >that surprised the international media and the world. >A revealling graphic document released by the Mexican Department >of Defense itself in an unprecedent historic meassure in favour >of Ufology. >And you Ademar as a dear friend of the Mexican ufo research, >received the scoop for Brazil and conducted a wonderful >coverage of the case through your UFO magazine and collague >researchers. >We both were aware of the deep impact of the story among the >people in our countries, a case that trascended frontiers and >was published in almost every language in many countries and >released by news services and tv networks all over the world. >Despite the usless efforts of an extremely reduced number of >skeptics who as you know tried unsuccessfully to disqualify, >the Mexican Air Force UFO encounter has been undoubtely the top >2004 UFO story. It may be the top UFO story for 2004 in Mexico, but it has yet to be proven that a "flotilla" of UFOs was in the vicinity of the airplane. Anyone willing to take the time to read my detailed analysis will find that the initial radar target can be classified as a"True UFO" assuming no one comes up with an explanation (I am aware of no credible explanation). http://brumac.8k.com/MexicanDOD5Mar04 download the Word document - 4.4 MB. A reader of the analysis will also find that the 'FLIR lights' - actually 'hot spots' detected as infrared radation - that seemed to move along with the airplane were actually many tens of miles to perhaps a hundred miles away. Estimates are based on triangulation techniques explained in the paper. The Mexican Air Force claimed it could not identify the lights. Since then identifications as ground lights - including oil field fires - have been proposed. The only way to refute or confirm these hypotheses would be to carry out a simple experiment with the same airplane and FLIR system, namely, re-fly the flight or something similar - as I suggested directly to an AF representative. This has not been done. Hence it would be premature to assert as factual the claim that the surveillance plane encountered a "UFO flotilla".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Balaskas From: Nick Balaskas <Nikolaos.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:55:06 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:44:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Balaskas >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >for the story. Hi Bruce! The simplest and easiest way to quickly determine if these organized gridded patterns are indeed evidence of artificial structures created by an advanced Martian civilization or simply image processing artifacts is to compare this single picture with a second picture of the same area inside Hale Crater. If the organized gridded patterns in both pictures closely match, then we have compelling evidence for a past (or present) advanced civilization on Mars. If the organized gridded patterns are present in both pictures and have similar complexity but do
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Boldman From: Brian Boldman <ufoah.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:26:05 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:47:31 -0500 Subject: Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? - Boldman >From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:36:06 -0400 >Subject: Re: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? >>From: Joe Harvat <jharvat.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:59:59 -0800 (PST) >>Subject: 1941 UFO Crash in Missouri? >>The latest issue of UFO Review (#9) mentions a website: >>http://www.seekingmoinfo.com/ >>that presents details of an alleged UFO crash in Missouri in >>1941. In looking at the site, I noticed all of the usual >>problems with such stories - records mysteriously missing, >>principals conveniently dead. Are any of our Listers aware of >>any compelling evidence that would lead us to believe this event >>is anything more than just another campfire tale? >Len Stringfield had told Charlette Mann's story but would not >tell anybody where she was. >Some few years after his death, I asked Len's wife if she would >provide contact information. She refused. She was saving Len's >files for a grandchild who might be interested at some time in >the future. >I started with the church in Cape Girardeau and evntually >located people who had know Reverend Huffman, a copy of his >obituary and then Charlette herself. She was most cooperative. >I also managed, with considerable effort, to locate the person >to whom Charlette's father had loaned the picture that her >grandfather had taken of the being. He was quite a mysterious >guy. I passed that information to Ryan Wood who spoke with him >in New Mexico. >Charlette has been filmed. I have no good reason, now, to doubt >her story. >Obviously I have no information on the location of the wreckage >or bodies. >I should note that it is well known that the Military Personnel >Records Center in St. Louis had a major fire. >One must recall that, according to the GAO, outgoing messages >from Roswell for July 1947 had been destroyed as well. Whether >this was to hide them or routine, I cannot say. Hi Stan, Joe, Is it possible that the date of this case is wrong? I refer to the possibility that this is the July 1947 case where something strange supposedly came down near there..possibly St. Joseph. This material is available for analysis, and has been by Colorado School of Mines, and others... supposedly weird stuff with perfectly round Fe spherules.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Shough From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:19:55 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:52:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Shough >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj These markings do look for all the world like a terrestrial farm-field patchwork or some analogue. But could they be an artefact of a digitally reconstructed image? I don't know how this HRSC camera works, but as it's stereo imaging I suppose the mission focus is on land contour rather than texture. Software might be used to generate the contours from a digital plane that is a grid of pixel elements laid down so as to simulate the camera perspective. It would then have to apply a smoothing/averaging algorithm to the underlying pixel structure. This would need to be applied pretty fiercely in shadowed and highlighted upland regions where the density contrast is large, but would not need to be applied in relatively featureless level areas where the contrast is low. When the final image is then "enhanced" by anomaly-hunters and the contrast is racked up, the unsmoothed grid-like structure emerges.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:39:29 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:54:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:38:06 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >I like that you challenge UpDaters with sensate reasoning, What in the world is "sensate reasoning" when it's at home? >but >you haven't, it seems, checked out the literature extant that >deals with 'sleep disorders'. I see, and how do you work that out, exactly? >I used a few examples, The Old Hag, and the 17th Century nuns of >Loudon episodes, to point those with a real interest in the >abduction phenomenon. And what does "pointing out those with a real interest in the abduction phenomenon" actually mean in plain English, may one ask? Come on Rich - stop flanneling. If you have evidence on sleep disorders which you think the rest of us have never heard of, then produce it in the form of citations, and then we can all assess them and analyze their relevance in a public forum. Unless, as I rather suspect, you don't have any citations because you haven't actually read anything. You're fond of coming up with excuses why you shouldn't actually have to do anything, but I'm not buying them. Science doesn't work like that. >In e-mail from Dr. John Mack to me a year ago - because he >thought it was our MediaWatch group that dissed his book - it >wasn't - we discussed the matter of culture affecting how >abductions are reported. (I'll put that correspondence online at >our blog and here, upcoming). >Again, I suggest that those who are truly interested in how >abductions have been reported over the historical longevity find >the literature for themselves so they can discuss it >intelligently, without rancor or the attempt to make >intellectual points of a vacuous kind.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Fleming From: Lan Fleming <lfleming6.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:59:11 -0600 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:55:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Fleming >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See:
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:01:30 +0100 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:57:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reason >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:29:09 -0500 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >Since when did you need a password to browse PubMed? >>http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/ >To see some abstracts (or have them sent to you, in toto), a >password is needed. >Otherwise seekers will only get a precis of the work listed. Yes, a precis is what you usually get when you browse an academic database, it's called an abstract. Are you saying the NLM is in the practice of mailing out hard
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:41:57 -0500 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:59:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 04:52:06 -1000 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >Aloha Greg, >Thanks for the analogy which does raise some of the problems we have >to grapple with. I think the analogy with North Korean defectors is a >very good one. I would say that analysis of whistleblower testimonies >from the black world has similar problems as analysing defectors from >North Korea in terms of lacking hard evidence aside from their >knowledge of what's going on in the North Korean system. However, the >analogy breaks down since we have hard evidence of North Korean >facilities in terms of spy satellites from the free world. We don't >unfortunately have spy satellites telling us what's happening in the >'black world' which is global in scope and controls possible 'spy >satellite' analogies such as free media, legislatures, executive >governments, etc. Michael, Your tone is quite wonderful, and I mean that. You're calm and friendly, no matter how strongly you're criticized. I admire that. I think you might want to read Bradley Martin's book. (Though I admit that not everyone shares my fascination with communist governments, or at least not enough to read 600 pages or so about North Korean.) The defectors Martin interviews don't talk about North Korean nuclear facilities, or anything else that spy satellites could verify. They talk about North Korean politics and society - things that don't show up on spy satellites, and about which we'd know very little if defectors didn't tell us about them. I'm talking about things like the operation of the North Korean prison camps, the extensive networks providing the supreme North Korean leader (first Kim Il-Sung, the founder of the state, and now his son, Kim Jong-Il) with pretty young women, the extent of starvation among the North Korean people, and, not least important, the number of children Kim Jong-Il has, what these children are like, and which one seems to be in the strongest political position. Kim Jong-Il's children matter a great deal, because the North Korean government appears to operate like a monarchy, with a child of the leader being groomed for succession. It matters a lot for the future which child might be selected (or which prevails in political maneuvering). Kim Jong-Il has a daughter, for instance, whose politics appear to be very moderate. There's no objective way to check the information that the defectors provide on these subjects. Spy satellites won't tell
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 30 Re: Kimball BlogPost On Wilbert Smith - Heath From: Gord Heath <gheath.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:49:40 -0800 Fwd Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:20:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Kimball BlogPost On Wilbert Smith - Heath I read Paul Kimball's post on Wilbert Smith with some interest as Smith is certainly a person of particular historical note in relation to Canada's official UFO history. I am not in any way an authority on Smith's history, and I certainly have no intention of debating the issues raised in Paul's post. I do however feel I may be able to provide an item of interest that relate to Project Magnet. I came upon this item while researching microfilm archives of the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper. I was at the time researching the disappearance of a US Air Force F-89 jet interceptor on an air defence mission over Lake Superior on November 23rd, 1953. (This is the "Kinross Incident" in which the jet was observed to merge with the unidentified craft it was pursuing =96 at which time, all radar contact, including IFF signal, and radio contact with the jet and crew was lost. The official explanation is that it was chasing an RCAF Dakota that was flying off course. This official explanation does not hold up to scrutiny as the pilot of the Dakota insists that he was never off course and the F-89 flight path isn't consistent with any such scenario even if it were off course.) Back to Project Magnet, it is a strange but perhaps meaningless coincidence that on the day that the F-89 disappeared, a photograph was published in the Toronto Globe and Mail showing the Ionospheric Observatory at Shirley's Bay, near Ottawa. The caption underneath the photograph reads as follows: "Saucer Station =96 The mystery of flying saucers is being investigated by scientists on the grounds of the Ionospheric Observatory of the Transport Department at Shirley's Bay, 10 miles northwest of Ottawa. "We hope to find something tangible about saucers," said W. B. Smith, engineer in charge." It strikes me as perhaps a little ironic that the very day the public was informed that the Canadian Government was performing research into flying saucers, was the same day that a US Air Force jet and crew were possibly captured by a confounded "flying saucer" and sent into oblivion. In my research into the "Kinross Incident" I have found many similar coincidences or related unsolved mysteries. Unfortunately, none seem to lead to any definitive explanation of the incident and the larger mysteries of UFOs, alien
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 CI: Down the Tubes? From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:40:59 -0800 (PST) Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:44:05 -0500 Subject: CI: Down the Tubes? Cydonian Imperative 3-29-05 Down the Tubes? by Mac Tonnies Complete article with photos: http://cydonianimperative.blogspot.com A photo released by Malin Space Science Systems (see S03- 00125p.gif) casts further doubt on the alleged artificiality of the Martian "tubes." [image] A three-dimensional tube? Not quite. Alternately know as "tunnels," the features garnered intense interest among Mars anomalists after Richard Hoagland pointed out a striking example showing what appeared to be, on first take, a shiny spherical object embedded in an clear elastic carapace. Although subsequent shape-from-shading renderings strongly suggested that the seeming "tunnel" was in fact a series of natural-looking rilles (and not a three-dimensional "tube"), the sheer number of subsequently discovered tunnel-like features invigorated an online community certain that high- resolution imagery from the Mars Global Surveyor would betray smoking-gun evidence of alien architecture on the Red Planet. [image] Seen up close, the supposedly arched "rungs" of a typical tube are less-than-impressive. Despite the very un-intelligent placement of many candidate tubes, the prospect of an ancient civilization using a globe- circling network of enormous cylinders to transport water, material and/or personnel (a la Percival Lowell's illusory canals) continues to exert huge appeal. And while there are indeed regularly spaced bright markings on the Martian surface that await explanation, notably in the Cydonia region, the number of "false positives" has hindered objective analysis. [image] Unexplained bright markings atop the Cliff in Cydonia. Tellingly, the tubes have become almost as well-known as standby surface anomalies such as the Face, and have become a staple interest among Mars-watchers with a planetary SETI bent. My first answer to those who inquire about the fabled "glass tubes" is that, contrary to their monicker, the features are neither glassy nor tubular. Of course, a vocal minority continues to claim otherwise. [image] An anomalous tube-like feature emanates from the eastern "wall" of the Fort. As with the "banyan tree" formations cited by Arthur C. Clarke as evidence of thriving Martian plantlife, NASA/JPL has been mostly silent on the tubes, prompting conspiratorial allusions by Web-based commentators. The new image, with its inherent sense of disappointment, has already become the victim of "coverup" accusations; some see it as a digital scam designed to nullify public enthusiasm. (Such an act is not without precedent. When the Mars Global Surveyor transmitted the first detailed image of the Face in 1998, JPL hurriedly subjected the picture to a high-pass filter that helped stifle the feature's humanoid likeness.) -end- Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:11:52 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:47:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:39:29 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:38:06 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >Come on Rich - stop flanneling. If you have evidence on sleep >disorders which you think the rest of us have never heard of, >then produce it in the form of citations, and then we can all >assess them and analyze their relevance in a public forum. <snip> >Citations, citations, citations..... Cathy: Just go to the venue I suggested, The National Library of Medicine, and type in "sleep disorders" in the search box. You'll get a vast list of relevant abstracts and papers. And if
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:14:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:49:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Reynolds >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:01:30 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:29:09 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >Are you saying the NLM is in the practice of mailing out hard >copies of manuscripts to people's home addresses? Would you >care to say how much they charge for this service? Cathy: The price varies depending upon the source of the abstract or
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 05:19:48 -1000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:52:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:12:45 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:53:50 -1000 >>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>Think of the precedent of pre-Meiji Japan when the elites >>discovered that the 'white barbarians' had all this >>technology that would overwhelm the best samurai military >>technologies. You'd want start a process of incorporating the >>white barbarians technologies while maintaining the illusion >>to your people that your warriors and war making prowess is >>second to none. I think the analogy holds for much of what is >>happening currently in the black world where technology is >>being developed and funding is being provided without much >>public awareness. >Michael! >Don't you know anything about Japanese history? >1853 - U.S. warships show up in a Japanese harbor, visible to >all. Japan is forced to open its borders, and determines to >adopt Western technology. >1895 - Japan emerges as a world power, by winning the Sino- >Japanese war, using Western technology. >In that intervening time, Western technology and even Western >clothes spread widely inside Japan. Massive Western industries >had to be built. Do you imagine the Japanese leaders could do >that in secret? The whole point is that they _didn't_ pretend >that their old ways were superior. They wanted to avoid being >colonized by the West, as other Asian countries were, and did >this by turning the entire country around. Western industry, >technology, and culture spread widely in Japan. It wasn't >secret. Japanese musicians even started to write Western-style >music. I've seen a wonderful catalogue from a Japanese music >publisher. It features a photo gallery of great composers of >past centuries. Along with familiar images of Mozart and >Beethoven and Bach, there's a fabulous photograph of a very >serious Japanese gentleman, wearing 19th century Western >clothes. During this period, Western culture even became >fashionable. >If you're this careless about Japanese history - which you could >learn about in four minutes on the Internet - why should we >believe you take any care with the contemporary stuff you talk >about? Aloha Greg, Your point is a fair one. I think the historical example that most closely parallels the strategic situation confronting the US and other major powers after their discovery of the truth surrounding ETVs and EBEs in the 1940s was pre-Meiji Japan. I think the situation in Prussia before German unification was also similar and I've used this as an example in paper I wrote on power politics and the ETH - see: http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-7.htm Both the Prussian and Japanese leaderships understood the challenge before them in terms of becoming modern states in an international system dominated by established imperial powers. For the Japanese the challenge was technological, cultural and political. For the Prussians, the challenge was mainly political. In both cases, the leaderships of Japan and Prussia had to politically centralize their populations and bring about reforms that ended the prior system of feudalism (Japan) and a decentralized system of German principalities. Now as you say, in Japan it was widely known that the 'white barbarians' had superior technology and that this required major political, cultural and technological reforms if Japan was to become a powerful state in the international system. The population was not kept in the dark about the white barbarians and their technologies since this was as you say something that propelled them to accept the political reforms. So I acknowledge that the secrecy analogy with the modern system is not that good here since the global general public are basically kept in the dark about the truth of the ETH. Nevertheless, I think that when national security strategists are confronted with a new international dynamic they look at historical examples such as pre-Meiji Japan and Bismarkian Prussia to get an idea of how smaller powers responded to more powerful actors in the international system. This would guide the development of new national security policies, reforming the global security system, setting up a strategic vision, and developing a target date for achieving strategic parity with the new actor (ETs) in the global system. I concede that the population of pre-Meiji Japan was not kept in the dark as much as we are about what is really happening in the national/global security exigency concerning the truth of the ETH, yet many other structural factors are similar which is why I use that example. If you can think of a better historical example of where a nation/city discovered the existence of more powerful neighbors and immediately set about widespread political, cultural, technological reforms while keeping their citizenry in the dark about the new powerful neighbor, I'll be delighted.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Holman From: Brett Holman <b.holman.nul> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:58:24 +1000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 06:54:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Holman >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >for the story. I agree with the others; looks like an imaging artifact. Other than the obvious pixellation, the fact that the orientation of the supposed features seems to align pretty well with the borders of the image is, to me, strongly suggestive of this - that's what you'd expect from a digitised image. They don't align with the borders of the JPEG, as you might normally expect, but that's because the image is in stereo, and is viewed from an angle. In fact, it's not really a direct image of the Martian surface at all, but rather a visualisation from a particular perspective of a digital elevation model computed from stereo images. So you've got (at least) two digitisation effects going on: those in the original images, and those from the computation of the DEM. Problems might also arise from the combining of the stereo images as well. See the URL below for some information about the whole process, and the actual images the stereo image is derived from. http://berlinadmin.dlr.de/Missions/express/first/24.11.2004_eng.shtml And looking at the original images, I can't see any sign of the claimed structures. So yet another Martian anomaly claim bites the dust..... Brett Holman --
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Gevaerd From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:31:21 -0300 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:02:40 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Gevaerd >From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:17 +0000 >Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:20:54 -0300 >Subject: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >>In a recent presentation at the 14th International UFO >>Congress and Film Festival, Laughlin, March 6-12, Jaime Maussan >>showedsome amazing footage of fleets of UFOs composed of dozens >>andeven hundreds of them. Thew footage was shot by regular >>citizens in several parts of Mexico in the last 6 months or so >>and sent to him, as he has a nation-wide weekly TV program. >>The most amazing one was shot on February 27, about a month >>ago, in Mexico City neighbouring location, by Arturo Robles >>Gil. It shows some 200 spheres in movement in the sky, after >>some time completely still. >>Other footage was also amazing, as they show fleets in >>formation and with the spheres changing position, at high >>speed, between clouds. This material could hardly be faked. <snip> >Of course the rest of the Mexican UFO flotilla sightings are >important as well and some of them are indeed spectacular, for >example the one from Mr. Arturo Robles Gil that you know, taped >in October 27, 2004 in Mexico city, a huge formation that looks >indeed kind of organic entity, strange and intriguing. >I have analyzed this footage and found that the formation >resembles a DNA configuration, coincidence or perhaps a sign ? >This sighting remains unexplained. >You must agree with me that perhaps one of the most impressive >is the UFO flotilla taped in Guadalajara, Jalisco by Mr. Miguel >Avila and Mr. Miguel Dominguez on July 10, 2004. More than 100 >objects in the sky at broad daylight in perfect formations >performing synchronized movements. <snip> Dear Santiago. Despite the controversy that remains about the March 2004 Yucatan flap, I have to admit that I have been impressed but the new flotillas filmed in Mexico and presented by Jaime. I have been following the debate and even published two long stories in the Brazilian UFO Magazine about the March 2004 Yucatan flap, with content pro/con its veracity. I believe that the case remains open and after talking to Jaime and Daniel Munoz in Laughlin, I kinda decided to wait for new info to surface. Jaime garantees that the flap is genuine, so does Daniel. However, this is a different story with the amazing new flotillas showed by Jaime in Laughlin. These are very impressive and have been videoed in broad daylight, clear and sharp, leaving very little room for mistakes and even fakery. You are absolutely right when you say that Mexico is the most important country these days for UFO fleets. I have never seen, anywhere else in the world, what has been videoed over your country. The Arturo Robles footage, for instance, of dozens of UFOs and a leader object emmiting heat, detected by further analyzis, is amazing. Those of you who haven=B4t seen them can check them out the Brazilian UFO Magazine website, where some of the footage is availabe for download: www.ufo.com.br/exclusivo/mexico/ The article is in Portuguese, but Listers can see the footage in small size files. Santiago, please, keep us posted of new findings in these cases. I have asked Daniel and Jaime to let me know when new things happen in Mexico, as I plan to go to your country and check things out, myself.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Ledger From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:56:31 -0400 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:05:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Ledger >From: Martin Shough <mshough.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:19:55 +0100 >Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >>Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >>They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >>lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >>http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >These markings do look for all the world like a terrestrial farm-field patchwork or some analogue. But could they be an artefact of a digitally reconstructed image? >I don't know how this HRSC camera works, but as it's stereo imaging I suppose the mission focus is on land contour rather than texture. Software might be used to generate the contours from a digital plane that is a grid of pixel elements laid down so as to simulate the camera perspective. It would then have to apply a smoothing/averaging algorithm to the underlying pixel structure. This would need to be applied pretty fiercely in shadowed and highlighted upland regions where the density contrast is large, but would not need to be applied in relatively featureless level areas where the contrast is low. >When the final image is then "enhanced" by anomaly-hunters and the contrast is racked up, the unsmoothed grid-like structure emerges. >Just a guess. Hi Martin, Nick, et al, The CCD reading it's own reflected printed circuit mosaic [or as Bruce puts it, seeing your own retina] or some other imaging result perhaps a product of imaging compression during the blowup seem to be the popular explanations for the unusual patterns on the surface. Perhaps so, but pushing the heck out of other Mars Express images doesn't yield the same mosaic or images. The irregularity of the the tiny artifacts, their haphazard linement and shapes are a bit unusual as well for some self-image pixels. Needs further analyses before the big blow off in my estimation. One thing though. These images have been up for several weeks [URLs were sent to me at least 2 weeks ago] if not longer so the April Fool's day explanation is probably not flyable. But I've a sneaking suspicion that this is a technical glitch.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Yturria From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:19:00 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:12:24 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Yturria >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:29:31 -0500 >Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >>From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:17 +0000 >>Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >>>From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO <gevaerd.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:20:54 -0300 >>>Subject: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >>>In a recent presentation at the 14th International UFO >>>Congress and Film Festival, Laughlin, March 6-12, Jaime Maussan >>>showedsome amazing footage of fleets of UFOs composed of dozens >>>andeven hundreds of them. Thew footage was shot by regular >>>citizens in several parts of Mexico in the last 6 months or so >>>and sent to him, as he has a nation-wide weekly TV program. >>>The most amazing one was shot on February 27, about a month >>>ago, in Mexico City neighbouring location, by Arturo Robles >>>Gil. It shows some 200 spheres in movement in the sky, after >>>some time completely still. >>>Other footage was also amazing, as they show fleets in >>>formation and with the spheres changing position, at high >>>speed, between clouds. This material could hardly be faked. <snip> >>The most important and trascendental is certainly the March 5, >>2004 UFO flotilla encountered by the Mexican Air Force Merlin >>C26A crew over the Campeche aerial space, a dramatic incident >>that surprised the international media and the world. >>A revealling graphic document released by the Mexican Department >>of Defense itself in an unprecedent historic meassure in favour >>of Ufology. >>We both were aware of the deep impact of the story among the >>people in our countries, a case that trascended frontiers and >>was published in almost every language in many countries and >>released by news services and tv networks all over the world. >>Despite the usless efforts of an extremely reduced number of >>skeptics who as you know tried unsuccessfully to disqualify, >>the Mexican Air Force UFO encounter has been undoubtely the top >>2004 UFO story. >It may be the top UFO story for 2004 in Mexico, but it has yet >to be proven that a "flotilla" of UFOs was in the vicinity of >the airplane. Anyone willing to take the time to read my >detailed analysis will find that the initial radar target can be >classified as a"True UFO" assuming no one comes up with an >explanation (I am aware of no credible explanation). >Since then identifications as ground lights - including oil >field fires - have been proposed. The only way to refute or >confirm these hypotheses would be to carry out a simple >experiment with the same airplane and FLIR system, namely, >re-fly the flight or something similar - as I suggested >directly to an AF representative. This has not been done. Just as an additional information in case you are not aware of. The Mexican Air Force has continued flying over that area as well as other areas of southern Mexico as part of their permanent antidrugs program, missions that have been performed for years in my country and has been increased during this administration. Never before or after the March 5, 2004 incident the Mexican Air Force has experienced, witnessed or encountered a similar phenomena nor similar objects or lights invisible to their eyes but detected by radar and FLIR systems. The mysterious lights/objects have not appeared again even that they are aware of this incident and alert to detect a new apparition. This has been reported and confirmed, period. Therefore we have our own confirmation of the March 5, 2004 UFO incident as legitimate. The Mexican Air Force is a military institution that will not, under any circumstance condition their programs, activities and duties to a request of a civilian for purposes not related to a national interest. They have higher priorities and will not subject themselves to prove anything based on this premise, we understand this perfectly and accept it as part of the proccess. To expect the Mexican Air Force or any other Air Force in the world to perform some test flight altering their programs just to prove a real UFO encounter took place is just an illusion and most probably will never happen. We must keep on mind what we are talking here and the consequences of every meassure taken. However the Air Force officials have been kind enough to inform us about their observations and findings during their subsequent surveillance flights over that area but as a courtesy and in the understanding that these are not official reports, just informations given to us as part of our direct communication in this new established relationship. We understand and accept our compromise with the Air Force, This relationship will be mantained following their rules and designs. They keep their leadership and command above all acts in this proccess and are willing to mantain the communication line open and the cooperation active but under their rules, this is understood and accepted. We are optimistic that important advances are coming to our Mexican UFO research with this trascendental communication line
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Smith From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:39:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:15:25 -0500 Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico - Smith >From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:17 +0000 >Subject: Re: UFO 'Fleets' Videoed Over Mexico >The most important and trascendental is certainly the March 5, >2004 UFO flotilla encountered by the Mexican Air Force Merlin >C26A crew over the Campeche aerial space, a dramatic incident >that surprised the international media and the world. >A revealling graphic document released by the Mexican Department >of Defense itself in an unprecedent historic meassure in favour >of Ufology. >And you Ademar as a dear friend of the Mexican ufo research, >received the scoop for Brazil and conducted a wonderful >coverage of the case through your UFO magazine and collague >researchers. >We both were aware of the deep impact of the story among the >people in our countries, a case that trascended frontiers and >was published in almost every language in many countries and >released by news services and tv networks all over the world. >Despite the usless efforts of an extremely reduced number of >skeptics who as you know tried unsuccessfully to disqualify, > the Mexican Air Force UFO encounter has been undoubtely the top >2004 UFO story. Oh yes, a very impressive example of prosaic phenomena being claimed to be otherworldly. Talk about a waste of time and effort! Still, it cannot be claimed to hurt ufology because it remains in the limbo between solved and unsolved due to the best efforts of stubborn "believers" who refuse to properly analyze a case which thankfully has enough data to be solved - except for Bruce's 1 radar target.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:04:27 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:17:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Maccabee >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:40:30 -0500 >Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >>Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >>They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >>lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >>http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >>for the story. >Bruce, >These look like digital image compression artifacts to me. I >don't know what compression scheme is used for these photos, but >I doubt it is garden variety JPEG. >What Mr. Skipper thinks is some sort of conspiracy to smooth >over and hide evidence is much more likely to be simple image >processing. >..Sorry, but no cigar. I don't know what digital image compression artifacts look like, but I would expect more regularity than appears in these images. I had thought that perhaps some strange reflection of the inner electronics in the lens of the camera could explain it. But then the anomalous image would be of the printed circuits, etc. that
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Maccabee From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:04:54 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:20:48 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - Maccabee >From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:47:40 -0600 >Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:09:44 -0500 >>Subject: Mars Desert Excavations >>They better have a good explanation for what appears in the >>lower left of the Hale Crater on Mars. See: >>http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj >>for the story. >Skipper describes the "secrecy agenda" as using... >"map type carpeting image tampering obfuscation"...ad nauseum. >What I see in his images are compressed images blown up beyond >any reason, and like Hoagland, using the inherent resulting >distortion to prove artificial structures. >and I must say that a phrase like "map type carpeting image >tampering obfuscation" read like "weapons of mass destruction- >related program activities"... a similar non-statement. >Skipper has a vivid imagination, and perhaps more time on his >hands than he asserts. >But hey, I could be wrong. There could very well be old cities >on Mars, and ESA may very well release images of same with all >kinds of "map type carpeting image tampering obfuscation", >rather than just not releasing such "provocative" images. >But I don't think so. >We'll have the answers on Mars in due course. Using highly >magnified and processed images to prove anomalies is premature >and unhelpful, in my opinion. I don't buy the "carpet cover up" hypothesis. However, I went to the ESA site for the original image and found the same stuff. It is not necessary to blow the images up. Sharp eyes can see some of these structures in the unblown up image: http://tinyurl.com/4dokq Look in the lower left area. A blowup of 2 or 3 of this good
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Secrecy News -- 03/30/05 From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:45:20 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:23:40 -0500 Subject: Secrecy News -- 03/30/05 SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2005, Issue No. 29 March 30, 2005 ** ISRAELI WHISTLEBLOWER VANUNU FACES NEW CHARGES ** IG REPORT ON RESEARCHER ACCESS TO BIOLOGICAL AGENTS ** NASA TO ASSESS IMPACT OF SPACE NUCLEAR REACTORS ** NORTH KOREA SLAMS THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE ISRAELI WHISTLEBLOWER VANUNU FACES NEW CHARGES Mordechai Vanunu, who was released from an Israeli prison last April after serving 18 years for disclosing secret information on Israel's nuclear weapons program and who has been seeking to leave that country, now faces new charges of violating a gag order prohibiting foreign press interviews. Y writes from Jerusalem: "You've probably heard that Mordechai Vanunu has been charged with violating the restrictions placed on him when he was freed from prison. The charges list 21 interviews he has given to the foreign media [...]. The restrictions were due to expire on April 21, but now the new charges and the pending trial will prevent him from leaving the country. Mordechai has hired Avigdor Feldman and Michael Sfard to defend him in this case. (The other day Daniel Ellsberg, Vanunu's longtime ardent supporter, was here and spoke at a press conference and on Israeli television. Very impressive.)" "I should point out that where the media refer to the restrictions as the terms of Vanunu's parole, they are mistaken. Vanunu is not on parole - he served his sentence in full. The restrictions derive from a British Mandatory state-of-emergency regulation." "Moreover, not a single word in any of the interviews went further - in terms of information re Dimona [an Israeli nuclear facility] etc - than the revelations he made to the Sunday Times in 1986, so they can hardly be said to affect Israel's security in 2005." "Some supporters (and Mordechai's brother Meir) advised him to keep quiet after his release, but Mordechai is not the sort of person who bends under pressure. I personally think that he was right to do what he did. If he'd kept shtum [silent] the government could have said, 'Aha, he's quiet here because he wants to leave, but if we let him out he'll start giving interviews all over the place and god knows what he'll say...' So long as the vindictive impulse continues to animate the system, Mordechai can't win." During World War I, Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany sought to curtail foreign travel by dissidents such as Albert Einstein, among others. Historian Fritz Stern writes that German authorities imposed the travel barriers on Einstein because they feared him as "a dangerous pacifist with international commitments and friendships." (Einstein's German World, Princeton Univ Press, 1999, p. 116). IG REPORT ON RESEARCHER ACCESS TO BIOLOGICAL AGENTS The Bioterrorism Act of 2002 prohibited scientists from gaining access to particularly hazardous biological agents and toxins (such as anthrax and Ebola virus) unless they had a legitimate need for them and had received authorization from the FBI. A new Justice Department Inspector General (IG) report reviewed the FBI's "security risk assessment" program for granting such authorization and found that previous backlogs of researcher requests had been largely reduced. Along the way, the IG report provides some new details about the mechanics of the FBI review process and the number of applications -- in the thousands -- that the Bureau has received for handling the restricted biological agents. "Our inspection showed that the FBI had 3,855 ... Applications pending in November 2003, but by June 2004, had reduced that number to 401. The FBI maintained a stable average monthly caseload of approximately 339 pending ... applications through December 2004 and was routinely processing the applications in 45 days or less." A copy of the new IG report, "Inspection of the FBI's Security Risk Assessment Program for Individuals Requesting Access to Biological Agents and Toxins," March 2005, may be found here (thanks to resourceshelf.com): http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/sra-bio.pdf NASA TO ASSESS IMPACT OF SPACE NUCLEAR REACTORS If one stood on top of a pile of all of the studies of space nuclear power that have been performed over the past twenty years, one would be several feet closer to Mars (at least during some hours of the day). Mars will come even closer now that NASA is undertaking a new programmatic environmental impact statement concerning the development of nuclear reactors for use in future space missions, as announced in the Federal Register today: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/03/fr033005.html As a technological enterprise, space nuclear reactors have been subject to a remarkable cycle of boom and bust over the past 50 years, as ambitious programs have been commenced every decade or so only to be terminated a few years later. The most recent major space reactor initiative was the SP-100 program, which was cancelled ten years ago after the expenditure of some $400 million. The U.S. did launch one space nuclear reactor in 1965; following 43 days of operation, it remains in orbit today. The Soviet Union launched dozens of nuclear reactors, several of which reentered the atmosphere, distributing measurable quantities of radioactive debris. Several other U.S. plutonium heat sources have also produced accidental releases of radioactive materials. Proponents note that space reactors hold the promise of dramatic enhancements in the scope, lifetime and effectiveness of space exploration activities. "Space nuclear fission reactor systems could enable exploration missions requiring substantially greater amounts of electrical power (on the order of many kilowatts of electricity), where currently available and reasonably foreseeable energy systems are likely to be inadequate. The ability to generate high levels of sustained electrical power regardless of location in the solar system would permit a new class of missions designed for longevity, flexibility, and comprehensive scientific exploration," according to the NASA Federal Register notice. NORTH KOREA SLAMS THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE The suggestion by a Congressional Research Service analyst that money from South Korea's Hyundai Group may have been diverted to support North Korea's nuclear weapons program, noted in yesterday's Secrecy News, was harshly dismissed by a North Korean spokesman yesterday. "Those arguments are not worthy of comment," the spokesman said before he proceeded to comment. "Those allegations showed clearly their ignorance and lack of common sense," the spokesman said, as quoted by Yonhap News Agency. "Our nuclear weapons were developed on the base of an independent economy." So there. See "N.Korea Dismissed U.S. Claim Funds were Siphoned for Nuke Program," Yonhap, March 29: http://tinyurl.com/4ybfo _______________________________________________ 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 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Hall From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:18:14 +0000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:27:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Hall >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:01:30 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:29:09 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>Since when did you need a password to browse PubMed? >>>http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/ >>To see some abstracts (or have them sent to you, in toto), a >>password is needed. >>Otherwise seekers will only get a precis of the work listed. >Yes, a precis is what you usually get when you browse an >academic database, it's called an abstract. >Are you saying the NLM is in the practice of mailing out hard >copies of manuscripts to people's home addresses? Would you >care to say how much they charge for this service? Cathy and List, I think Rich Reynolds has been caught with his bluff down. As you noted, his failure to ever provide citations that we can all look at makes it seem likely that he has none. As a professional abstractor/indexer for most of my adult life - including American Psychological Association and National Institutes of Health databases - I get the distinct impression that he doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to scientific databases. Further, he obviously hasn't studied - or comprehended - the abduction case database as to the form and structure of abduction reports, nor such things as the MIT conference at which clinical psychologists and scholars very knowledgable about sleep disorders, the Old Hag hypnopompic hallucinations, etc., expressed total puzzlement about abduction reports. There were some slight overlaps of details with some of the phenomena they knew about, but many differences. I had some very interesting conversations with a lot of the participants in the hallway at MIT, which as any conference attender knows is where a lot of the most important information exchange occurs. The 'experts' were not nearly so glib as Rich; they were deeply puzzled and had no easy answers.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:26:48 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:35:03 -0500 Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula - Kimball >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:29:48 -0800 >Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula >>From: Paul Kimball <Kimballwood.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:52:01 EST >>Subject: Re: The Aztec Case - Ufology's Dracula <snip> Good Day Paul, Et Al, >>No ill effects here, probably because I took a neutral stance at >>the time. As for those who have suffered, one could start with >>Frank Scully (but, as that is my "stumbling block" I'll leave >>him aside), and move straight to William Steinman and Wendelle >>Stevens, neither of whom, to the best of my knowledge, has any >>credibility with serious ufologists (anyone out there care to >>disagree? stand up and be counted). >Scully's book if I'm not mistaken, was a "bestseller." Moreover, >most of his "infelicity" came from one man-J.P. Cahn; whose >motives are dubious. Additionally, to disparage (saying this >while standing) a man or woman's entire body of work because you >disagree with a portion of it isn't prudent. What is more, I've >never met any "flippant" Ufologists. Frank: Yes, Scully's book sold well out of the gate (to call it a bestseller is a bit of a stretch), but it's what happened afterwards that counts. His book was thoroughly repudiated by both critics and scientists, and then largely ignored by anyone having anything to do with ufology. As for J. P. Cahn, I'd be fascinated to hear where you get the allegation that his motives were "dubious" from. Scully? In fact, Cahn was a respected reporter, who had done meticulous research into the Aztec case, something Scully neglected to do, and it caught up with him. And my point re: Steinman and Stevens stands, in terms of the credibility they have within ufology, which is what I was talking about. I haven't heard anyone jump to their defence. Have you? <snip> >>1. Virgel Riggs - I discount Riggs for the simple reason that he >>is not a witness. He wasn't at the alleged crash, and never >>claimed to be. >If we were in court, your assessment of Riggs' "testimony" would >be quite accurate; however, as I have repeatedly said before >we're not. I understand that you have a legal background, and a >"lawyer's eye"; that certainly is beneficial in Ufology; >however, in this stage of the game instead of a "courtroom >analogy," think "archaeology," where we are "digging" for the >most "minute clues." Frank, your analogy is hopelessly flawed. This is not archaeology - this is witness testimony. The proper analogy is a court of law, or at least the same methodology as a historian would apply to evidence, which is, again, very similar to that used in a court of law. I admit, however, that it is convenient for you to keep claiming we are not in a court, because, if we were, these witnesses would simply have no merit. >Riggs by the way has presented "military documents" >substantiating the "existence of" as well as "his association >with" the "un-named airman." He is very close to being found. Frank, as you say, I'm only responding to what I've seen. If Scott has new documents, let him bring them forward. If not, then why talk about Riggs at all? A good investigator would wait until all the evidence was in before publishing his conclusions. It's how you avoid making a fool of yourself. <snip> >>2. Anonymous - He's anonymous. I know you'll disagree, but for >>me there's nothing more to be said. His testimony is worthless, >>because we can't check it out. >See above. What "I" have said about you Paul, is that "I respect >your opinion, and your tenacity, as well as your skepticism, >which I believe is a 'healthy thing' in Ufology." I only wish more people involved in the Aztec case would employ some of that "healthy scepticism". <snip> >>3. Fred Reed - Now I will grant that Reed is the one of the >>three that claims to have been an actual witness. He maintained >>that he was ex-OSS, and then part of the "clean-up team" that >>was "sent to Aztec". His account, if it is to be believed (and >>one must ask whether Scott or anyone else has done a thorough >>background check on Reed) is interesting, but not because it >>backs up the Aztec crash theory. Reed states that, "In 1948 they >>were ordered to collect any foreign items they found (presumably >>parts of a spaceship, if you buy the crash story), [and] bury >>them eighteen inches deep." Does this make any sense? Would they >>have not carted it all away, (a) so that no-one would ever find >>it, and (b) so they could study it? If there was anything alien >>on that mesa, then I cannot imagine the military / MJ-12 / the >>Unholy 13 (a shout- out there to Major Randle) being so cavalier >>/ stupid as to just bury it 18 inches down. Good lord - my dog >>could find that! This account gives "crack team" a whole new >>meaning, in that they must have been smoking the stuff if this >>was the best they could do. So, Fred Reed? Worthless. >The "OSS statement" is/was an error on "Scott's part"; it was >erroneously published in his article, as well as your >documentary. If your argument (to discount Reed's "so-called >testimony") is based on the premise that the military is beyond >culpability in acting without acumen, then said argument is on >the same level of your opinion of the witness's statement. No, Frank, my argument is that no super secret group, which, according to Scott was made up of the best people they had (see my film, wherein he states, in essence, "they learned from Roswell, and so would not make stupid mistakes again."), would bury alien material in 18 inches of desert dirt, for the two reasons I cited. This is a point you seem to have missed, or for which you have no answer. Again, Reed's testimony is worthless as a result. <snip> >>>Scott first heard about Aztec during a business trip to the area >>>from locals that were going hunting; that story didn't originate >>>from Frank Scully. <snip> >>The above proves nothing, other than, perhaps, that Scott's >>buddies were pulling his leg which, in the absence of any >>evidence to the contrary, makes as much sense (more, in my >>opinion) than the crashed flying saucer story. <snip> >Scott's buddies? Are you speaking of the individuals he's >uncovered via hard work, research and investigation? Uh, no - it should be clear to all that I was referring to the "locals" with whom he went hunting, and who you stated were the ones who first told him the Aztec story. >>You keep tossing the term "60 direct and indirect witnesses" >>around. But where are they? Scott's article laid out five, that >>I've dealt with (and, in the case of Farley and Nolan, will >>comment on further below). >Scott, has rightfully been protective of his work, and hopefully >will be until it's completed. The truth, Frank, abhors a vacuum. If you're going to say you have 60 witnesses, then let people know who they are. If you're not willing to do that, then just talk about the information you are willing to release. Otherwise, all you're doing is issuing propaganda, which cannot be responded to, because you're the only one "with the info." This is not how a reasoned debate is conducted. We have five witnesses that Scott has made public. They are, until he makes the rest public, the only ones that are relevant. Any discussion of other witnesses is useless, because we don't know who they are. >>There are no such things as "direct" and "indirect" witnesses, >>anyway. There are witnesses, ie. people who saw the event, or >>participated in some aspect of it afterwards (like a cover-up), >>and then there are people who are, at best, "hearsay" witnesses. >>There's a reason that this latter group don't get to testify in >>very many trials (although there are very specific, and >>carefully constrained exceptions, to the hearsay rule). As much >>as I know you don't think we're in a court, I will nevertheless >>quote from Black's Law Dictionary (6th edition), about >>witnesses, just so, again, I can be clear here, and avoid all of >>these misunderstandings I seem to be having as of late: >Pardon me, again I was using "lay" terms, not courtroom >terminology. Yes, we're not in court, but if it makes you feel >better, when Scott "completes" his investigation, I'm sure he >will welcome any all "skeptical eyes" to scrutinize his >sequitur. The problem with "lay" terms is they have no precise meaning. They can mean whatever an individual wants them to mean. If ufology is ever to move forward, it needs to develop a proper methodology, and a standard set of terms, so that everyone is singing from the same choir. <snip> >The value of a witnesses' testimony is not predicated on whether >it's in the public arena or not. The value of a witnesses testimony can only be ascertained after that testimony has been made public, so that it can be tested for authenticity, credibility, and so forth. >Personally, I wish Scott wouldn't have made any witness names >public. I don't believe, to use the analogy your so fond of, that he >should present his case until he can do so in it's entirety; I present >"you" as my "best evidence" in that regard. Here I agree with you. An acceptable alternative would be to say, "here is the evidence we have discovered so far, which is sufficient to warrant further investigation/examination of the case." This is the stance that my film took. <snip> >>Nolan and Farley were both in very bad health, by Scott's >>own account... >So to surmise: Sticking with just the few witnesses mentioned, >rather then "consider" the possibility that the "death bed" >declarations of "independent witnesses" and corroboration of >said declarations by the "similarities" in each account has >"something to do with the content," i.e., that a "disc shaped >craft" came down in Hart Canyon, you choose to believe it was >either some grandiose "conspiracy hoax," or the delusions of >"elderly stroke victims?" (Gives a new definition to the term, >"believer"). It's not a question of belief, Frank. With respect, you obviously don't understand oral research methodology, the influence that an interviewer can have on testimony, particularly on an elderly interviewee, and the problems with memory in stroke victims. Until we see the transcripts of the interviews, we'll never know, will we, whether Scott asked leading questions or not, or how the witnesses answered. Take the Discussion about the 1980s testimony given to Stan Friedman by Robert Sarbacher. A transcript of that interview exists. We can look at it to determine the types of questions that Stan asked, whether he led Sarbacher to answers and tainted the interview, or whether he asked neutral questions and let Sarbacher provide the answers. We can also determine, to some degree, as I pointed out elsewhere on Updates, whether Sarbacher was being evasive, or forgetful, or whether he seemed to be answering the questions to the best of his ability. This is an absolute must for researchers to be able to judge the credibility of the testimony offered. To my knowledge, Scott has never released this information, although he talks at length about what Nolan and Farley said. To be blunt, that simply isn't good enough, particularly when there are reasonable concerns raised as to their competence to give testimony, and the objectivity of the interviewer. <snip> >>Frank, the critiques have been there for all to see - for >>example, check out my blog on the radar bases, which, >>apparently, you haven't bothered to read, but which Scott and >>others have claimed provides proof of a crash at Aztec (see >>Scott's MUFO paper). >>And I'm not the one doing my homework?? >Admittedly, I haven't read all of the content in regards to >Aztec on your Blog; I respond to "what you say, where you say >it." Then you haven't been responding to "what I say" as I referred people to my blog for a fuller explanation. I know it drives EBK nuts, but to simply repeat the information here when it exists elsewhere is a waste of his time in formatting it and mine in sending it. I wouldn't expect you to repeat everything verbatim that Scott wrote in his MUFON article - if you referenced it, as you did, I would go look it up and read it myself before I replied. <snip> >>>In the end Paul there is only the data-it is neither good nor >>>bad, it just is. >>Frank, this is just ridiculous (or, as you might say, >>"nonsensical"). Of course there's good data and bad data. The >>objective observer is capable of telling the difference - that's >>why things like rules of evidence, and oral research >>methodology, come in handy. >>Of course, to the "believers", to extend (and flip around) the >>original analogy of this thread one more time, those things seem >>to be the ufological equivalent of holy water to a vampire. >Paul given your background, it's no surprise that you think as >you do; of course there's nothing wrong with it either; however, >this work is very much like archaeology, in the sense that we >try to cull bits and pieces of information to assemble the >larger picture. Again, it's nothing like archaeology, unless you're actually conducting archaeological research. It is historical research, for which there is a methodology, which is, when dealing with witness testimony, very similar to that used in a court of law. You can only see the larger picture if you follow the proper methodology and test the evidence as you find it; otherwise, each time you deviate from the methodology, you skew the picture, and move further from the truth. >Think of Stan at LSU in 1978 when talking to a TV station >director when he stumbled across the lead for Jesse Marcel. >Think of how the "CT memo" was discovered etc. Think of the >"first airing of "Unsolved Mysteries" show on Roswell and the >flood of witnesses that responded to it. >These little "bits and pieces" at first glance seem trivial, and >some are; however, I often wonder where "Roswell" would be, as >far as the public's "collective consciousness" is concerned had >Stan not called Jesse the next day..... Yes, and think of what would have happened if (a) Stan had gone public with an anonymous witness (Marcel) instead of sharing that information, as he did, with other researchers; (b) Stan et al had not kept records of their interviews with Marcel and others so that future ufologists wouldn't have to rely on Stan et al's recollection of what they said, but could go directly to the source, even after the witness was dead; and (c) Stan et al had not conducted extensive background checks into Major Marcel and the other witnesses (of which, again, with Roswell, there were nowhere near as many as some have claimed) to determine his relative credibility. In all likelihood, we would not be talking about Marcel's testimony now.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Two Beings In A Light Tube In Argentina From: Scott Corrales <lornis1.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:28:46 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:39:06 -0500 Subject: Two Beings In A Light Tube In Argentina INEXPLICATA The Journal of Hispanic Ufology March 30,2005 Source: CIUFOS - La Pampa Date: March 28, 2005 ARGENTINA: STRANGE CREATURES REPORTED *** A report by Raul Oscar Chaves, CIUFOS - La Pampa*** On March 20, 2005, the time being 0400 hrs, two witneses driving along National Highway No. 35 some 30 km south of Santa Rosa, near the vicinity of Parque Luro, saw a beam or "tube of light" some 50 meters from the paved road surface. Unable to see the source of said light, the noticed that the "tube" was projected from a height of some 8 meters in the air down to the ground, without touching the surface. "It seemed suspended [in mid- air]." Faced with this circumstance, they slowed their vehicle, detecting that [inside the tube] "it was possible to see two figures in apparent descent, one on top of the other, with their legs slightly raised." The witnesses add that the "tube" measured approximately 1 1/2 meter wide, was entirely white in color, and allowed [the witnesses] to see that the "the beings wore silvery clothing, like astronaut-type jumpsuits." They further noticed that the beings "held their arms outstretched, as though carrying some element in their hands while the rest of the arm was slung downward and slightly away from the body". Faced with the unexpected encoutner and their subsequent feelings of fear, they chose to speed away from the sight,
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Exopolitical Analysis - Sparks From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:01:43 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:42:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis - Sparks >From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 04:52:06 -1000 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:44:46 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research <snip> >>So, Michael, do you think you're saying anything new here? Do >>you think nobody has ever investigated things that are hard to >>figure out because the principal players lie? >>You might want to look at the history of research into the >>Soviet bloc, before the Soviet Union fell. Or, for a more modern >>instance, take a look at Bradley K. Martin's thorough (and very >>lively) recent book on North Korea, "Under the Loving Care of >>the Fatherly Leader." >>Here we have a country whose government lies about absolutely >>everything. Its citizens are completely (and effectively) >>forbidden to communicate with the outside world. No matter how >>dishonest any of us think the US government is, North Korea is >>immeasurably worse. >>And yet scholars and journalists have to figure out what's going >>on there. How do they do it? They use rigorous standards of >>evidence. Because if they don't, they're reduced to guessing, or >>relying on rumors. Sometimes the evidence isn't as good as >>everyone would like, but when a serious scholar is faced with >>that situation, he or she says very quickly and honestly that >the evidence isn't good. >>Bradley Martin does this throughout his book. He's forever >>weighing various assertions about North Korea, and trying to >>ground all of them in verifiable facts. He relies a lot on >>testimony from North Korean defectors, but he doesn't always >>accept it. He's very careful, with everything any defector says, >>to consider how dependable it seems to be. He doesn't simply >>say, "Oh! How wonderful that these brave men and women have >>escaped from Communist tyranny to tell us the truth about what's >>going on." Some of them might be lying, some might be >>misinformed, some are only passing on rumors that they've heard. >>Martin weighs each assertion that any of them make, and tries to >>assess how reliable it might be. >>Do you do that with your whistleblowers? <snip> When one has little external factual context to check a story, heavier reliance must be made on checking for internal inconsistency and contradictions, and checking for broader factual, scientific and political errors (e.g., if a defector claimed that Kim il-Jung ruled by taking a democratic vote of his advisers on every matter we would find that defector not very credible based on what we know about Kim). Checking for consistency is erroneous methodology, it means you're trying to not find errors. All the "consistency" in the world will not trump one major factual contradiction proving an alleged witness a liar. This is the problem with the Woods' methodology, all they do is look for support for MJ-12 and naturally they rarely if ever find any problems with it. >...Hall is not the first to come forward with such >stories, but he certainly is providing testimony that goes >beyond what other whistleblowers have been able to reveal about >high level cooperation between EBEs and the US military. <snip> So aliens are friendly? But in the next paragraphs the aliens are a "threat." >Basically, we have to consider that at some point a group of >senior national security officials sat in a room and put >together a rational process to deal with the ET civilizations >that were visiting. We might call this committee MJ-12 as in the >1947 Truman memo but formation of such a committee would have >been a rational policy. Committees are notorious for not getting things done or taking rapid action. The Mahattan project was run by one man, Gen. Groves, in a military chain of command. That is how "threats" are handled. Committees merely review, rarely are relied upon in national security contexts to take and direct action. The MJ-12 fraud is a nebulous entity with no clear operational command structure yet is supposed to direct actions operationally. >I think the best clue that this happened >are events such as Gen Vandenberg rejecting the initial Estimate >of the Situation provided by the Project Sign team back in >October 1948. That suggested that a national security system had >been put in place to deal with the ET phenomenon by at least >1947/48 if not earlier. <snip> You are sorely misinformed. There were _two_ Estimates of the Situation because Gen. Vandenberg in fact did not reject the first one which reached the Pentagon on Aug. 5, 1948, but it was rejected (as I have been able to reconstruct the policy history and process) by Gen. Craigie the AF Director of R&D. When Craigie was replaced by Gen. Putt in Sept 1948 the AMC Intelligence Dept decided to try again and _revised_ the Estimate of the Situation at the end of Sept 1948. But Gen. Putt would not overturn his predecessor's decision. He or his boss Gen. Craig said they could try going to Gen. Vandenberg but he would not overturn the prior decisions either. It's hardly the picture of some conspiratorial scheme to protect some supersecret, just mundane military politics. Gen. Craigie was well respected and he had rejected the EOTS and that was that, no one was inclined to overrule him. >The next step would have been (for MJ-12) to organize the >development of a 'White Paper' or 'Threat Assessment' of the ET >visitors. Part of the Threat Assessment would certainly have >contained a 'Strategic Vision' on how to achieve 'parity' with >the visitors. This is standard for militaries around the world <snip> So now the aliens are a "threat" and (in the part I snipped) you say there would even be a 50-year strategic plan for dealing
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 The Kinross Incident [was: Kimball BlogPost On From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:26:31 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:45:05 -0500 Subject: The Kinross Incident [was: Kimball BlogPost On >From: Gord Heath <gheath.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:49:40 -0800 >Subject: Re: Kimball BlogPost On Wilbert Smith <snip>
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Mars Desert Excavations - White From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:32:59 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:47:35 -0500 Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations - White >From: Bob Shell <bob.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:40:30 -0500 >Subject: Re: Mars Desert Excavations <snip> >>http://tinyurl.com/5yxuj <snip> >These look like digital image compression artifacts to me. I >don't know what compression scheme is used for these photos, but >I doubt it is garden variety JPEG. If those are digital compression artifacts, or, if those are pixel-patch dither patterns to achieve desired colour, brightness and texture for the larger image, then such patterns _must_ appear uniformly over the _entire_ image. By "uniformly" I don't mean every patch shows the identical pattern, but there must be some sort of pixel pattern over the entire main image.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: The Moby Dick [Alien] Abduction - Sandow From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:50:10 -0500 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:50:33 -0500 Subject: Re: The Moby Dick [Alien] Abduction - Sandow >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:00:12 -0500 >Subject: The Moby Dick [Alien] Abduction >The following is from Chapter Four of Herman Melville's >monumental work, Moby Dick. >(The narrator, Ishmael, is "abducted" by....?) >At last I must have fallen into a troubled nightmare of a >doze; and slowly waking from it - half steeped in dreams - I >opened my eyes, and the before sun-lit room was now wrapped >in outer darkness. >Instantly I felt a shock running through all my frame; >nothing was to be seen, and nothing was to be heard; but a >supernatural hand seemed placed in mine. My arm hung over the >counterpane, and the nameless, unimaginable, silent form or >phantom, to which the hand belonged, seemed closely seated by >my bedside. >For what seemed ages piled on ages, I lay there, frozen with >the most awful fears, not daring to drag away my hand; yet >ever thinking that if I could but stir it one single inch, >the horrid spell would be broken. >I knew not how this consciousness at last glided away from >me; but waking in the morning, I shudderingly remembered it >all, and for days and weeks and months afterwards I lost >myself in confounding attempts to explain the mystery. Nay, >to this very hour, I often puzzle myself with it. Rich, this isn't an alien abduction. There's no abduction. And no aliens. (It's also a fictional experience, and not a real one that someone has reported, but that's another story.) Your post is fascinating, though, because it shows the way you think. When you call this an alien abduction, what you really mean is that you believe an experience like this one is, at bottom, the same thing as an alien abduction experience. This may be true. Or it may not be true. You certainly believe it's true. But you don't know! What you have is a theory, which you keep repeating as though it were a proven fact. It's easy to show, though, how problematic the theory can be. And, really, how it confuses thinking on these subjects, and can actually block us from learning what these experiences really are. For instance, let's suppose that all experiences of this sort are nothing more than psychological. That is, no phantom hands are grabbing anyone, no aliens are abducting anyone, no old hags are sitting on anybody's chest. But we still don't know that all these experiences are the _same_ psychological phenomenon. Maybe the alien abduction experience is one kind of psychological phenomenon, and the old hag experience is another kind. How do you know that this isn't true? Maybe there are three or four distinct psychological phenomena behind this varied group of reported experiences. Or maybe people really are gripped by phantom hands - that is, the phantom hand is really there - but alien abductions are psychological. Or the other way round:Maybe aliens really are abducting people, but people who think that they're gripped by phantom hands are having some kind of sleep paralysis. How can you reject these possibilities? Let's suppose you're right, and sleep paralysis accounts for most of these experiences. That doesn't at all mean that some of them couldn't be real. Or even (as has been said probably half a million times) that some alien abduction experiences are sleep paralysis, but others are really alien abductions. There's nothing illogical about supposing this. What _is_ illogical, really, is assuming - without any real evidence - that all these experiences are the same thing. At least, Rich, have the courtesy to say that you're offering a theory. The Moby Dick experience sounds to me like a known paranormal (or, perhaps, not paranormal) phenomenon, the experience of sensing (or literally seeing, or feeling) a phantom presence by one's bedside. I've known people who've said they experienced this. One of them found it very comforting, and when I've read about the phenomenon, I gather that many people have found these presences comforting. That might suggest a distinction between the alien abduction experience and the phantom experience. If the majority of people who report phantoms by their beds find it comforting, then they're reacting very different from abductees, who are generally terrified. You might still say (and I'm sure you will!) that the experiences are basically the same, and people are just reacting differently. But, again, you don't actually know that, and again I'd suggest that we all should follow David Hufford, and at least start by simply recording the phenomena as people actually report them. We'd start, then, by noting that the phantom experience has a profile very different from alien abductions. (And of course it's not just whether the experience is comforting or frightening. We have to include all the details of the narrative - which would make the Moby Dick experience very different from abductions.)
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:55:36 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:55:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle >From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:27:20 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:47 EST >>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:44 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>>>From: Peter Rogerson <progerson.nul> >>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:40 +0100 >>>>Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas <snip> >>>>>The abduction phenomenon shouldn't be put in the 'dream' >>>>>category. >>>>>The phenomenon rests with other complicated sleep disorders, >>>>>which you can find delineated at the National Library of >>>>>Medicine (and other venues). >>>How anybody can claim that abductions rest with complicated >>>sleep disorders is beyond me. There are literally hundreds of >>>cases where the people aren't in bed, but are driving, walking >>>etc. There are loads of cases where more than one person is >>>abducted at a time. Now will we hear about a new contagious >>>disease.. sleep paralysis that occurs when people are driving or >>>doing other non horizontal activities? >>The trouble here is that few are claiming that sleep paralysis >>answers all abduction cases. It does explain some. Besides, >>there is a type of sleep paralysis that does, in fact, affect >>people who are wide awake and involved in other "non horizontal >>activities." It's called cataplexy and before anyone runs off to >>look it up, I will point out that it is always associated with >>narcolepsy. No one, as far as I can tell, has ever done any >>research into the number of abduction witnesses who are also >>narcoleptic (though I will speculate that the number is quite >>small). >Cataplexy occurs during normal sleep not in narcolepsy. It is >"sleep paralysis." This seems odd and I'm not sure I understand the point of it. Cataplexy is associated with narcolepsy, meaning that those suffering from narcolepsy are those who exhibit the symptoms of cataplexy. Hufford, in the Terror that Comes in the Night, wrote, "Cataplexy differs from SP in that it occurs during daytime activities, often following the eruption of expressions of strong emotions such as laughter. It may be either partial, or complete." But the point was not to begin a discussion about cataplexy or narcolepsy, but to point out there is a mechanism that mimics sleep paralysis that comes in a waking, non horizontal state. >>The point is that some abductions, but by no means all, can be >>explained by sleep disorders. >Where is _my_ point, all deleted now, that UFO abductions >almost always have beginnings, middles, and ends? Whereas >dreams are almost always fragmentary with no beginnings or >endings like an abductee being abducted by aliens, taken >aboard a UFO, then returned to car or home or wherever. Because I was responding to a point made by Stan and not to your point about dreams. It opens the discussion to a whole different take. >>>>>Dreams are one thing. Sleep paralysis and narcoleptic incidents >>>>>have, in the past, produced acounts that are exactly like those >>>>>of UFO abductees but, because of the different cultures and >>>>>eras, have the afflicted persons being taken by the hag (a >>>>>common abductor), spirits of the underworld, and a host of other >>>>>creatures who slip into one's sleep or unconscious state and >>>>>"take them away." >>>I have seen no examples that sleep paralysis has produced >>>accounts just like abductions any more than magnetic fields >>>have. >>Well, then let's take a look around and see if we can find some >>examples for you. First is Pat Roach, the Utah woman who said >>that she and a number of her children had been abducted. She >>said that she awakened, believed there had been an intruder in >>the house, then called the police. Over the next two years she >>became convinced that the intruders had been alien creatures. <snip> >Where is the "sleep paralysis" with Pat Roach? In the Osborne >case he woke up "paralyzed" but recalls no abduction into a UFO. >Where is that here with Roach? Where is the abduction into a >UFO? For Pat Roach, it came out of the discussion of her awakening and believing there was an intruder in the house. It also is implied in the transcripts from the first of the hypnotic regression sessions. With Osborne, it was Budd Hopkins who produced the testimony in his books, associating Osborne with the UFOs. And, I again don't completely understand your point because Roach talked about being taken into the UFO, she describes the interior and even told me where the craft had landed. The point, once again, was that here were two cases in which sleep paralysis could have played an important part. That was what Stan had asked for. The thing that needs to be done is to determine a way of identifying episodes of sleep paralysis from abduction by aliens. That has not be done yet.
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:57:57 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:58:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas - Randle >From: Cathy Reason <CathyM.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:20:38 +0100 >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:47 EST >Subject: Re: Imaginary Traumas >>The trouble here is that few are claiming that sleep paralysis >>answers all abduction cases. It does explain some. Besides, >>there is a type of sleep paralysis that does, in fact, affect >>people who are wide awake and involved in other "non horizontal >>activities." It's called cataplexy and before anyone runs off to >>look it up, I will point out that it is always associated with >>narcolepsy. No one, as far as I can tell, has ever done any >>research into the number of abduction witnesses who are also >>narcoleptic (though I will speculate that the number is quite >>small). >Cataplexy is not a form of sleep paralysis, though it may >involve the same neural mechanism (brainstem inhibition of >spinal motor neurons). In my admittedly rather old and out-of- >date copy of Kandel & Schwartz's "Principles of Neural Science", >Dennis D Kelly describes cataplexy as "an abrupt loss of muscle >tone, a swoonlike reaction..., during which the patient may fall >to the ground and lie there, conscious, for several minutes. >Cataplexy usually occurs when the patient becomes emotionally >excited, for instance, during laughter or sexual excitement." >Kelly then adds: >"Two other less frequent symptoms of narcolepsy are sleep >paralysis, a brief inhibition of muscle tone during the >transition from wakefulness to sleep and vice versa, and >hallucinations (visual or auditory) at the beginning of sleep. >The latter symptoms occur in many normal people, but are >exaggerated in narcoleptics." >This should help to illustrate why sleep paralysis, when >strictly defined, is phenomenologically separate from cataplexy. >It should also illustrate that sleep paralysis and hallucinatory >imagery are strictly separate entities, though they may >sometimes occur in association with one another. Yes, very nice, but to quote from David Hufford in The Terror that Comes in the Night (150 - 151) in the section called, "Narcolepsy, Hypnagogic Hallucinations, and Sleep Paralysis," "Although from the time they were first described in the nineteenth century both HH (Hypnagogic Hallucination) and SP (sleep paralysis) have been known to occur idiopathically, since the 1920s they have been consistently associated with narcolepsy which is a syndrome consisting of excessive daytime sleepiness and abnormal manifestations of REM sleep. The latter include frequent sleep-onset REMs periods, which may be subjectively appreciated as hypnagogic hallucinations, and the dissociated REM sleep inhibitory processes, cataplexy and sleep paralysis." Hufford continues, "Cataplexy differs from SP in that it occurs during daytime activities, often following the eruption of expressions of strong emotions such as laughter. It may be either partial, or complete. Like SP it may be ended by stimulating the patient." So, in reality, my language was imprecise. I was suggesting that this is something like sleep paralysis that occurs in the daytime during the non horizontal activities. The point was not to get into a discussion of sleep paralysis vs. cataplexy, but to suggest that the dismissive attitude that sleep paralysis can explain no claims of alien abduction because some people have been abducted in the daylight and engaged in non horizontal activities is a false claim. >I believe it's important to resist the sort of category >inflation which is endemic in the psychological literature, in >which categories become ever more loosely defined, encompass an >ever greater range of phenomena, are less and less supported by >evidence, and have little or no predictive value. >>The point is that some abductions, but by no means all, can be >>explained by sleep disorders. >I agree, provided we adhere to a strict definition of sleep >paralysis, and acknowledge that actual explanations will in most >cases be multi-factorial - that is to say they will involve two >or more additional factors, such as hypnagogic/hypnopompic >hallucinations and therapeutic contamination, and not just sleep >paralysis alone. And a secondary point was to suggest that just because we can accept that some claims of alien abduction are explained by sleep paralysis doesn't mean that we can say that they all are. We do not have to reject the solution of some cases because we believe that such an acceptance weakens the overall case for
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:36:06 -1000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:00:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:44:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:53:50 -1000 >>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>>To: ufoupdates.nul >>>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >>>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research ><snip> >>I think the Hall case opens up much of national security issues >>that were secretly dealt with back in the 1940s and 1950s >>concerning UFOs/ETs. It's a very logical system that uses cost- >>benefit analysis in reaching decisions that concern national >>security. Ethical and constitutional issues are secondary to the >>national security priorities. I think the logic of the system >>that has been set up to deal with ETs/UFOs is quite clear once >>you put the pieces together. >Dr. Salla... >Unlike some here, I find your "methodology" interesting but, >again, I observe that if what you (or Hall) say is true (or >real), the reaction from politicos and military types is too >bland; that is, if alien technology is rife, those who know >about it have surely acted blas=E9 these past 57 years. Aloha Rich, I'm not sure of your point here about being blase. I can only assume that the whole ET technology phenomenon would have been taken very seriously at the highest levels of national security. For the military types, assessing the possible threat posed by ETs would have been paramount and putting together an infrastructure to develop these technologies would have been a logical corollary. >The human condition offers a few mavericks who would expose such >a massive influx of alien echnology - someone, somehow, a person >with real credentials and credibility, would have come forward >by now to tell humans what is going on. (No, not a guy like Bob >Lazar.) There have been a few whistleblowers who have come forward with strong credentials. Gordon Cooper revealed his experience back in the 1950s where he filmed the landing of an ETV but all film was forwarded to some Pentagon black hole and never heard of again. Other well credentialed whistleblowers include Robert Dean who had an impressive service record. His encounter at SHAPE headquarters with the Assessment on different ET threats to NATOs also qualifies. Also Phillip Corso is quite credible and his credentials are quite impressive. Brig General Stephen Lovekin who testified in the Disclosure Project also had important things to share about the Eisenhower administration's loss of control over ET affairs. >Diaries or notes of some kind should have surfaced by now, if >someone in the vast military/industrial complex had actually >experienced or knew about the things you cite. And why? Well there are many rumors about what happened to Admiral Richard Byrd after Operation High Jump in 1947. He makes a couple of press statements about a new enemy that can fly from pole to pole and is then muzzled. Subsequently, we have much controversy over his alleged posthumous diaries. If you read some of Donald Keyhoe's books, especially the Flying Saucer Conspiracy, you see he was essentially dealing with the same issues. Coverups, muzzling military interviewees, etc. As for people coming forward to reveal what's happening in the vast miltiary industrial complex, there are numerous testimonies in Dr Greer's Disclosure Project. Many can be found in his Disclosure book which I contend is one of the most important book to come out of UFO Research in 50 years. >Either those who would like to preserve their name or establish >a legacy of some sort (as exampled by Presidents who need >libraries to guarantee their "place in history") or persons for >whom the truth is more important than loyalty to a transient >government should have come forth by now, with irrefutable proof >of these things that you say have happened. Here we go again with the idea of 'irrefutable proof' as the basis for UFOlogy. If a top secret committee sets up a vast parallel infrastructure to deal with a national security threat that was deemed too sensitive to be disclosed to the general public or congressional officials who exercize oversight; then the security system would be sure to eliminate, remove or taint the 'irrefutable proof' you request. That this has happened can be identified in key documents such as JANAP 146 and the works of people like Keyhoe who I admire as one of the genuine giants in the field of UFOlogy for his acumen and understanding the roots of the problem. I think the search for irrefutable proof or hard evidence in the national security system set up in response to visitation of ET races is really an act of faith. Far too many UFO researchers chant the mantra of 'hard evidence' or 'irrefutable proof' but are really promoting a kind of faith based approach to UFOlogy. I think we need to begin from the premise that the national security system was set up to keep the truth about the ET presence secret and to punish/intimidate those who broke ranks to reveal what they had seen/done or provided any kind of hard evidence. Essentially, we need to factor in the distorting role played by national security agencies if we are to make sense of the entire ET phenomenon and to better appreciate how to deal with whistleblower testimonies. If we begin with the correct premises about what was set up back in the 40s and 50s, we can work out what's happening currently. To continue with the search for hard evidence or irrefutable proof is really a faith based
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:15:53 -1000 Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:11:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO >From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:43:45 -0800 >Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>From: Rich Reynolds <rrrgroup.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 09:28:36 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul> >>>To: <ufoupdates.nul> >>>Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:36:37 -1000 >>>Subject: Exopolitical Analysis Of Charles Hall & UFO Research >><snip> >I cannot refrain from commenting on the Charles Hall tale as I >was asked to investigate it, but turned down the invitation >after interviewing him on the phone for 90 minutes. Beside the >fact he had a very peculiar definition for "Dreamland" and did >not think it applied to Area 51, it was his explanation of the >power source for the Tall White's spaceship that bothered me. >Charles described the power coil as a fiberoptic coil. He said >he had once seen the White's repairing one of these power coils >that overheated. It was this fiberoptic coil which developed a >"lifting" field around the craft. He also wrote a paper on this >invoking a third photonic field he called "starshine"! Now, >fiberoptic coils channel impulses of light a in a fiberoptic >lamp or can be modulated for transmission as in fiberoptic >cables, but no fiberoptic lamp that I know of is about to lift >off the table due to its starshine field nor are any of these >susceptible to melt-down from overheating. I have sent his paper >(Charles has an M.A. in physics) to two Ph.Ds and they both >agreed that his physics is, ahhh well, hokey. >Charles wrote his books as fiction, but now claims his story is >fact. Aloha Bill, I forwarded your post and got the following reply from Charles Hall. Michael Salla ***** Hi Michael, I don't know much about Bill Hamilton but, if he associates with the group of people who believe the government has not exactly been forthcoming on the topic of UFOs and ETs, I would expect that he would have more insight into the answers to many of his questions. especially, for example, reasons why a person might issue a disclaimer on the first page, before publishing a book which was in fact true. I don't know why Bill Hamilton came away with the impression that the Tall Whites gave us inovations in medicine, or believes that they taught us their method of propulsion for traveling faster than the speed of light. My wife, who has heard me talk to more people than anyone else, has never heard me say such things. I have always stated that the Tall Whites were very protective of their spacecraft propulsion technology. It seems that scientists who are tenured and/or recieving big pay to preach the party line, have been reluctant to rock the boat.However, I would think they might be motivated to spend time exploring the world of physics, rather than dismissing my theory out of hand. It is difficult to pass on ordinary wisdom to our children and so, I will try to be patient as I explain this. I have found that many scientists have not even read Einstein. Einstein, himself, in fact, never claimed that he could explain the water filled telescope. This alone gives credence to the belief that there are aspects to Physics still open to major new discoveries. Therefore, I believe that my explanation should be given due consideration. Bill Hamilton did well to decline, and leave the job of serious scrutiny to others. To begin with, below is a link to a web site that discusses the water filled telescope and the failure of both classical physics and Einstein's relativity to explain it. http://users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter22.html Note that the author of the website clearly states that neither classical physics nor Einstein's relativity explain the experimental results, and that the experiment opens the doorway to new discoveries in physics. Next, consider the field of fiber optics: Below is a link to the SCIENCE DAILY website and an article that discusses new applications for fiber optics http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/07/040702092628.htm I quote from the webiste: " ... By twisting fiber optic strands into helical shapes, researchers have created unique structures that can precisely filter, polarize or scatter light. Compatible with standard fiber optic lines, these hair-like structures may replace bulky components in sensors, gyroscopes and other devices <snip> While researchers are still probing the unusual properties of the new fibers, tests show the strands impart a chiral, or "handed," character to light by polarizing photons according to certain physical properties. With moderately twisted fibers, researchers can manipulate the resulting polarized light in useful ways, leading to a range of applications such as gyroscopes for navigation systems, current meters for electric power stations, and chemical and materials analysis equipment." - - - Next consider the sensitivity of fiber optics to heat and the great variation in the shapes and sizes of fiber optics: I quote from the following web sites: http://www.acreo.se/templates/Page____1026.aspx http://www.visual-lighting.com/education/gen_info02a.html " . . . 2.1.5. Heat When light energy enters the light guide, some is absorbed by the molecular structure of the material, generating heat. Luminance for side-lighting is based on losses of light energy. Lets use 2% losses per foot as an example, of which approximately 1.75% is emitted luminance and 0.25% is absorbed. So overloading the fiber with light energy is a concern, along with high ambient temperatures at the entry face of the light guide (covered in more depth in Section 3.3 under Illuminators). It is absolutely imperative that infrared wavelengths be properly filtered, as IR is almost immediately absorbed into the core of the light guide. Visible light can also create excessive heat if it's not transmitted efficiently. Flaws in the light guide absorb light energy and generate heat. If plastic fibers exceed their temperature limits, which vary from 80 to 125 C, they will melt. Though glass is much more impervious -it can take the heat generated by most lamps -it will melt if exposed in the environment to high enough temperatures. As soon as a solid-core light guide begins to melt it deforms, likely causing it to absorb more heat. The fiber will yellow as the chemical structure of the plastic breaks down, causing it to absorb even more heat. The face of the light guide bums brown, then black, completely failing to transmit light. In small plastic fiber exposed to excessive heat inside the illuminator or from the outside environment, the strands will quickly deform and fuse, losing their transmission ability." --- Note, in Hall Photon theory, I specifically state my theory that there exist several sub atomic particles that produce anti- gravity and whose path of flight can be bend by a properly constructed fiber optic coil. I also have repeatedly stated that since those sub atomic particles typically undergo radioactive decay and deposit heat in the coils, the resulting propulsion system is sensitive to overheating. It is my personal observation that the Tall Whites always very carefully monitored the temperature of the coils. Obviously if heating in fiber optic coils is a problem when excessive light energy is being transmitted then the temperature of the coils would be an even bigger consideration when sub atomic particles are used. Therefore, I wonder what in the world Bill Hamilton could possibly be thinking of when he wrote: >>fiberoptic coils channel impulses of light a in a fiberoptic >>lamp or can be modulated for transmission as in fiberoptic >>cables, but no fiberoptic lamp that I know of is about to lift >>off the table due to its starshine field nor are any of these >>susceptible to melt-down from overheating. Lastly, I was particularly amused by Bill Hamilton's statement: >>Beside the fact he had a very peculiar definition for "Dreamland" >>and did not think it applied to Area 51, I was read my classified orders. I personnally drove my truck and hiked all over many of the various sections of Dreamland. Those areas include Areas 53 and 54. The mountains located at the northern end of Indian Springs Valley, and the restricted sections of the Desert Game Range. As I describe in Millennial Hospitality II, The World We Knew, in the chapter entitled "Day with a View", while I was out there, I personnally looked the heavily armed guards in the face, both human and Tall White, as we "pleasantly discussed" my orders and the topic of where Dreamland was and where it was not. For Bill Hamilton to pretend that I, of all people, didn't know where Dreamland is or was, gave me a very good laugh. On my orders, Area 51 wasn't Dreamland. On my orders, Area 51 was only known as "Groom Lake".
UFO UpDates A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena 'Its All Here In Black & White' Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Mar > Mar 31 Recommendations For Field Research Equipment From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby.nul> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:17:45 EST Fwd Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:12:51 -0500 Subject: Recommendations For Field Research Equipment I'm on a shopping spree and am headed to the electronic store to snag up some new goodies. Already bought new computers and communications equipment and was about to buy a new camcorder but said to myself let me ask around first. Also, cell phone carriers and companies. We all have our favorite brands but UFO research is unlike any other because one has to have a good grasp on the various sciences as well as good interviewing skills. I don't often see recommendations for products and services that stand the test. I'ld like to hear some. As for me, camcorders are first. Digital, resilient good customer service plans. Nowadays I can fit both my office and field research materials into a backpack. Was able to do that back in the late 90's too. Yet now I can work on the road and video tape, collect samples and surf the web on the fly! I can also process and edit video, audio and upload it at high speed unlike 7 or 8 years ago. I use Toshiba laptops. They're very versatile, ahead of the pack and resilient. Sony for camcorders but haven't checked out the latest camcorders so I'm asking. So with UFO research tools and art supplies my backpack weighs 25lbs. There have been times when I would haul around a field pack of 120lbs. Some places required rope to get to and provisions. Technologies change!